Bernie warned Max two months before it happened

In today's paper we carry an exclusive interview of Dean Attew who says he told Bernie that Mosley was being targetted two months before the News of the World published its first revelations on Mosley. Attew says Bernie told Max immediately(in the third week of January). He also says the group who said they were going after Max was operating on an "unlimited budget".

Unsurprisingly, perhaps, Attew was extremely angry when he realsed Mosley had completely ignored his advice. He believes Mosley's subsequent behaviour demonstrates that his "judgement" is seriously at fault. Attew, in particular, has also found it increasingly hard to keep his counsel because Mosley has said nothing about this since the scandal erupted and has, instead, allowed suspicions to gain traction that Bernie was behind the plot.

There is a lot more to come in this affair. Who was behind it and what was the "trigger" which set the whole thing in motion? Was there any element of opportunism involved or was it all planned from the start? Was the group the who contacted Attew the same one which eventually "delivered" to the News of the World?

There is also the trial - Mosley v the News of the World - which starts on July 7th in London and which will no doubt throw further light on this during two weeks of evidence.

Comments

[Stelmara]

Derek (Anon the real one)
You are correct in what you say about prostitution (without boring anyone), I work at the sharp end and if any reader here or voter at the FIA knew what I knew and have seen what I have seen I'm certain their views on prostitution and the whole Mosley affair may well have been different and I believe few if any would condone prostitution in any guise.
The way that BOTH Mosley and Ecclestone are dragging F1 is nothing short of disgraceful and shameful where it's clear to me that both are solely interested in their own position and what they gain from it (money and power).
The fact that STILL no team boss has spoken out in any way regards this so called battle speaks volumes about today's F1.
I have not followed F1 for as long as the likes of F1-Insider and Derek Smith (sorry, not that old chaps – ouch – sorry:-0) but I wish today's F1 was a little more like I hear and read those older days were and like others have said, all I want is great racing, great technology and fair, open and consistent governance by whoever the referee ends up being. Currently we don't really have any of these do we?
I, like most here watched the French Grand Prix and asked myself afterwards why did I just waste 3 hours of my time as I found the racing boring and the penalty on Hamilton questionable (no I am not opening that one here but I doubt that anyone who has followed F1 in the Schumi days could honestly say that they think he would have received the same penalty for the same move and that says it all), this is the trouble with today's Mosley/FIA/Ecclestone F1, I want it to be better than that.
Every track to have at least 3 overtaking points just for starters would be good.
I cannot see how F1 can be what I and many others want it to be whilst BOTH Mosley and Ecclestone or either of them are involved and from my perspective what Mosley is trying to do now is cynical as if he were really sincere he would have done these things at the start of his office and not towards the end after the S&M prostitutes scandal and before the Ecclestone battle ever started.
I have had many posts not published and I trust this will be in its entirety (Ed you know it's right) as I have chosen my words carefully but it should not be forgotten that a free press and the ability to express one's view fully is a good thing and not a bad one and I very much hope the Times will uphold this principle so all of us, so long as we are not offensive are able to write freely so others can pass comments as they see fit, as many do.

Well done to both Ed and the Times for have the finest F1 blog on the entire internet:-)

Stella

[MDH]

Are we to believe that Attew - an intelligence operative working at the highest level, has let his emotions get the better of him to the extent that he just had to contact a national newspaper and put his head above the parapet all because he was angry at the way Bernie is being seen.

I have no experience of the intelligence industry, but I would imagine that a low public profile is preferable to having your name in the papers.

Bernie's orchestrated return salvo to Max's opener yesterday??

[KoJ Finland]

Hello

Just read on Grand Prix http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns20513.html and http://www.pitpass.com/fes_php/pitpass_news_item.php?fes_art_id=35236 on Pitpass which are both good articles.

@ Stelmara
I agree with you in full about the racing and what you say about prostitution even though I do not have the knowledge you do on this. What you write has made me think but it's sad to say it is probably always going to be around. There certainly are some rotten things in life and F1 is an escape from all of these, it is about enjoyment, well at least it should be.
On the French GP I too found it boring. Maybe all F1 fans are boring why else do we watch it sometimes?

[Anon (the real one)]

OK, now I'm really starting to seriously think Ron Dennis did this to Mosley. I think we can all agree he has the most motives to do this.
Now, I might be totally wrong, but it seems to me to be the most logical thing.

I hope Mosley wins his trial and forces News of the World to tell him who gave them the video.

[Delboy]

Only Fools & Horses

The conversation went a little like this: Plonker (Rodney - Mosley) why didn't you listen to my warning said Del (Bernie) backed up immediately by Boycie (Flavio) yeah why didn't you listen you *******.
Rodney (Plonker Mosley) quips well I didn't think I'd get caught to which Del replied, 'You are a plonker Rodney' followed by 'yeah you are a plonker sometimes Dave' said Trigger (now who could that be?) where they all turned and stared at Trigger.

Couldn't make it up.

[Damon - Birmingham]

Normally I try to avoid that piece of journalistic "trash" known as Pitpass and advise everyone else to do the same. However I strayed onto the site today - I hope Bernie Ecclestone reads the piece Balfe has written about this article. It is seriously libellous and I won't repeat its contents here so as not to get The Times in trouble.

[Weasel]

Ah yes, that 'brilliant legal mind' of Maxiavelli at it's finest. I have always considered the man to have a Ph.D. 'magna cum laude' in stupidity and the alleged 'brilliance' to be a PR spin based on myth, not reality.

What is the old adage now? 'Be careful who you step on, on your way up, lest they step on you on the way down'.

You live by the sword, you die by the sword. Ah well, it couldn't happen to a more deserving individual.

[Weasel]

@ Stelmara

While you make some valid points, would you please quit harping on and on (and on and on) about flogging prostitutes - yes, you ARE boring everyone.

It seems that your two most prominent vices are necrophilia and bestiality - you know, flogging a dead horse.

[F1-Insider]

Anon (the real one)

For the record Ron Dennis has put. ‘On the record’ that neither he nor anyone within his team has had anything to do with the Mosley scandal and I for one have no doubt whatsoever that he IS telling the truth (he has too much to loose if he weren’t).

There are many people within F1 that could have been out to get Mosley and whoever it was for whatever reason will have left a trail and if the resources are put to it by Mosley this will be found. I would wager a fair sum that Ron Dennis was the first Mosley’s team went after and have found nothing so unless anything else comes out specifically aimed at him may I suggest it is better we do not try to burn him!

Delboy

Excellent, a little light relief and it made me laugh as I have always been a big fan of both Del and Rodney. I have rattled my brain but dare not say who Trigger could be ;)

Weasel

I read with interest what you about Maxiavelli but I disagree as I always saw him as nothing more than an ‘idiota’ though stupid he most certainly is not.

No truer saying has ever been said than ‘live by the sword then you will die by the sword’ in the current war I am no longer sure where the lines fade from one of the protagonists to the other and this saying could equally apply to the both of them.

Stelmara

Respect to you, an honest opinion eloquently put. Maybe we all live a far too sheltered lives and never see or are just blind to the darker side of modern society. Re the French Grand Prix all I can say is ‘ditto’ but even in the older days the odd really boring race would take place where even the likes of me would question how I bothered to spend my time. The only thing that might have made last Sundays race good was destroyed by a questionable decision now for the British Grand Prix , now that’s just got to be better.

[McCheets]

F1-INSIDER

Let us not discount the possiblity that the people responsible for setting Mosley up are not involved in F1, or at least not yet.

[Stelmara]

To Mr Weasel
A few lines in a thread in reply to a previous post is hardly going on and on and on and on and there really is no need to be insulting, I honestly thought better of you, I thought you were better than that.
I will refrain from engaging with you in the future.

To F1-Insider
Thank you

To KOJ FINLAND
Thank you

To Damon - Birmingham
I agree the article does seem a little close to libellous, I wonder if they took advise before publishing it.

Stella

[Aaron James]

All I will say is this, when things are sailing smoothly for Bernard he is quiet as a mouse.

When the proverbial starts hitting the fan he starts gobbing off veiled threats in the press. Then backtracks a few days later.

Bernie's PR at the moment consists of wildly contradictory statements to the times then followed up by a limp wristed obfuscation (in the guise of clarification) in a rival paper. It's getting a bit tiresome really.

What I want to know is if Bernie knew this was all a big setup why did he not say as much when this all kicked off? Why, only when his own backside is starting to feel the roast fire of the stake does he feel it worth his bother to encourage his minion to make these claims to the times?

Why, if he is such a good mate of Max, did he not come out with this before the EGA, when it would have supported Max's statements?

I read this latest 'discovery' as a very weak attempt by Ecclestone to wrest back some sort of initiative. I guess this would have come out when Mosley takes 'the **** of the world' to the cleaners early next month and he wanted to spin it positively for him.

Either way everything that comes out in this story actually corroborates Mosley's stories. And often contradict Bernard's.

Anyway, with Bernie you can gauge his concern over a matter by the number of public comments he makes on it. Clearly, Mosley rattled his cage on Wednesday and he's flapping around like a disturbed parrot.

[Afzal]

Reading through alot of the comments it seems Max is the innocent party in all of this. Everyone is trying to find out who 'set' him up, but rather I place full blame on Max. He went to the prostitutes willingly and wasnt pressured to do it. He therefore is fully responsible for his actions. I am happy that such exposes reveal the disgusting personalities who hold serious positions within our society. Its unfortunate that morals are no longer valued.

[Anon (the real one)]

F-1 Insider: About RD saying he didn't do it: bah, after all of the lies, one more can't hurt!

But you're right, let's not burn him without proof.

[Jordi]

Hey! Am I the only one to think that Mr Attew is playing a very twisted game?

-How come is he coming out now with that information?

-Who was the friend that contacted him,representing people who wanted Mosley removed from office?

Surely we need to look in that direction instead of blaming (again) Max because he ignored Mr Attew advice.

regards.

[Stelmara]

Afzal
Agreed agreed agreed on the morals and I'm happy they still count for many people and long may that be the case.

[Jordi]

Afzal
What about the morals of those who did not respect the most basic rights... such as the right of privacy?

[GP]

@Stella,

I am curious as to why you say that Bernie’s behaviour “…is nothing short of disgraceful and shameful…” What is Bernie doing that is so reprehensible in your opinion? I’m trying to understand why you’re saying this. As far as I know, Bernie had nothing to do with the sex scandal. MM’s lifestyle has brought all this to F1 and Bernie is now trying to put out the fires. Are you suggesting that if Bernie went away all would be forgotten?

Something else I don’t understand in your post. What do you suggest the fact that team bosses are not commenting actually means? What should they be saying or doing?

[Stelmara]

Dear GP
From what I can see F1 is where it is today because of both Mosley and Ecclestone, this whole thing for the control of F1, money and power is just a big game to them and the very last they take into consideration are US, the normal passionate F1 fan.
I might be totally wrong and the both of them really do care about the sport of F1 but I don't think so.
I have no reason to assume Ecclestone did have anything to do with the sex scandal itself (he has said he didn't) and I do agree with a comment made by another poster; who is to say whoever it was that alerted the press may not be involved in F1 at all (at the moment - this may well be the real key to all this).
On the team bosses, just an honest opinion would be nice, an honest appraisal of where F1 is today and what they want for the future, we are the fans and most of us follow the teams and drivers and I am sure they all have a view. They have not said anything not a word because of fear of what might happen to them which is ridiculous and cowardice.
I do read and listen to what others say and will always be educated by those that know better (there are some really knowledgeable people on this blog) but at the end of the day I genuinely feel F1 would be better if both of these old men left F1 and got an allotment to pass their days away:-)
Thanks for reading my post anyway, even if you have an alternative view.

Stella

[Richard]

@ Jordi - 'What about the morals of those who did not respect the most basic rights... such as the right of privacy?'

I don't disagree about privacy being a most basic right, but for those who choose a life in the public eye, they must first have accepted their privacy would be compromised. This kind of person wants to use the media when it suits them, but cries foul when they receive unwelcome exposure.

If I went into a life where I was going to be under the spotlight, I'd accept the fact that my character would be closely scrutinised - it comes with the territory. If I then choose to behave in a manner that I know many people would find offensive, I'd know exactly what risk I was running. Why didn't this supposedly great intellect realise that, or was he just so drunk on his own power that he thought he was invincible (and maybe he still thinks it?).

[GP]

@Aaron James,

Ok, I guess I’m really dense because this is another post I don’t understand, so I’ll ask.

“All I will say is this, when things are sailing smoothly for Bernard he is quiet as a mouse.”

Isn’t it what he’s supposed to do, run the show in the background and let the racing BE the show?

“When the proverbial starts hitting the fan he starts gobbing off veiled threats in the press. Then backtracks a few days later.” And "Bernie's PR at the moment consists of wildly contradictory statements to the times then followed up by a limp wristed obfuscation (in the guise of clarification) in a rival paper. It's getting a bit tiresome really.”

What veiled threats? Who was he threatening? I must have missed it. Would you be kind enough to direct me to your sources? And what has he retracted or backtracked on? As far as I know, Bernie is using only this paper as his method of public communication. Is there another one?

“What I want to know is if Bernie knew this was all a big setup why did he not say as much when this all kicked off? Why, only when his own backside is starting to feel the roast fire of the stake does he feel it worth his bother to encourage his minion to make these claims to the times?”

Here I will attempt to answer your questions. First question, Bernie DID tell Max about the setup. Once Max was duly warned there was nothing more Bernie could or had to do. Max is an adult and mentally competent to make his own decisions and respond as he chooses. Bernie is not Max’s guardian. Second question, Max is the one feeling the heat because of his actions. It’s going to take a whole lot more to get Bernie nervous. Bernie’s “minion” as you call him seems to know what he’s doing and, as he will probably be called to testify at the upcoming trial of the NOTW, I suspect these are more than claims. Dean Attew worked for Bernie for 4 years and appears to have stayed loyal to Bernie and wanted to set the record straight. Bernie’s people are extremely loyal to him; Charlie Whiting and Herbie Blash have been with him since the Brabham days. I think that speaks volumes about Bernie. Sometimes, a cigar is just a cigar. Furthermore, I haven’t read anywhere that Bernie has asked Attew to do what he did. Again, maybe your sources are better than mine and would be much obliged if you could let me know where you get your information.

“Why, if he is such a good mate of Max, did he not come out with this before the EGA, when it would have supported Max's statements?”

Again, I don’t understand. The confidence vote was about Max’s standing and ability to continue in his position following the revelations about his sex romp. How would that have changed?

[Timothy Cooper Duckworth]

Ed, You have yet to comment on the absence of a U.S. race on the provisional schedule. Last year at the F1 Marketing Summit in Monaco several manufacturers and sponsors expressed outrage that there was not a U.S. race. Why aren't they stepping up with $ or to be the primary sponsor of the race? What is the actual amount that is preventing there from being a USGP in 2009 Ed? I bet you can find out.

[GP]

Stella,
Thanks for responding to my questions. I would like to comment on them if I may.

First, I don’t think F1 is in a bad place these days. TV audiences are huge; there’s a waiting list of countries who would like to host a GP; the racing has been very good, France notwithstanding but this always happens during a long season; we have some great drivers – I agree with James Allen when he says that this year reminds him of the Senna, Mansell, Prost, Piquet, Berger era – a good number of very good drivers who can win on any given weekend.

I don’t agree with your judgment of Bernie. I’ve been following F1 since the 60s and saw Bernie take a bunch of disorganized enthusiasts (albeit talented) working out of woodsheds and racing at appalling and dangerous circuits and build a thoroughly world class spectacle. So he made himself rich in the process, why not? He didn’t do it for himself alone, he took a grubby F3 mechanic (Ron Dennis) and a used car salesman hustler (Frank Williams) and many others and made them multi-millionaires flying the world in their private jets.

This leads me to the subject of team bosses. They know what Bernie has done for them, including the corporate guys like John Howett and Mario Theisen who know that Bernie’s show is the best platform to promote their products. All of them are now caught in the crossfire and, having witnessed what happened to McLaren last year, want nothing to do with MM. And what else are they going to do? This is about a sex scandal with an alleged Nazi theme, what can they do? They’re involved because they want to project a prestigious image of high technology and dynamism. Unfortunately, they are stuck with a ******* who is ruining the show.

To me, it is clear that Max is putting his personal agenda above the sport’s, but I really don’t see Bernie doing that. Bernie is stuck with having to clean up Max’s mess and I completely understand why he’s not happy.

[Jordi]

Richard: I disagree. Max is president of FIA, he is not a pop start or an actor, but even if he was David Beckam or Cliff Richard, in my opinion, he would still have the right to privacy.
Regards

[jlk]

Keep it up Stelmara! I am glad someone can have a sense of the importance of personal character in a person who can affect the outcome of multimillion dollar enterprises.

No guys I am not a neo-con or even religious but in my opinion there is a limit.
Leadership entails responsibility and one of those is SELF CONTROL!!
Edit/Moderator
What happened to integrity and honesty in our oh so rich western culture!
JLK

[Aaron Bonner]

The basic human right to have a private life is provided for in EU laws which the UK is compelled to respect.

A human right is inalienable, it's not something you get to selectively apply and it's not something that you give away by choosing a profession.

What NOTW did was utterly disgraceful. No doubt on Monday some of the preliminary details of NOTWs disgusting sting will come to light.

It's no surprise that the organisation behind the outrageous vilification of Liverpool after Hillborough could be behind such a vile invasion of someone's privacy.

I just hope that not only does NOTW get gutted, I hope we ultimately do find the 'parties as yet unknown' and they too, pay for _their_ disgusting and immoral behaviour.

[Felipe]

This all seems very complicated to me... bit like a whodunnit novel, it's so complicated that it's not even certain whether Max is guilty or innocent. Even though people have their own opinions, and strong ones at that, they are divisive. It's obvious Max did something wrong, prostitution is ilegal afterall, but there's a lot of grey areas regarding why and how the information was got. Seems to me that this could be either very complicated, or far simpler than people think. Of course there is a right to privacy, but someone in such a position relinquishes his privacy, because it's also used when it's convenient to their advantage.

[Stelmara]

GP
I acknowledge that the show may be more high tech and corporate and that tracks have better facilities for the teams and the media and that all the teams have become richer since Ecclestone has been in control (I am talking about the time he has been in cahoots with Mosey).
I do not accept this necessarily means we, the fans, get better racing or a better show, last weeks French Grand Prix is not the only bad one we get year on year. To have good racing first we need a good track and several of the current tracks should not be in F1 and others that aren’t definitely should be, you must agree with this.
Let’s remember it is Ecclestone alone who seems to decide where the racing goes and there can only be one reason why certain tracks are on the calendar that shouldn’t be (Hungary for example) and others that definitely should be (Suzuka, my personal favourite) are not. I think that under Ecclesone money is the Holy Grail where I believe that should be about racing so the fans (us) get the best show.
I also think that Mosley has manoeuvred himself into the position where he has so much power with Ecclestone’s assistance (I accept I may be wrong here as I don’t fully understand how all this works) and that’s why I say the two work hand in hand and are, in my view, as bad as each other (albeit for different reasons).
On the team bosses both Dennis and Williams, from what I see, really care about F1 and the sport of F1 and in both cases it is not all about money and they should be able to say what they think without fear of any reprisals from certain figures. This is what is really sad about F1 that the teams just can’t stick together, if they did F1 would be how they want it and we may well have better racing, fairer rules and several daring overtaking moves during a season. We must be honest but how many times do we see really good overtaking moves and when we do see a Hamilton or a Montoya type move they get punished, which is probable one of a number of reasons we don’t see daring moves.
I also think that today’s F1 is all but too safe and some of the run off areas take a lot away from the skill of the better drivers who don’t use them, this is another Mosley/Eccestone thing, I don’t want to see divers dying left right and centre but I do think there should be an element of real danger in what they do and lets me honest the modern car track combination makes the modem F1 driver all but indestructible (is there any safer sport)?
All in all there is a lot right with F1 but also a loads wrong with it (sorry if I’m talking too much, after all I am a woman :-)
Anyway now I know you are another one of those that have seen F1 in the 60’s together with F1-Insider and Derek Smith I will make sure I study your comments more closely.

Stella

[Derek Smith]

So RD is 'grubby' and FWilliams nothing more that a carpet bagger?

You pick the two team principals who have brought F1 into the modern world. These are the people who moved standards of engineering and racecraft forward in the 80s and 90s. In the 20 years from 1980 they were F1, winning 16 championships between them.

It is a shame that engineers and those who have dedicated themselves to running teams in the sport have not got a bigger voice, or a voice at all it seems, in how the sport is developed. It is not RD and FWilliams who ran roughshod over the condcord agreement. The sport needs more grubby carpetbaggers like these two heroes of F1.

The sport would have been in a very dodgy situation even if MM hadn't decided against doing the right thing. We have factory teams cutting back on their budgets, major international motoring giants struggling, and probably failing it seems, to fight off bankruptcy. And sponsors feeling the bite of recession. And if one adds to this the destabilising effect of Mosley’s ridiculous vote of confidence, we’ll be lucky if F1 teams have a budget of Eu200,000 per car next season, let alone F2. You’ve got to hand it to the likes of Vodaphone in sticking by their teams so loyally in extremely difficult and risky times, but how much longer can they? Ferrari, with their government backing, are probably immune to such fears, at least in comparison to other teams, but everyone else must be quaking.

The rights and wrongs of the News of the World’s ‘revelations’ are not relevant to the future of F1. The problem is, and always has been, solely MM’s response to it.

He quite clearly should have resigned as soon as it broke. That way he may have gained sympathy and maybe even a bit of credibility. It would have been all over by now, all but forgotten, and MM could have been able to do some other role in the FIA if that’s what also turns him on. Instead he opted to drag the sport and the FIA into the argument and his, to many, disgraceful predilections have now contaminated everyone and thing associated with him. The banana-republic voting methods of the FIA would have stayed a secret

We are now being hit by revelation after revelation in what appears to be a carefully timed sequence, each one adding more scandal. This is harming F1 to a tremendous degree. It is a sport where, for investors, image is everything. Sponsors ask husbands to bring their wives along to enjoy the wonderful corporate entertainment. Sadomasochism, with a certain emphasis on the ‘sad’, the use of prostitutes and the beating of women is hardly pre-watershed material. Had MM thrown in the towel, this could all have been avoided.

I don’t care who wins the personal battle between MM and Eccs, if indeed there is any substance in it. All I want is for F1 to come out of this parlous situation with some degree of financial stability and, hopefully, the ability to continue to provide excitement, thrills and wonder. At the moment, all I wonder is if it will.

[F1-Insider]

Stella, Derek and GP

It's clear that we all have firm opinions on what is happening to F1 at the moment and you all make excellent points.

I find Stella's posts interesting as they are from a female F1 fan's perspective and although I am no prude I do agree with what she says on prostitution and the truths about it.

I agree fully with Derek's view that both Ron and Frank are the bastions of F1 and how F1 should be, these guys are racers through and through and I like that. F1 would have been way better if Ferrari had been run with the same racing instinct that both Ron and Frank would have done (like allowing the drivers to race each other). In the McLaren all conquering days when both Prost and Senna drove for McLaren it was never boring as it was each driver for himself and boy did they race.
The point made by GP of the professionalism Ecclestone has brought to F1 is of course correct but so is Stella's when she says this hasn't brought better racing and I often ask myself why I bother.
I like the fact that contributors go to lengths to post their views without the need to attack each other when our views differ.
Keep it up chaps and whatever is the female for chaps (Stella;)

[Jordi]

@GP:
Why, if he is such a good mate of Max, did he not come out with this before the EGA, when it would have supported Max's statements?”

Again, I don’t understand. The confidence vote was about Max’s standing and ability to continue in his position following the revelations about his sex romp. How would that have changed?

If Bernie said from the begining, from day one, that it was a set up, that someone was after MM and pointed towards Dean Attew and his "friends", It is very clear to me that the public opinion would had been different.

[Mike]

There's a lot of muddled thinking on this blog.

We should not confuse the NotW "revelations" about Mosley and their effect, if any, on F1 with the question of whether Mosley (and/or Ecclestone) does a good job.

As to the revelations, it is not true that none of the team bosses have commented. BMW and Mercedes did early on as did Honda and Toyota. All four were hostile to Mosley. Berger and Montezemolo have taken the opposite stance. The remainder have said nothing, which is also entirely reasonable. No sign of "fear" here.

Equally the drivers and ex-champions. More have defended the right to privacy (Schumacher, Lauda, Piquet Sr., Prost, Raikkonen) than the opposite (Stewart, Hill, Scheckter, Webber). I make that 12 world championships for Mosley, 5 against.

The privacy issue is simple. If the act is private, legal and between consenting adults it is no one else's business. People who hold the opposite view would probably still lock homosexuals up if they could, just like 50 years ago. Society has moved on since then.

Ultimately, this is a matter for the European Court of Justice. They will surely uphold the modern continental view. Don't forget that in France you can go to prison for up to a year if you make a picture secretly and without the consent of the subject in a private place (226.1 of the Penal Code). Worryingly for the News of the World the same penalty applies to publishing such images in France. What the NotW did would attract criminal sanctions in other European countries eg Italy and Germany.

All in all what the NotW did was wrong and all civilised people will recognise this.

In discussing F1 and whether or not one thinks Mosley is the right man to run it we should not confuse matters by debating the UK's privacy laws. These will be tested when the Mosley case comes to trial in the next weeks.

[GP]

Stella and Derek,

Derek, I totally agree with your opinion of RD and FW. They are the 2 team owners I have the most respect and admiration for. However, facts are facts. Their biographies are published, you probably have read them. There are a couple of stories that readily come to mind; on RD: Jack Brabham lost a world championship after running out of fuel at the last deciding race and it turned out RD forgot to top up the tank; on FW: for a while he couldn’t pay his phone bill so his service was cut off and he had to walk to the corner phone booth to conduct his business. These guys literally started at the bottom of the ladder and got where they are today through hard work, passion, and dedication. I’m convinced that they are both so talented that they would have been successful at whatever else they did. But I’m also convinced that it is Bernie who provided the structure and organization that allowed RD and FW to reach the level of success and wealth they enjoy today.

As far as the difficult economic situation and its impact on racing and, and as you say, regardless of MM’s decisions, indeed things are probably going to get worse. Let me tell you that I completely understand it as I’ was a victim of the last economic downturn of the late ‘80s and early ‘90s. I was making a nice living in racing but that recession forced me to get a real job. So yeah, don’t worry, I know what that feels like.

However, I’m not worried at all in terms of getting some good racing. There will always be racers like RD and FW who will put teams together, hire great drivers and battle it out. The lack of huge money we see today will not allow the cutting edge technology but the racing will still be good. Who cares if a car corners at 4.5G or at 2G as long as the racing is good?

And as for MM’s scandal, the toothpaste is out of the tube and can’t be put back in regardless of who did what and what happens next. However, I’m absolutely convinced that F1 needs Bernie and he’s going to pull it off. What makes guys like RD and FW so good at what they do is exactly what prevents them from running F1, they know it and they also know that Bernie is THEIR man. I’m convinced the unfolding of all this will bear this out, with or without MM.

[Derek Smith]

F1 Insider:

Your point about the much lower levl of personal abuse on these blogs is one I share. Such behaviour has put me off contributing and reading some others.

GP:

Indeed, the cornering speed is of academic interest only. What we all want to see is fabulous racing. If cornering speeds are lower, we might well get more overtaking.

And I've always used the term 'guys' to denote male and female. I used to be a police officer, the force being the most PC (as one would expect) organisation in the country, and I was never 'pulled' for using it. I was, rather famously, the person who at a large multi-agency meeting, said, after a social worker referred to the 'embryonic gay and lesbian police/social workers forum', "Do they know at that age?" After that I had to be very careful and 'guys' was part of that safety net.

[F1-Insider]

An excellent editorial has been posted on PlanetF1 see http://www.planet-f1.com/story/0,18954,3261_3750290,00.html it’s well worth a read.

I find the F2 element very interesting as why did the FIA not revise the F2 series when the FIA branded F3000 series ended. Why was F3000, which I assume was not owned by Ecclestone replaced with GP2 which was and is together with CVC? I assume Mosley must have been OK with this but why?

There certainly appears to many that are supporting Ecclestone but I am sure of the real reasons for this and I honestly believe if both Mosley and Ecclestone had not colluded as they had over many years none of this current mess would exist and Mosley’s (moderated by F1-Insider) would be known to any of us.

We now have a state of affairs where two powerful men at the highest level are battling each other for their own sake with neither giving us a seconds thought.

Just a thought but how I wonder would F1 be in three years time if both Ecclestone and Mosley left F1 today and new blood was brought in together with a complete overhaul of the FIA governance of F1, would we, as we all want, get better racing and a better more thrilling show or would everything just be the same?

I do agree with Stella when she says the first thing that’s needed is great tracks and the world’s best tracks should be raced by F1 cars and those tracks that are not worthy should be done away with or altered to make them into great tracks, nothing is beyond the will of man when the will is there.

[Kathryn S]

People continue to refer to what happened in the basement in Chelsea as a private act. Although the activity engaged in would be considered private to many, this was a commercial undertaking. Money was exchanged for services. The commercial nature of the event is what opens it up to scrutiny, and negates the claim to privacy.

[17 points in two races]

And now what about the wooly liberals?

I said this was BLACKMAIL, and it is. The reason, who, when, how is not important.
The law is the law, and private life is private life... of course my opinión about Mosley it isn´t now better than it was.

@ Stelmara, I can understand your point of view, but this is not new it the world. Have you seen Blue Velvet? Its the 42 better film of The Times in history.

It´s me, my brother, my father, my husband, my uncle, my friends,... the ones who NEVER pay for sex, not the others.

[GP]

F1-Insider, I don't understand your following paragraph. Care to explain?

There certainly appears to many that are supporting Ecclestone but I am sure of the real reasons for this and I honestly believe if both Mosley and Ecclestone had not colluded as they had over many years none of this current mess would exist and Mosley’s (moderated by F1-Insider) would be known to any of us.

[GP]

@Jordi
“If Bernie said from the begining, from day one, that it was a set up, that someone was after MM and pointed towards Dean Attew and his "friends", It is very clear to me that the public opinion would had been different.”

But is it really about public opinion when it comes to MM’s duties and responsibilities? Don’t forget that Honda, Toyota, Mercedes, and BMW condemned his actions, in addition to the fact that the Bahraini prince didn’t want to see MM at his track, and Prince Albert of Monaco didn’t want to be seen in his company. This is the problem MM faces and I don’t think Dean Attew’s timing would have changed that.

To get back to the general public, some countries are more conservative than others and MM’s actions will be judged accordingly. Will people stop going to GPs because of MM? I don’t think so; they go to watch the best drivers driving the fastest cars.

On the other hand, MM’s problem is with the people who are directly involved in the running of GPs, in one way or another. Even if the courts decide in MM’s favour and agree that there was a breach of his privacy (although Kathryn S has a good point) I don’t think it will change the opinion of his detractors, including the sponsors who don’t need this type of negative publicity, even if they haven’t made any public statements.

This is why Bernie got dragged into the whole mess. If you recall, Bernie stayed quiet for some time before he asked MM to step down. As Bernie is in contact with all these players, after all they are in business together, he realized how damaging MM’s actions were and had no choice but ask for his resignation. I can’t see how Bernie is a bad guy in all this. He’s just the poor schmuck who now has to clean up MM’s mess.

[F1-Insider]

GP

Happy to oblige. I believe there are a lot of people who have vested interests that are jockeying for position, obviously in Ecclestone's case he is looking after his and CVC's business interests and the revenue stream they currently enjoy from F1.

In Mosley's case he is, as others have said, putting his own interests above that of F1 although some of his current views could be interpreted to those that do not know him as being for the sole good of F1.

Just one example where BE and MM colluded together for reasons known to them (and I expect many of us) but not for the good of F1 is the modification to a certain fuel rig by a certain team, anyone like yourself knows what I am referring to, I could give many more examples. I accept you have a favourable opinion of Ecclestone for what he has done for F1 and he has done some good things but he has also done a number of things that I do not approve of.

It is my view that had Mosley and Ecclestone always acted for the sole good of F1 and ensured the rules were applied equally AND fairly to all teams and in all circumstances then probably what has happened and is happening would not be happening at all (Mosley would probably still have his grubby secret, I'm sure many do).

The 100 year deal, the alleged 300 million payment etc.

Having seen most things in F1 since the early 60's what is happening now is, in my view the worst and F1 is not really what's it's about it could be for control of ice creams or jelly babies, this is all about power, money and ego.

Hope this comes across as intended without saying more than I should or certainly could.

Kathryn S

Welcome, you are obviously another intelligent woman. I agree totally with what you write though sadly it will always be with us.

[Anon (the real one)]

Well, I think our Spanish friends (especially Javiervivaespania) must be having a great time right now. :)

[GP]

F1-Insider
“Just one example where BE and MM colluded together for reasons known to them (and I expect many of us) but not for the good of F1 is the modification to a certain fuel rig by a certain team, anyone like yourself knows what I am referring to, I could give many more examples. I accept you have a favourable opinion of Ecclestone for what he has done for F1 and he has done some good things but he has also done a number of things that I do not approve of.”

I have to disagree with the above statement for two reasons. First, the modification of the fuel rig and the lack of a penalty for the team in question did not involve Bernie, only MM was involved. The reason, and this is my second point of disagreement, is that the overall running of the sport is the responsibility of two distinct entities: 1) the sporting authority (FIA/Max), and 2) the Commercial Rights Holder (CVC/FOM/Bernie).

So, Max and his FIA stewards are the only ones who can and do enforce the regulations. As it is not the business of the CRH to enforce those regulations, Bernie couldn’t be part of the fuel rig shenanigans.

The CRH is strictly responsible for contracting the circuits, TV, teams, etc., and has nothing to do with the sporting regulations.

Over the years I have worked in these two different areas of the sport. As a former general manager of my country’s ASN, I am well aware that this separation of powers is very clear and strictly enforced, and as a former employee of a commercial rights holder my job was very different.

In closing I will just add a couple more examples. Last week’s penalty to LH did not involve Bernie; it was strictly a decision of the stewards who answer to MM/FIA. Last year’s penalties to McLaren for the spying incident did not involve Bernie either. Bernie is strictly commercial, not regulatory. It is fundamentally wrong to think that Bernie is involved in sporting decisions.

[F1-Insider]

GP

I agree with some of what you say but not all. I believe the reason a certain team did not receive the correct judgement on their cheating re the fuel rig was as a direct result of the nationality of a certain driver and the want of the CRH to establish F1 in that country (at the expense of a certain other team) which the records show they certainly did.

I believe that although what you say about the line between the FIA/MM and the CRH/BE is how it SHOULD be, but with MM and BE this IS NOT how it always has been (I could give many more examples although this blog may not be the right place) and there lies the problem for me and is my reason for saying F1 would be better if both of them dropped out.

The past MM/BE years have been very much their play-thing (they both get their kicks from it) and they (together) have controlled everything be that good or bad, fair or unfair (many examples could be given here and the history books would show a number of different results if all had been above board).

[KoJ Finland]

@ GP
I have been following the conversation between you and F1-Insider and I have to agree with what he is saying about the fuel rig case. I have just read again http://forums.autosport.com/showthread.php?s=&threadid=57753&highlight=Matchett+AND+1994 which I already knew about and I cannot believe that all was right here or that the end result was not what both Mosley and Ecclestone had planned for the reasons F1-Insider hints at.
The two of you obviously know a lot about F1 and maybe have different involvements as you both always make excellent points, but on this one I think F1 would be better if both Ecclestone and Mosley were no longer running the F1 business most of us like to think of as a sort.
Who knows maybe we will even get a Grand Prix in Finland, the most successful county in F1 considering out population.
I have not been following F1 for as long as you but in my time I have seen many wrongs dished out by the FIA (which was really Mosley and Ecclestone until all this blew up) and that's just not right, the rules should be fair for everyone and no other consideration like money of grievances etc should ever apply (Ferrari barge boards comes to mind as just another case).

[McCheets]

F1-INSIDER

I think we should recall some of the decisions that went against a driver of a certain nationality in 1994 before suggesting that there was a conspiracy to ensure his success.

egs. penalty for overtaking on parade lap, exclusion for wooden underplate dimension violations, suspension for two races, all of which helped lead to a last-race showdown (and ensured that many Europeans would wake up early in the morning), and led to the 'from zero to hero' movement.

[F1-Insider]

McCheets

Lets keep this thread real, it's not about McLaren!

If you honestly believe what you believe and think all was well with the way the rules have been applied since Mosley and Ecclestone took control of the FIA and F1 then so be it as you are fully entitled to your opinion.

KOJ FINLAND

Thanks and an excellent link.

F1-INSIDER

Once again it would appear that you are mistaking my postings for those submitted by somebody else - I can't see the word McLaren mentioned anywhere in my posting, nor are there any remarks which could be interpreted as referring to McLaren. The only possible connection(?) that I can see is that 'from zero to hero' was touted as a candidate for a McLaren drive in 1998.

My point was that the championship went down to the wire in 1994 after looking like it would be all over mid-season. And didn't having drivers of two particular nationalities against one another stir up emotions, and presumably television viewing figures, in the land that 'from zero to hero' was from!

[McCheets]

F1-INSIDER

My posting was made at 17:01 on 30 June 2008. Seems that I forgot to include my details - duh!

[Kormak]

So... if finally Max goes out of F1 I think that Ed deserves a part of this open budget as he seems to had been working to achieve it from months ago.

Come on... what is de crime in this story and who is guilty?

[Kormak]

@ Richard
"If I went into a life where I was going to be under the spotlight, I'd accept the fact that my character would be closely scrutinised - it comes with the territory."

Would you like to have your "private" sex life being filmed and legally published in NOT?

Come on, you are talking about character scrutinised not private sex films.

[F1-Insider]

McCheets

If I wrongly assumed your name is a reference to McLaren and as you see it them cheating (?) then I apologise to you unreservedly.

The essence of what I say still remains though, all I want, as most others in F1 or fans of is a fair and equal racing formula where all is above board and seen to be so at all times, and this is not what we have had in recent years (the likes of Frank Williams and Patrick head could and maybe should put on the record many of the things they have been unhappy about as other team bosses could).

I also believe for reasons I won't go into here that Hami will not (be allowed to) win this years championship, however well he and the McLaren team perform.

[GP]

F1-Insider & KoJ Finland,

I still disagree with your assessment of what Bernie did in the fuel rig judgment. As the CRH, it is his responsibility to promote F1. If he sees that something might negatively affect a particular market – in this case the German market – he will, as he should, make his case with whoever is involved. There’s nothing wrong with that, in fact it’s his job to do so. As a series director I’ve done it many times. I’ve pleaded the case of a driver and/or team with the ASN’s steward to not penalize or reduce the severity of the penalty. The ultimate goal and responsibility of the CRH is to protect the show by making sure that all teams and drivers compete. Otherwise, you end up with something like the Indy fiasco, where, as you recall, Bernie was again pushing on behalf of the teams and drivers but in that case MM did not agree with Bernie. This is, as I keep saying, why there has to be that separation between commercial and sporting interests.

I think your interpretation of Bernie's actions is where we disagree. You seem to think that it is wrong for Bernie to get involved in a disputed case. I say that he is not wrong and that in fact it is his job and responsibility to do so. He is just making his case with the FIA and it is perfectly legitimate. However, when all is said and done (including Bernie’s pleadings), the FIA and Max are responsible and accountable for enforcing the rules. Surely you’re not implying that Max and Bernie should never be talking about controversial issues…

Now, if you can prove that Bernie did something like slipping Max a large sum of money to obtain the verdict he wanted, then yes, he is in the wrong. But to argue in favour of a team or driver to protect the show, and in this case prevent a championship contender from being suspended for the rest of the season, I find is perfectly legitimate.

From the article that KoJ Finland linked to it is pretty clear that MM didn’t fulfill his responsibilities. But if you’re going to accuse Bernie of wrongdoing and that he should therefore be removed, you must then ask that the same thing happen to Ross Brawn, Flavio, and many more. What about last year’s situation with Renault? Should Bob Bell, Pat Symmonds and others be banned as well? What about Toyota and Ferrari?

[F1-Insider]

GP

You make a good case and if all was as it should be then I agree that is how it should be but until, probably the Indi fiasco (can you recall a certain team doing quiet well that season, maybe you are clocking what I am saying as maybe that’s why MM decided to flex his muscle?) I believe that the real power behind the scenes was BE.

If we just look at the fuel rig, this wasn’t just cheating it was a serious accident waiting to happen and possibly a fatal one at that. We both know why nothing happened and the results of the improved audience figures in a certain country as a result.

I believe MM did what a little voice in his ear told him to do. Let’s not forget that BE role on the world council is as a representative of the teams, not just some teams, or a team for a particular purpose that suits his and the FIA/MM agenda. By allowing a certain team to do what they did it needs to be remembered that this was at the expense of another team.

If my knowledge was based just on the fuel rig episode then maybe that could be overlooked but it isn’t by any means and unfortunately this is not the forum for expanding my reasons but as a seasoned F1 man you will be aware of many events in recent years.

The truth is that the FIA/MM/BE has been fogged in a number of controversies since MM/BE took over and let’s just suppose all was above board at all times (there cannot be many who really believe that, can there?) most F1 fans and others believe it not to be and the only way to flush this out is by either changing the governing body (my preference) or changing those that run the FIA.

It’s good engaging with you and I do respect your opinions, which I’m sure are sincere but I’m afraid we won’t agree on this one. I like the point that KOJ Finland ended his last post with, i.e. ‘barge boards’ (I could tell you much about this one); how history might have been different if all was always above board.

To finish, it’s all gone very quiet hasn’t it? I suspect there is an awful lot going on behind the scenes

[McCheets]

F1-INSIDER

You can interpret my username in whatever manner you deem appropriate, however I think that we should stick to discussing the contents of what appears in postings.

I too would like to see a free and fair championship, however given certain events, eg. Jerez 1997, I am not certain that the duo you mention are beacons of morality that should be put forth.

If you believe that the authorities are conspiring against Hamilton, then so be it. But let's look at the facts - a thoroughly deserved grid penalty for ruining Nick Heidfeld's qualifying lap in Malaysia (and possibily endangering Heidfeld in the process), another throughly deserved grid penalty for driving into a stationary opponent parked in front of a red light at the pit lane in Canada, and a disputable penalty for maybe having gained an advantage in France by cutting a corner. You have only one questionable ruling to back up your claim.

Last year at Monza, Hamilton escaped a penalty, or even an investigation, for overtaking Massa by cutting the chicane, he avoided a penalty for exceeding his tyre quota in Brazil, and Kubica was given a penalty for pulling off what any true enthusiast of motorsport could not describe as anything other than hard but fair.

Hamilton may have suffered in France, and based on the evidence that I have seen I believe that he did, however to date he has generally been the benificary of questionable decisions for on-track incidents.

If making such a statement is deemed McLaren-bashing in your eyes, then so be it.

[McCheets]

People still go on about Indy 2005! Michelin-tyred teams instructed Michelin to devote all of its efforts into developing one compound of tyre, rather than split developmental efforts over two separate tyre compounds. The compound that Michelin brought to the track was not capable of withstanding the forces that the tyres experienced during the course of a lap, and there was no Plan B readily at hand. The Barcelona-spec compound rushed in also failed the make the grade. It was a pure act of incompetence on the behalf of Michelin and the teams which were using Michelin tyres at that event. No realistic alternative was placed forth in the short build-up to the event, and so the Michelin-tyred teams were unable to compete. If the majority of teams had been running on Bridgestone tyres in 2005 then this matter would have blown over immediately.

[David Holmes]

I don't think I'm imagining it; there seems to be a definite move to stop McLaren from making a come-back from last season's fiasco, engineered by the team that controls F1 - Ferrari. The penalties to Hamilton before and during the French Grand Prix were, first, out of all proportion to the "crime" and, second, completely unnecessary; and the fact that Trulli was not penalised for deliberately driving into Kovaleinen on the last lap tells me that McLaren are s**t out of luck this season, unless their drivers can win convincingly and drive perfect races at the same time. Ferrari needs to be told that they are just another team, and Ecclestone and Moseley need to be kicked out, or a new organisation built in opposition to the FIA and current F1 set-up.

[Delboy]

To David Holmes

Delboy says you are right on the mark. Until there is change and Del and Rodney go away and do other things McLaren will be up against it by hook or by crook. The more we openly talk about this the harder it will be to fix things and the press and media will be doing F1 a service to make sure any decisions for the remainder of the season are watched very closely indeed, excuse the pun but they have their fingers on the 'Trigger'.

[KoJ Finland]

Delboy and David Holmes
A also think this and I hope that the media will not shy away from reporting the merest hint of any further controversies that either hinder McLaren or assist their competitors. As others have suggested it seems to me like the personal grudge against McLaren is still a living thing albeit far less visual than last year.

[GP]

F1-Insider,

Well, we will have to agree to disagree over Bernie. As for MM, I think it would be good for F1 to see him go.

As for the LH penalty for his pass in France. I haven't read anywhere the following argument. If the subject part of the circuit had cement walls very close to the tarmac, say, like the last chicane in Montreal, would LH have even attempted the pass? If yes, he would most probably have crashed; if no, then it confirms the pass could not be completed on the racing surface. Does this point of view legitimize the penalty?

[F1-Insider]

GP

Maybe these modern tracks have just become too safe and for certain not always for the better. The point I have re the penalty is if the FIA have made their decision by the CCTV evidence then why don't they simply show it? This would stop any talk about a dodgy penalty stone dead wouldn't it? Why are the FIA holding this footage back? These are fair questions aren’t they?

If the stewards made their decision based on the footage we all saw from Hami’s onboard camera then there was not a case for the penalty (my view).

The fact that MM’s man is one of the stewards just makes me very uncomfortable, especially where anything to do with McLaren is involved. F1 fans are not stupid (well maybe a few are) and they are able to judge these things when they are fair and likewise when they are not.

On the BE/MM connection I agree we’ll just have to disagree on how we see BE but for me there have been way too many suspect things happen when it suits a certain cause and w both know not all is what it always appears in F1.

As an aside I find it remarkable how few are contributing to what is probably the most important happenings in F1 for many a decade if not ever, let’s hope it all ends up to provide with fair, honest and the best racing in the near future.

[GP]

F1-Insider,

I agree, they should show the CCTV footage.

As you mentioned previously, there must be an awful lot going on behind closed doors at the moment. Wouldn't it be great if a camera crew was following BE and MM to be shown as a documentary once the dust settles. I know, I'm dreaming.

[F1-Insider]

GP

Now that WOULD be great, no, it would be fantastic, could you just imagine what's going on behind the scenes?

On the Hami CCTV footage why do you think they have not shown it?

Good talking with you.