F1's infamous 'crashgate' scandal

The Athletic Hello and welcome to another episode of And Colossally That's History, a podcast that re-appraises motor racing history. I'm Matt Bishop and sitting opposite me, poised for another epic wee hope, discussion about a pivotal moment in motor racing history is my old mate Richard Williams. How's it going Richard? Very good, thanks Matt, and we've got another cracking story to unpick this week and quite a modern one too, or at least as modern as we get on this podcast. Yes, well, look, I mean history is the study of past events, isn't it? So I reckon that means anything that's ever happened. Pretty much. Pretty much, whether long ago or more recently. Anyway, the saga we're going to be talking about in this episode happened 17 years ago, so relatively recently. And it's another of F1's Formula 1's infamous gate controversies. You might remember that in season two of Colossally, we tackled Spygate, the controversy of 2007 ostensibly involving MacLaren and Ferrari. But whose intended beneficiary was actually Honda, that's why I say ostensibly. And if you want to know why I say that, then I recommend you listen to that Colossally episode if you haven't done so already. Anyway, now here we are in season three, and we're going to get our teeth stuck into the crash gate controversy. Yeah, and whether you like the term crash gate or not, it's certainly stuck around as the shorthand term for the Singapore Grand Prix controversy of 2008, when it emerged that the Renault driver Nelson P.K. Junior deliberately crashed to hand a major sporting advantage to his teammate at the time, Fernando Alonso, who went on to win the race. Yes, and if you're listening to this podcast as maybe a slightly newer fan of Formula 1 than perhaps Richard or I, and if you don't therefore know much about crash gate, perhaps, it's worth saying that it was a pretty seismic moment in Formula 1 and an incident that was taken very seriously, not only from a sporting perspective, rightly so, because one of the principles of all sporting contests, not only motor racing, but all sporting contests, is surely that all competitors should be engaged in trying to win or if actually winning isn't possible then at least to achieve the best result possible, but also because of what the FIA certainly saw as the potentially dangerous consequences of a driver crashing deliberately, thereby, in dangering not only himself, but also other drivers, trackside marshals, trackside camera operators and photographers, and potentially of course spectators as well. All in all, therefore, what can we say? The fallout from crash gate was well massive, and in one sense it's actually still kind of going on, since the incident played its part, however large or small, in the outcome of that year's World Championship, the 2008 World Championship, which Felipe Massa lost to Lewis Hamilton by the narrowest of margins, but we'll get to all that. But first, we should probably kick off by introducing the main cast, the dramatic person may of characters in the story, Richard. Yep, and we'll start with Renault's team boss back then. That was the colourful and always controversial Flavio Bria Tore, who now, I could say puzzlingly, I could say ironically, I could even say something a bit stronger. His lawyers might be listening, so maybe don't. He's back 17 years later as something called executive advisor with the team-based at Enstone in Oxfordshire, which is once again owned by Renault and now operates as Alpine. Back in 2008 though, Flavio was the team principal, a role he'd previously held for around 10 years, when the team ran as Beneton, and they'd won two drivers championships, and one constructors title with Michael Schumacher in 1994 and 1995. I noticed you called him Flav. Are you particularly good mates? Oh, it's close as this. Everybody calls him Flav, even his enemies. Okay. He was forced out of the role at Beneton in 1997, when he was replaced by pro-drives David Richards, but he returned as team principal and managing director in 2000, when Renault, who you might remember, had been out of Grand Prix racing as a manufacturer since 1985, announced their plans to buy the Beneton F1 operation. The team won world championships again in 2005 and '06, when Breatory led Renault to back-to-back constructors crowns as Fernando Alonso scored consecutive drivers titles, which put an end to the five-year spell of dominance by Michael Schumacher and Ferrari. But after Alonso jumped ship from McLaren in 2007, as we detailed on our spygate podcast, indeed, Renault didn't win a single race. And though Breatory brought Alonso back to Renault for 2008, after a year of infighting with Luis Hamilton and your mate Ron Dennis at working, the team still hadn't won a race as they approached the Singapore Grand Prix, round 15 of 18 that season. And the drought was now getting on for two years. Yeah, exactly. And the endstone team were therefore coming under intense pressure to win a race. Flavio reportedly told his senior staff that the Renault high-ups in France had informed him that unless they could win a race in the remainder of the 2008 season, they might well consider pulling out a Formula One altogether for 2009, with obviously potentially dire consequences for everyone at endstone. Yeah. And of course, this was the time of the global financial crisis, when the corporate finances of major car manufacturers were looking far from healthy. And it was becoming harder and harder for boards of directors to OK spending north of £200 million a year on an F1 programme. You'll remember that Honda were about to drop out, and Toyota were beginning to waver. Indeed they were, yes. And BMW also left the end of 2009, you remember. They did. Anyway, let's get back to crash gate itself and the cast of characters. One of the senior Renault figures to whom Breatory would have conveyed that worrying news about Renault possibly pulling out a Formula One if a race win didn't eventuate soon is the next character in our story, Pat Simmons. Now back in 2008, Pat was Renault's executive director of engineering. One of the team's longest serving members of staff. He'd joined Tolman, the team that would become Beneton, that would morph into Renault in the early 1980s, and bar a brief move to the aborted Raynard Formula One project in the early 1990s. He'd been with the team ever since, playing a big role in all its world championship successes. And Pat had stayed with the team when the other key members of Beneton's crack engineering brains trust, if I can call it that, I'm talking about Ross Braun and Rory Bern, particularly, had departed for Ferrari. So he, Pat, was very much teamenstone through and through. Yeah, absolutely. And he was someone who'd seen the good times and the bad, the championships, and the controversies that went along with him. And given his seniority within the team, he must have been feeling the pressure of the winless run more than most. Absolutely. Which brings us to the drivers. We've mentioned them both already, but Fernando Alonso was the team's undoubted number one, and rightly regarded as one of the best drivers in the world. He'd been promoted to a Renault race drive in 2003, having been managed through the junior ranks by another than Flavia Breatoria. And interestingly, the team's other driver, Nelson P.K. Junior, was also in Flav's management stable, FFBB. So Flav, with his Renault hat on, would pay both of his drivers a decent salary, then put his FFBB hat on and recoup some of that back immediately as their manager. Nice work if you can get it. And in some other fields of human endeavour, that sort of arrangement might qualify as an impermissible conflict of interest, very possible impermissible. P.K. Junior was, of course, the son of Brazil's first three-time world champion, Nelson P.K., who's been mentioned in several episodes of Colossal, already, and not always in the most glowing terms. No, I've probably been guilty of, or at least responsible, for some of those non-glowing terms. But anyway, like his father, P.K. Junior, raced for Brazil. Although he was born in Germany to a Dutch mother, and he spent his early years living in Monaco. You know, his was one of those cosmopolitan, Formula One upbringings, a bit like, well, a bit like Nico Rosberg, for example, who was born in Germany to a German mother and a Finnish father, another Formula One world champion, K.K. Rosberg. And he, Nico, spent his early years living in the city. in Monaco and Ibiza. Anyway, back to Nelson P.K. Jr. having been extremely well backed by his father, Nelsonio, as P.K. Jr. is often referred to. Little Nelson, in other words. Little Nelson, indeed so, had a decent junior career, winning the British Formula 3 title in 2004, pretty good, then finishing runner up to Lewis Hamilton in GP2, which was the four runner to today's Formula 2 in 2006, also pretty good. 2008 was Nelsonio's rookie season in Formula 1, and he hadn't found it at all easy, especially with the brilliant Fernando, a double Formula 1 world champion already, remember, as his teammate. So heading into the soon-to-be infamous Singapore Grand Prix of 2008, P.K. Jr. had scored 13 points to Alonso's 28. Alonso had more than double. And remember that this was a time when only 10 points were awarded for a win, down to 1 point for eighth place. And therefore, because if his, I suppose I could call it if he form, P.K. had come under increasing pressure throughout the season, and there were rumours swirling around the Formula 1 paddocks and therefore being written about by journalists, etc, about him possibly losing his Renault drive if things didn't improve pretty damn quick. But there was that win for Alonso at Singapore, which he'll come back to big time in a moment, followed by another at the next race in Japan, so the year was saved. Renault stayed in F1, and Nelsonio was retained for 2009, at least initially. But after a dismal first half of the new season, in which he was again out performed by Alonso, in what was admittedly a rather average car, he was given the boot by Renault and replaced by Raman Grojean. And that proved a really significant move by Bria Tori, because although he certainly didn't know it at the time, Flav had in effect signed his own notice of dismissal. Yes, you're right. And I think that's well put, because the P.K.'s, father and son, were both livid, absolutely livid, and they didn't hold back. In fact, had Nelsonio not been sacked, it's possible that we might never have heard of Crashgate. And indeed that the word Crashgate, if you can call it a word, might never have been coined. The secret might never have emerged, I mean. After all, it had held firm for almost a year, despite a few people being suspicious at the time. Matt, why don't you go back and set the scene for us for the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. Okay, so it was Formula One's very first night race, and right, in fact, delirt. And I was there, by the way, were you there? No, weren't of that one. But I was there working from McLaren as the team's comms and PR chief, and the whole weekend had a surreal feel to it. Everything felt different. Why? Well, it was a brand new venue for a start, a brand new country for a championship status, Formula One race. We all arrived at the circuit every day at about two o'clock in the afternoon, which felt weird. And we stayed there until well after midnight, sometimes two or three in the morning, in fact, which also felt weird and unfamiliar to most of us, those of us who are not mechanics, I should say. Anyway, it was therefore hard to sleep in sufficiently in the mornings. So we were all pretty knackered most of the time. And of course, it was boiling hot and incredibly humid in both paddock and pit lane even at night. Anyway, so on top of all of that, a little while after the race, in which our number one driver, McLaren's number one driver, Lewis Hamilton, had finished third, which actually I have to say had disappointed us, no fault of Lewis's, but had disappointed us, because he'd qualified on the front row, and he was gunning for the world championship. And we'd therefore been hoping that he was going to win the race. Anyway, one of our senior engineers, I probably better not say who, but one of our senior engineers came up to me in the paddock and said, "Do you think the timing of PK's shunt was iffy, Matt?" called me naive, but I replied, "Well, you know, lucky, yes." Because it advantageed a Lonsso, obviously, he wouldn't have won without it, would he? And my colleague smiled, looked pensive, paused, and finally said, "Exactly." I'm honestly, I didn't think much more about it at the time, truth be told. I thought my mate, my colleague, was indulging in a bit of conspiracy theory fantasy. To be honest, I simply couldn't imagine that a formal one team would deliberately shunt one of its drivers to advantage the other, as I say, call me naive, if you like. No, I think that would have been most people's reaction. Do you? Yeah. It was certainly mine to begin with. Crashing on purpose just seemed like an unthinkable idea. Exactly. You know, Nino Farina, the very first world champion, back in 1950, he wasn't above intimidating his rivals. And we all remember the semi-staged collisions between Senna and Prost, that Suzuki in 89 and 90, and then Michael Schumacher barging into Damon Hill at Annelay in 94. And Hereth in 97, and there are various other things. But at least those incidents occurred sort of in the heat of competition. The idea of going out with the premeditated intention of crashing to affect the outcome of a race seemed utterly contrary to everything we'd grown up with, didn't it? I agree with you. It did. And as I say, nonetheless, and thank you for not saying that I was naive, although I do think in some ways in retrospect, I was, but anyway, I dismissed the idea out of hand. So let's get back on with our story. Now, Sacked, PK Jr. didn't hold back. He was livid, as I said, and so was his father. In an interview with alto Sprint, the famous Italian magazine, he, PK Jr. launched a scathing attack on Bria Tori, saying, and this is a quote, but also a translation, Flavio is a businessman, but he doesn't understand shit about Formula One. He's my manager, but in his role of team principle, he doesn't respect me. He only thinks about money, about how much money he can pocket in everything he's involved with. He's a man with no friends. End quote. And then in a formal statement, he, Nelsigno, added quote, "A manager is supposed to encourage you, support you, and provide you with opportunities. In my case, it was the opposite." Flavio Bria Tori was my executioner, unquote. The liney, extremely strong words. Very strong. Jr. Very strong. And his dad was just as angry, Nelsigno. After he'd found out his son was going to be Sacked, which was before it was actually made public, he went to see Max Mosley, our old friend, the president of the FIA in Monaco, to tell him about the deliberate crash involving his son in Singapore almost a year earlier. But actually, Mosley already knew the story. Surprise, surprise. Surprise, surprise. Because PK Sr. had spilled the beans to another senior FIA person much earlier, albeit without intending anything to happen. At least while his boy was still in a job. In interviews for a 2021 documentary film about Max Mosley called Mosley, it's complicated. Which is worth watching, yeah, indeed. The former everyone, race director, the late Charlie Whiting, revealed that Nelson Sr. had first mentioned the subject with him at the 2008 Brazilian Grand Prix, five weeks after Singapore. And that was the dramatic season finale where Lewis Hamilton was crowned champion ahead of Felipe Massa. Charlie Whiting said, quote, "There were a few conspiracy theories after the race, but nothing of any great substance." But it was in Brazil, and I was talking to Nelson PK Sr. I was his mechanic for a number of years at Brabham, and we'd remained good friends. He came to see me in my office, and we were having a chat. And then all of a sudden he shot the door. He held his foot against the door, so no one could come in. And then he told me about what had happened in Singapore. It was aimed at Flavio because basically the essence of what he was saying was, "Flavio made my boy crash." I said, "Wow, this is pretty serious stuff." I don't know who else he told, but he just said, "Keep it yourself." In doing that, he would have known that I'd tell Max. That's a very typical nuance of Formula One totally, no? Nelson PK said, "Don't tell anyone, but he, both new and intended," that Charlie would tell Max, and he knew he would. Yeah, you're a Formula One, that's right. And Nelson Sr. would later tell investigators that he chose not to pursue the situation further at the time, because he was worried it would impact his son's career negatively, which is probably a very fair assumption. I mean, as it turned out, Nelson Sr. didn't race in F1 after the scandal became public. Yes, that's right. So, the wider world found out about the whole thing on August 31st, 2009, the day after the 2009 Golden Grand Prix, which is a significant detail, as I'll explain in a minute. Anyway, what did we find out? We found out that the FIA was, quote, Investigating alleged incidents at a previous former one event, "Vague wording, I think you'd agree, although by that point everyone was pretty sure it was Singapore. Actually, Brazilian television who really would know because they were very well informed by the PK's particular PK senior had already said as much on air. But in reality, mostly the FI president has you've already said, but also a former barrister and as crafty as they come had been working behind the scenes for a little while already. After his Mosley's chat with PK senior in Monaco, he Mosley had arranged for PK Junior to go to the FIA headquarters in Paris to make a signed statement of his version of events. But even so, Mosley feared that PK Junior's statement wouldn't actually be enough evidence on its own. Mosley later said, "I knew that even if I were to produce this statement," he means PK Junior's statement, "with the whole story, and even if Nelson Jr. were to give evidence, the team's defence would be, well, we've just fired him. He's just being spiteful. He's just trying to cause trouble." And one thing you can say about Max Mosley was a good strategist. He was good at working out what might happen if this happened and what might not happen if this didn't happen, etc. Anyway, according to Mosley, it was only after investigators and lawyers had been sent to the 2009 Belgian Grand Prix, which I mentioned earlier, to interview members of the Renault team that he felt there was, finally, enough evidence to take the matter to the FIA World Motorsport Council. To quote Mosley again, if I may, "the first person they summoned was Fernando Alonso, and he denied all knowledge of what had happened. A lot of people probably think that Alonso knew," - not in other words, knew all about it - "but it's interesting that the chief superintendent who had enormous experience of interrogating people told me that he was convinced that Alonso was telling the truth." So that was fine. This is Mosley speaking still. And this is Mosley continuing. But then the next one they summoned was Pat Simmons. And Pat, of course, is a completely honest person. So when he was asked the obvious question, he said, "I can't answer that question." Of course, the minute he said that, that was as good as a confession. So we then summoned Flavio Brietori in front of the FIA World Motorsport Council, and the rest is sort of history, end of Mosley quote. Richard, when you heard the news that the race was being looked into, what were your first thoughts? Well, I was obviously worrying in terms of the breach of sporting ethics that it implied. But also, given some of the people involved, it wasn't actually as surprising as it might have been. What was your reaction, Matt? Well, my reaction, I mean, kind of obviously, was that I immediately was reminded of the chat that I'd had with my McLaren colleague, the senior engineer, just a couple of hours after the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix had finished. And I thought, "How naive I've been." I mean, of course, it must have been a deliberate ruse. It all seems so bloody obvious now. But as I say at the time, I dismissed my colleagues' suspicions as silly nonsense. But in my defence, I suppose I will say, "Don't forget, this was 2008, the year after Spygate, when McLaren had been fined $100 million, after one of our engineers had been found to be in possession of 780 pages of Ferrari technical drawings. So, since we paid the fine and we were now in contention for the Formula One World Championship, the 2008 World Championship, I mean, back from the brink, if you like, the last thing we wanted to do was start casting us versions at other teams. Put it this way. And I remember this so well. I remember the vibe. I remember what the atmosphere was like in every meeting and in every email we sent and received. In 2008, everyone at McLaren was focused on two things. One, trying to win the World Championship with Lewis, and two, trying to avoid controversy wherever possible. So, on September 4th, 2009, Rena were formally accused of interfering with the outcome of the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. And over the course of that month, we'd learn more or less exactly what had occurred on that fateful day. And we'll go through the details after this short break. Let's rewind the clock again, Matt, and go back to late September 2008. And that first ever F1 Night Race in Singapore. As you touched on earlier, there was an enormous buzz about the race, wasn't there? And Bernie Eccleston, the F1 ringmaster, had added various other new races to the calendar over the years. Some of them have been more popular than others. But the feeling was that this was going to be a real winner. Yes, absolutely. A game changer perhaps even. As I said earlier, everything about Singapore was all new, and everything about it felt all new as well. Exactly. And we mentioned earlier how Rena were under massive pressure to win before the season was out, and Singapore was the fourth from last race on the calendar. Actually things look quite positive for what's often called "Team Enstone" from the start of the weekend, with a long-so void by a new blend of L-Fuel providing a significant power boost, going fastest of all in FP2 and FP3. A little bit of casual chemistry from Richard Williams there? Fail-dow-level chemistry, in fact. They still didn't have the fastest car, but on a brand new street track, which where everyone was effectively starting with a blank piece of paper, Alonso felt he could make the difference. And sixth in the first part of qualifying seemed to back that up. But then, fuel feed problem left him stranded on the track in Q2 and settled him with 15th place on the starting grid. And that was a massive blow when things had been going pretty well. Absolutely. And I think that's very key because it's at that point of the weekend when the Renault guys must have been starting to get desperate. 15th on the grid, needing a win. So it was at that moment that the idea of staging a deliberate crash to bring Alonso back into contention for victory by hook or by crook must have first come up. The idea, just to be clear, the idea would be for Renault to pit Alonso early, then have PK deliberately bring out the safety car. Because in those days, of course, a safety car would mean a closed pit lane, meaning that Alonso tires already changed, would be able to jump up the order while everyone else was pitting for fresh rubber once the safety car period had ended. Of course, what we don't know is who came up with the idea. That's right. And this is where it gets murky. In the first of his two sworn statements, which was leaked in the media, Nelson Jr. said, quote, "The proposal to deliberately cause an accident was made to me shortly before the race took place when I was summoned by Mr. Breahtori and Mr. Simmons in Mr. Breahtori's office. Mr. Simmons in the presence of Mr. Breahtori asked me if I would be willing to sacrifice my race for the team by, quote, causing a safety car." He added that at the time of this conversation with Breahtori and Simmons, he was, quote, "in a very fragile and emotional state of mind," end quote, because of the intense stress brought about by Breahtori failing to confirm whether he'd be retained for 2009. So, according to PK Junia, again, quote, "I accepted because I hope that it could improve my position within the team at this critical time in the race season. At no point was I told by anyone that by agreeing to cause an incident, I would be guaranteed a renewal of my contract or any other advantage. However, in the context, I thought that it would be helpful in achieving this goal. I therefore agreed to cause the incident," end quote. Interesting you use the word "merky." I mean, it is developing into a murky tale as we're telling it, isn't it? The more I think about it, I mean, it'd be a good movie, wouldn't it? Who'd play five? Oh, well. James Gandalfini's gone, unfortunately. Sorry. We'll continue that discussion later. Anyway, back to our story. In his written testimony, Simmons said, quote, "the idea was first suggested to me by Nelson PK Junia," unquote. Simmons added that he, quote, "should have dismissed it immediately. It is to my eternal regret and shame that I did not do so. I can only say that I did it out of a misguided devotion to my team and not for any personal gain whatsoever." So come on, Matt. Who do you think is more likely to have come up with the idea? Nelsonio, being bullied by Breitori and looking to carry favor with the team, with his seat on the line? Or Simmons, the brilliant engineer and endstone loyalist, desperate to save his team's future? Well, I've known Pat for 30 years, more than 30 years. I like him. We get on well. We've hobnobbed on flights to Grand Prix. We've hobnobbed in airport lounges and so on, on and off throughout that time. We've even had dinner together in London. And let's just be clear for the avoidance of doubt, as they say, even moseley described him as, and we've already mentioned this, but I'll repeat it, quote, "a completely honest person." Even though Max describing him in that way wouldn't actually have been in the best interests of his, best efforts to secure the verdict that at the time he wanted to secure, or to establish a deterrent that would prevent other teams trying something similarly dodgy in future, or to make sure that justice was seen to be done with maximum force, which was very much the way Max liked to operate. And all that was clearly what moseley was hell-bent on achieving. So what can I say in answer to your question? I don't really know PK, Jr. Although I have, or I had had the odd chat with him, in 2007, particular when he was the Renault Test and Reserve driver, and I was still a full-time journalist, not having yet joined McLaren, which I joined in 2008, but as I say, I know Simmons well. So of the two, if you force me to choose, the one I choose to believe is Simmons. What we do know is that after the dastardly deed had been thought up, a detailed analysis of the Singapore Circuit map was undertaken to identify exactly where the recovery cranes were positioned. And it was concluded that if the crash was staged at the tight-turn 17, where there were no cranes and there was no easy access to the track, a safety car would be necessary. And in the event, they were bang on with their thinking. Yes. It was very meticulously planned in that way. Also, PK, Jr. said in his statement that Simmons had warned him to, quote, "be careful," unquote, which he took to mean that he, Nelsigno, should be careful not to hurt himself. But other than that, his only instruction appears to have been what corner on what lap to crash on. And so it was that on lap 14, two laps after Alonso had made a surprisingly early stop for fuel and tires, with Ferrari's Felipe Massa leading from McLaren's Lewis Hamilton, PK, Jr. stuffed it into the wall at turn 17 just as planned. Or was it just as planned? Because, according to the races, Mark Hughes, fine journalist, who wrote a good piece on Crashgate in the race's website in April 2023, so many years later, on being asked over the radio to, quote, "push," unquote, PK, Jr. had planned to spend deliberately at the exit of turn 17, and he'd do that after applying too much throttle so as to power-slide the right rear wheel into the barrier. So it would be a harmless low-speed accident, but one that would block the track and it even actually done a practice spin on the reconnaissance lap to the grid. But as things panned out, the accident he ended up having was not the accident he was trying to have. And to quote, Mark Hughes again in the race's website, quote, "Crashing deliberately is such an unnatural thing to do, and he was overcourcious with his speed. As he stood on the gas to induce the power-slide and kept his foot down, the car looped around, but without hitting the barriers on the right, as intended. Instead, it continued spinning and hit the opposite wall side on with considerable force. There was real concern on the Renault pit wall that PK might have injured himself, thankfully, he was okay." Unquote. Well, that just underlines the degree of recklessness involved, isn't it? Not only might PK Jr. have been hurt, but so too, as you said earlier, could another driver or a marshal or even a spectator? I mean, morally, there's no defending it, is there, man? Yeah, I mean, we'll probably talk about that a bit later once we've got through the saga itself, but yeah, obviously, of course, it was potentially dangerous. But there's nothing really for me to say more at this point, I think, other than, which I think I will repeat, what Pat himself said, which was, that he admitted that he should have dismissed the idea immediately. He conceded that it really was to his eternal regret and shame that he didn't do so, and he added, quote, "I can only say that I did it out of a misguided devotion to my team and not for any personal gain whatsoever." And I believe that. But I'm going to just add a little bit of context, which you may or may not take issue with, or regardless relevant, if I may, Richard. Well, I like what the famous American writer and teacher, Dale Carnegie, I'm sure you've read all of him. Of course. Or the big fan of self-improvement. Of course, yes. Well, you are unimproveable. Anyway, Dale Carnegie said this, quote, "There is a certain degree of satisfaction in having the courage to admit one's errors. It not only clears up the air of guilt and defensiveness, but it also helps solve the problem created by the error." Unquote. Well, having made an error, Simmons then behaved exactly in accordance with what Carnegie had recommended years before, didn't he? In other words, he made a mistake and he admitted it. Yeah. And coming back to what Mark Hughes wrote, it's interesting what he said about PK Jr. having the wrong kind of accident, because the Brazilian himself said that after the race, his engineer, who hadn't been let in on the plan questioned the nature of the crash, because he found it unusual. Quote, "I believe that a clever engineer would notice from the cars telemetry that I caused the incident on purpose as I continued accelerating, whereas a normal reaction would be to break as soon as possible." That is interesting, isn't it? But anyway, if you all let me make a joke at this point, may I? By all means. Well, after all, colossally is supposed to be entertaining, as well as informative, and we're not actually in the court of law here. I reckon the riskiest thing about the crash gate plan is that it required PK Jr. to get to lap 14 on a tight street circuit without having an unplanned crash, because he hadn't been particularly crash a verse so far that season anyway, had he? Cruel, but not inaccurate. They must have been sitting there over those 13 lapsing, "Don't shunt, mate. Don't shunt." "Don't shunt before a long circuit." Exactly. "Change, please, time." Yes. I mean, that could easily have happened and completely spoilt the whole thing. Anyway, he managed to get to lap 14 and do the shunt as planned, or more or less as planned. Anyway, to be serious once again, and to return to the narrative of the race, the upshot of the incident was that a Lonsow moved up to 5th, with all the cars of head of him still having to pit again. Maser, meanwhile, and this made it even easier for Renault, really, Maser, who'd been cruising towards a likely lights to flag victory, had his race turned on its head after a truly disastrous Ferrari pit stop. In the panic to get him refueled and back out on track, and with the other Ferrari, Rikonans, Kimi Rikonans, stacked just behind, he, Maser, was given the signal to go before the fuel hose had been detached. So Maser duly drove down to the end of the pit lane, trailing the fuel hose behind him before finally being told to stop. And by the time he'd been wheeled back and the fuel hose had been removed, he was stone-lost. And he still, orchapp, still had to serve penalty for an unsafe release. So that completely wrecked his race, and ultimately you could say, his world championship, but more on that later. Yeah, we will return to that, but it's interesting that a lawnso said, immediately after the race, that if it hadn't been for the safety car, he'd have finished 14th or 15th. He added, we chose a very aggressive strategy, and we had a bit of luck. Well, you could say that. You could say that. We've already quoted from Nelsignos' first statement on the crash a year later. But it's worth stating that the day after it was leaked to the media, September 11th, 2009, Renault, meaning Flavio Rietori and Pat Simmons, stated that they intended to take legal action against P.G. Jr. and his father, for quote, "the making of false allegations and a related attempt to blackmail the team into allowing Mr. P.G. Jr. to drive for the remainder of the 2009 season." End quote, "but they wouldn't get very far with that action. Five days later, the Renault team announced that it would not be contesting the charges at the meeting of the World Motorsport Council, except for the following week, adding that both Rietori and Simmons had now left the team." Quote, "I was just trying to save the team," unquote Rietori said. "It's my duty. That's the reason I finished." Well, I'm not sure whether that's falling on your sword or being pushed onto it. here. Yes, well, look, I think Britoires days at Renault were numbered by that time and he probably would have been pushed if he hadn't jumped. Anyway, despite his and Simmons departures and despite Renault admitting that they wouldn't contest the charges, the extraordinary meeting of the FIA World Motorsport Council still went ahead as planned on September 21, 2009. And in it, Renault stated at the Council that it had conducted a detailed internal investigation, which had found that Britoires, Simmons and P.K. Jr. had conspired to cause the crash and that no other team member was involved in the conspiracy. However, it was revealed that another individual at Renault, the so-called witness ex, whose identity was never revealed, did know about the conspiracy, but that he wasn't a conspirator himself. And in fact, it was witness ex's testimony that confirmed many of the details of what did happen, including the fact, it's quite important fact, that Britoires had known about the crash plan before it had been put into effect. Yeah, that was the clincher. And after a 90-minute hearing, the Council imposed a disqualification on Renault suspended for two years. Britoires was banned indefinitely from any FIA sanctioned event, arguably the biggest individual ban in motor racing history. And furthermore, Britoires was indefinitely banned from managing drivers with the FIA saying that superlisances would not be issued or renewed to drivers associated with him of whom Alonso was won. Pat Simmons was given a five-year ban while P.K. Jr. avoided a penalty, and that was his reward for spilling the beans in the first place. We mentioned earlier that Max Mursley's investigator deemed Fernando Alonso to have known nothing of the plot, and the Council agreed, so Alonso escaped any punishment and maintains to this day that he still counts Singapore 28 as a win, which in the record book it is. Nevertheless, a number of people doubted whether Alonso could have known nothing of the plan, including Felipe Massas, surprise surprise, the man who suffered most by losing the world championship. What do you think, Matt? Do you think a mind as shrewd as Fernando's wouldn't have questioned his highly unusual race strategy, stopping so early for fuel and tires? It's my hunch, and only a hunch, that he was told to come in for that weirdly premature stop, but not explicitly given the reason, just maybe a nod and a wink, and that would have given him what's known to the legal profession as plausible deniability. Well, you know, it's not an impossible theory what you've just described there, but I don't know, and that's because no one can know. And that feels like a good time for our final ad break. We're going to dedicate the final part of this podcast to looking at the fallout from Crashgate, both in the short term and the long term, because as you'd expect, there was plenty. Two of Renault's main sponsors, ING, a global bank based in the Netherlands, I think, weren't they? Yep. And Mutua Madrilaena, a Spanish insurance company, anyway, they both pulled out straight away, leaving the team with a rather bad looking car for the next race. Ironically, the 2009 Singapore Grand Prix. Mutua Madrilaena said that the scandal, quote, "could affect the image, reputation, and good name of the team's sponsors," unquote. And that was probably a fair assessment, wasn't it, Richard? Yeah, very fair, I think, and do remember that this was a very turbulent time in F1. It wasn't just the fallout from the global financial crisis of 2008. Crashgate happened in the middle of a huge battle between the FIA and FOTA, the Formula One Teams Association, over Max Mosley's plans for a $40 million cost cap. Pierro Ferari and so son actually rang me in the middle of all that to tell me that if Mosley got his way, Ferari would withdraw completely from F1. And all that would eventually lead to Mosley's decision not to stand for a fifth term as president. Then there was a lot of distress caused by Eccleston's decision to take the British Grand Prix away from Silverstone and give it to Donington Park on a 17-year deal. And that fell through when the Donington people couldn't raise the money to bring their track up to spec. But it did allow Bernie to go back and make a much better deal with Silverstone. So, you know, all round, F1 was not already doing itself any favors in terms of its reputation as a stable and well-run sport when the big scandal of Crashgate blew up. And in 2010 Renault sold 75% of their F1 team to Genii Capital, a Luxembourg investment firm, and a year later they sold the rest to what became Lotus F1. Yeah, I mean, as you say, it was an extremely turbulent time in Formula One. And you'll remember that the Renault Formula One team, when Brea Tori was still running it, had initially launched legal proceedings against the PKs, insinuating that PK Jr had lied and even suggesting blackmail. So, in light of the world, Mosley's council outcome, the PKs won a libel case against the Renault Formula One team in the high court and Renault apologised and agreed to pay damages. But Brea Tori himself also went to court suing the FIA personally for his lifetime ban and claiming that there had been several miscarriages of justice. He actually gave me a scoop on that for the Guardian. He and his French lawyer, a man called Philippe Hoacard, got in touch with… Well, well pronounced. Hoacard. Got in touch. And they showed me some documents they'd submitted to France's tribunal de… Granden Stonce. You're doing pretty well. I thought I was doing well with Mouddoire Matrillena. Come on. So, put it together. Okay, sorry. These documents accused Max Mosley of, quote, "assuming the roles of complainant, investigator, prosecutor, and judge," end quote. And they were asking not just for the setting aside of Brea Tori's lifetime ban, but for a million euros in damages. A million euros. Pretty penny. Sure enough, in early 2010, the French court overturned Brea Tori's ban and awarded him 15,000 euros in compensation. Not quite a million. Not even close. Not quite a million. While Simmons was awarded 5,000 euros in compensation, in addition to having his ban overturned. The FIA were not happy about any of this at all. But in the end, in early April 2010, they, the FIA, announced a settlement with Brea Tori and Simmons, which led to both men agreeing not to work in Formula One until 2013, or in any other FIA championship until 2011. As we know, the time passed and Pat would go on to work for the virgin racing manor, Maristia, Formula One team, all of those names being the same team, then for Williams, before finding his way to Formula One management itself, in fact, where, as chief technical officer, he was a key architect of the current rule book, rule set. And he's now executive engineering consultant with Cadillac, as they prepare to enter Formula One in 2026. And Pat has been fully accepted back into Formula One, fully and unequivocally, having held up his hands and having admitted his mistake. Yeah, I think that acceptance came because he's generally thought of as being one of the good guys. Absolutely. Flav is a slightly different matter. He came into F1 in the early 90s through his association with the Beneton clothing company, knowing absolutely nothing about the sport. But he was a colorful figure with an interesting, slightly opaque background. And he showed very quickly that he wanted to be a disruptor. In his view, F1 should concentrate on providing entertainment. And you remember, Matt, that his first idea was to recommend reversed grids with the slowest qualifiers at the front. And I have to say, in Basilic, barely covers that. Well, say what you mean. I will. Actually, I remember being invited to talk to Flav about the idea of ghost writing his autobiography. Oh, I wish you'd done it. I wish you'd done it. You would have had so many stories about well, hang on. I didn't actually want to ghost write anyone's autobiography at the time. But Flav's mysterious background did make it seem worth exploring. So we had a chat about it during which I told him very clearly that from my point of view, it would only be worth doing if he was absolutely open and honest about everything. And surprise, surprise. I never heard from him on that subject. Fancy that? Fancy that. Bernie liked him a lot, though. They're still close friends. So what one of the Pico's said about Flav having no friends? It's not quite true. Not true. He's got Bernie. Not true. And in 2007, the year before the events of Crashgate, Flav and Bernie had gone into partnership with Lakshmi Mattal, the Indian steel billionaire, as co-owners of Queen Spark Rangers, the London Football Club, who were then in the championship, the second tier. They decided that getting the club promoted to the Premier League would give them access to another money-making machine. And Flav had spotted Loftus Road from his helicopter while flying from his home in Chelsea to the factory at Enston in Oxfordshire. He'd actually never been to a game there. Not very thorough due diligence. It's a form of it. And you can see how that worked out in a fabulously bizarre BBC documentary from 2011 called The Four Year Plan. Which I haven't seen. You think I should? You might just go home and watch it. It's a plan. It's a plan. And the revelations of Crashgate, of course, made people in football, questioned whether Flav passed the supposed fit and proper person test for ownership of an English League football club. He stepped down as chairman of QPR in 2010 and a year later, he and Bernie sold their shares to the Malaysian billionaire Tony Fernandez. Who'd also got involved, I mean, Tony Fernandez, this is, with Formula One. He's a big player in the team. No wonder when Breatory opened a club in Sardinia and a line of expensive clothing he called his brand billionaire. Well, small world, the world of billionaire. It is, it is. Actually, here's a funny story about Breatory. Well, I think it's a funny story. Anyway, in what year would it have been? 2005. I think 2005, when I was still a full-time journalist, not having yet joined McLaren, and the Formula One World Championship was being duked out between Renault and McLaren. If you remember, Flavio got it into his head that I was biased in favour of McLaren. And he told his comms and PR chief, Patricia Spinelli. Do you remember her? I remember her very well. There you are. Yes. He told her to give me a ballad king about it, which she duly did. She duly did. Actually, more than once, more than once. But various points, in fact, during the 2005 season, was I given that ballad king? By the way, I like Patricia, but she was good at giving ballad kings. You would know this, actually. Our comms and PR chiefs actually allowed to administer ballad kings to journalists. We are. It's part of the job description. Is it? It is. I've never given you one, and I don't think I ever will. Thank you. Anyway, back to my little story, which I think is a funny story. At the tail end of the season, 2005 season, as bad luck would have it, member Flavio already thinking that I was biased and favourable McLaren. Flavio spotted me and Ron Dennis having dinner one evening in a restaurant in Shanghai. Alonso had already won the driver's world championship in the previous race, Japan, Suzuka. But the constructors world championship was still up for grabs in China between Renault and McLaren. Flavio slowly walked past Ron's and my table, then took a step back, stopped, stared, looked as both up and down, said nothing, then went silently on his way. Anyway, the next day I bumped into him, Flavio, in the paddock. Again, he stopped, stared, looked me up and down, then rolled English mafia. From Flavio, I don't know whether that was an insult or a compliment. Well, you reckon probably unwiced to push that one too far on that. They are probably. Capiche. Capiche. Capiche. What of Nelson P.K. Junior? That's a loose end we need to tie up. Well, the Crashgate saga well and truly killed off his former one career, didn't it? Although he hadn't exactly been going great guns before Crashgate, had he? But many pundits, including driver-turned-commentator Martin Brunnell, who I have a lot of respect for, by the way, and I'm sure you do as well, Richard. Many of them were left shocked and stunned that P.K. Junior had escaped personal punishment when he admitted race fixing, which I suppose he did admit race fixing. But he did escape punishment and actually he was crowned the inaugural FIA Formula E Champion in 2015. Richard, do you think Brunnell was right to question why P.K. wasn't punished? Yeah, I think Martin was absolutely right. And you have to wonder why owning up to a crime would completely absolve you from paying a price for it. And with hindsight, we can say that P.K.'s actions actually had the effect of preventing another Brazilian from winning the F1 World title. I suppose it's like turning Queen's evidence, really, isn't it? Yeah. I suppose it is, yeah. But I mean, I think there's any law that says that you can't be punished. No, I just thought I'd draw the analogy. Yeah. Anyway, assuming Felipe Massa had collected that victory in Singapore as he seemed destined to do, he'd have gone on into the 2008 title finale in Brazil around three points ahead of Lewis Hamilton, depending on where Lewis would have finished that race without P.K.'s interruption. Massa's subsequent winner, Interlagos and Hamilton's fifth place would have had Massa winning the title by a likely nine points. And at that time, despite their suspicions, Massa and Ferrari chose not to pursue legal action, but that since changed. Thanks to an intervention a couple of years ago by one Bernard Charles Eccleston. Indeed, but there is a little phrase that I'm going to use now. Would a Kudoshuda? I mean, you can't just extrapolate like that. You know, had Massa entered the 2008 title finale in Brazil three points ahead of Hamilton, McLaren would have hatched a more aggressive race strategy for Lewis for that race. Don't forget I was there. I was in the pits. I was in the paddock. Well, you mean they'd have tried to win the race and they didn't. I do mean that. I think they were, I mean, I was part of the team. I think they were looking to score enough points to win the World Championship and therefore temporarily and perhaps injusticesly, riskily, abandoned the normal objective, which is a try and win race. Anyway, that's my theory in which it's another conversation and I might be wrong and I might be right. But in general, if one thing changes, everything changes. It's like, you know, there's sliding doors, the famous movie sliding doors, or to put it in another way, if Massa had won the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, everything that happened after that, absolutely everything would have penned out differently. Well, that's your woulda coulda shoulda mat. Well, yeah. Of course you can extrapolate and the odds on a Massa title, which he almost won anyway, would certainly have improved. Yeah, look, yes, they'd have improved. Certainly, I agree with you. But once you change one variable, you can't extrapolate on the assumption that the other variables wouldn't also change. We don't have to agree, by the way, Richard. And that's the joy of F1 and of our podcast. One man's unwarranted extrapolation is another man's cast iron certain. Well said. Well said. Anyway, yes, in a March 2023 interview with the German website F1 Insider, Bernier Koston, who was, of course, Formula One's chief executive officer at the time of Crashgate, indicated that he and Mosley, quote, had had enough information in time to investigate the matter, one quote, but actually that they'd chosen to do nothing. So as to quote, protect the sport and save it from a huge scandal, unquote. And that may be true. But you never know, with Bernie. Anyway, I'll stop laughing. Okay, okay. Having said that, Bernie also added that under the statutes, the Singapore Grand Prix should have been unalled, which would have made Massa Formula One World Champion. So it's perhaps understandable, because of all that, that Felipe was fuming when he read those comments, prompting him to send a so-called letter before claim to both Formula One management and the FIA. And Richard, you know, we haven't had an update on the Massa legal case for a while, have we? And nor therefore do we really know whether he's seeking to reverse the World Championship result or simply claim some financial conversation. But does he have a case, do you reckon? I mean, should anything be done? I'll answer my question first, and then you answer it. In my view, the answer to my question is, no. You know, in all sport, you play to the whistle, or at least until such time as the window for normal sporting appeals as closed. I mean, should we now lobby, we Englishman, should we now lobby for the quarter final match between Argentina and England in the 1986 World Cup to be annulled? You know, because of Maradona's infamous hand of God-gold. No, in my opinion, no, obviously not. OK, obviously it was wrong. Obviously it was a handball. But it was 39 years ago. Crashgate was 17 years ago, which is also a long time ago. So in my view, I'm sorry, Felipe, but the ship has sailed. The horse has bolted. The fat lady has sung the case is closed. Oh, yes. And Louis Hamilton didn't win an eighth-world title at Abu Dhabi in 2020. 21, the fact ladies sang them too. Yeah, not a happy to you. Yes, I agree with you. And sadly, it's too late to do anything about that awful aberration too, the awful aberration being Abu Dhabi 2021. I was there, again, I was there in Abu Dhabi in 2021, I mean, working as Comzan PR Chief for Aston Martin, not McLaren by now, and I watched the race and the drama unfold from my office in the team's paddock hospitality unit with TV and data screens in front of me. And I remember yelling at the tele or the TV screens as so many people listening to this podcast right now, probably remember yelling at their tellies at home. I mean, that was a proper FIA balls up, wasn't it? Yeah, and degree of culpability never to be established. Also, anyway, this is worth just saying it's a bit of a, a, a cool to sack or not a cool to sack, but it's a little bit of a diversion. But anyway, after the race, I'm talking about Aberdhabi 2021 now, although the team that I was working for Aston Martin was completely uninvolved in the controversy and therefore had nothing either to gain auto lose, I found that I was, well, I was almost shaking with rage. So I remember I marched down to Mercedes paddock hospitality unit where I saw total wolf in earnest dialogue with my Oppo, my opposite number there, Bradley Lord. And I said to them, I said, I hope you're going to protest that, that we will, we will they replied. But that's another episode. And it's another podcast, unless it's, unless it's history too recently for colossally, what's your egg? Oh, I don't know. We might, we might bear that one. It is history. It did happen. It is in the past. Yeah. Back to crash gate, what more is there to say about crash gate? Well, it was wrong. Of course, it was wrong. We both agree and have made clear that we agree over the past hour that it was wrong. But I recall that a number of newspaper men, particularly those who weren't regular Formula One correspondents, and I don't mean you. I know you write about lots of stuff, but you or form you are a Formula One expert. But a lot of them castigated crash gate, and what I thought at the time, you know, was ludicrously over the top language. People saying it was the worst event in sporting history, blah, blah, blah. And remember that I was working from a clarinet at the time. So from a purely selfish point of view, you might have expected me to welcome the acres of newsprint that was devoted to vilifying a rival team. But I didn't. And look, you know, as I've said, as we both said, crash gate was wrong. But now I'm going to say something that I don't often say. In fact, I may never have said ever. I'm going to say I agree with Eddie Irvine, who said he thought the reaction to crash gate was a little over the top. Given that, whether we like it or not, Formula One teams have always bent the rules and done almost anything they could to win. So I'm not saying it was right, but I'm saying that the absolute castigation was over the top. For one smat, I couldn't agree with you less. Or with Eddie Irvine, which is possibly less surprising. Probably. There's the kind of bending the rules that involves flexible wings and rocket fuel and even hidden traction control software. And that's the kind of thing that's always been intrinsic to F1. It's an extension of finding loopholes in the regulations, which is what all designers are paid to do. So that is a completely different thing from staging a crash that, as we both already said, might have killed another driver, a marshal or a spectator. That is way beyond acceptability and it needed exemplary punishment. Instead, everyone involved got off very lightly. But that's just me. Look, I'm not saying it was right. Just saying I thought some of the castigation over the top. Shall we continue this discussion in the pub, my friend? I see no alternative. And that feels like a very good place to say. And colossally that's history. And wrap up our episode on one of the great Formula One controversies of our time. Now it's time for our regular questions segment, where we tackle questions sent in by the Race Members Club about our previous episode, which was on the great Jim Clark. The first one comes from History Guy 67, who says, "Do the two of you think that Jim Clark had reservations about driving Colin Chapman's cars? Clearly, you're can rent did, but did safety ever start to come between Jim and Colin? What do you think, Richard?" Well, I followed Jim Clark throughout his career pretty much from the beginning and I think I've read all the available books and so on. And I have never come across anything that suggests that Jim had reservations about the safety of Colin Chapman's notices. As History Guy suggests, we know that Yock and Rint certainly did because there is a letter, which is now in the public domain, that he wrote to Colin saying that, warning him that his cars were dangerous. And if he carried on with his absolute stress on lightness at all costs, making components light, he wouldn't be able to drive through him anymore. Yeah, it's a remarkable letter. The actual typed photocopies available on social media and on the internet, as you say. And it's phrased very carefully. We must get a grip on this, Colin, the Atlantic uses that phrase, but yes, because I've had too many shunts recently, all of which were a result of car failures. But do you think it was really bad luck that Yock and Rint had more such failures than Jim Clark did? Or do you think it was partly a consequence of Jim Clark's great mechanical sympathy? Well, we know all the drivers of Jim Zira who had bad accidents driving lotuses when half shafts or stub-axles broke or suspension bits. And that didn't seem to happen to Jim so much. And it may have been that he did, as he did, have a very light touch at the wheel. He was very sensitive, sympathetic to the machinery. And maybe Yock and Rint was a more aggressive driver and that's probably true, not faster, but more aggressive. Very fast. Of course, yeah, very fast. So maybe that's the answer that the way Jim drove didn't take him into such jeopardy in the way some others did. Our second question is from Max Campasano. And Max says, "I'm wondering if you guys could talk about how Clark was so fast. I'm sure I've read somewhere that he essentially didn't know why he was so good and didn't understand why everyone else didn't drive like him. How did he compare to more technical or analytical drivers? And I'm not sure who a contemporary would have been. Think a Nikki Loud or a Michael Schumacher type. What made him so good? What do you think, man? Well, I think it's a good question. And I'll answer it in two ways, if I may. Perhaps one of the reasons is what we've just touched on already, which is his great mechanical sympathy and the fact that he finessed his cars to the lap times that he could achieve and only he could achieve. Genius, if you want to call it that. And the second thing I'd say is that that kind of sporting genius, or by the way musical genius, or artistic genius, or literary genius, you know, if you ask Shakespeare how he could write blank verse so beautifully, he'd just say, well, that's how it comes out. That's what I do. Yes. If you ask Jacqueline Dupre how she could create tone from a cello that others couldn't, she'd find it hard to reply. If you said to David Beckham, how can you curl the ball around the wall when you're taking free kick better than hit your contemporaries? And I know you've worked in more sports than I have, but do you agree? These people can just do it, but they don't always know how they can do it. Yeah, I do. I mean, it's an inherent feel for whatever it is they're doing, it explains a lot of it and can't be explained. And of course, you know, the 10,000-hour stereo also comes into play. You have to practice like mad, or most people do. But it wasn't, I think Jim Zira was of drivers, wasn't particularly technical or analytical era. I don't think drivers thought about it in the way. You know, I just read a fantastic thing. Carla Science talking about adapting to a new team and a new car and the num, and you've started to actually talking about those Hamilton taking this ball. Yeah, I saw. Very interesting insight. Fascinating. All the things that they have to take into consideration now and adjust and have in their heads. And I don't think it was quite the same. I think, you know, feel was much more important in those days. I agree. And if you'd like to ask a question about Crashgate, just head to patreon.com/thorace and sign up to the Race Members Club. There's tons for you to enjoy over there, including ad free access to all our shows and a load of bonus content. What's more, throughout May, we're giving you 75% off your first month of access as part of F1's 75th anniversary celebrations. Yep. And remember, if you'd like to drop us a line, you can get in touch via podcasts at the hyphen race.com, or you can drop us a line via social media. I'm @TheBishF1, and Richard is at our Williams 1947. And that's it for this week. Until next time, with thanks to our producer, Johnny Reynolds, who keeps us both out at the wall, and to you for listening, it's goodbye from me, and it's goodbye from him. [MUSIC PLAYING] And philosophy, that's history. [MUSIC PLAYING] The Athletic.