Stepneygate explained: A primer on the F1 espionage scandal
In case you're trying to get up to speed on the whole Formula One espionage case, we were tipped by our buddy Jay that GrandPrix.com has a pretty good summary. Although much of what we've reported already is about the FIA hearings, this gives a pretty good outline of the events behind the case and a timeline of sorts so you can get the whole mess straight in your head -- if you're so inclined.It's a pretty fascinating read that brings a level of juicy intrigue to the news that is so much fun, and it makes this year's on-track competition seem tame in comparison. Click over to read about Mike Coughlan, his wife, Trudy, Nigel Stepney, and the other players in this melodrama. It reaches deep into both Ferrari's and McLaren's inner workings and gives us a glimpse into just how competitive this premier racing series can be. You'll even read about a third team that might be involved in some way, shape or form. Definitely worth a click for all of you F1 fans out there, and for those who might enjoy a little motorsports soap opera.
[Source: GrandPrix.com]
_opt_thumbnail.jpg)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
John R 12:36PM (8/02/2007)
That is an interesting read. I have a better understanding now.
However, based on what I've read I still don't see the basis of Ferrari pushing for penalties against McLaren. Unless I missed something, these two knuckleheads, Coughlan and Stepney, were in collusion with each other and a few other individuals who have nothing to do with McLaren management.
No one from management looked at the documents nor were they aware that they existed until after Coughlan recieved them and told his boss he had them.
Can someone who knows what's what's enlighten me further?
Reply
Richard 1:01PM (8/02/2007)
I think what's left to be decided is how to punish McLaren for using the information they received to challenge the design of Ferrari's floor in the first race of the season. And it is clear that the information they received prompted them to challenge the manner in which the floors were deemed legal, which cost Ferrari the advantage their design would have given them...and obviously did give them in Race 1.
Eamon 6:29PM (8/14/2007)
In other articles I've read regarding this case it's been made abundantly clear that the documents were read by people in the upper management of Mclaren. The assumption being made is that Mclaren would never have been able to challenge ferraris "moveable floor" components had they not seen the document that was stolen by Coughlan. F1 seems to be going the way of the Tour De France these days, it's really quite sad, because so far this has been a very exciting season. But if everything plays out like it currently is, the season won't really matter.
John R 1:09PM (8/02/2007)
Ah, so McLaren did look at the documents that Coughlan recieved? The article linked above made it sound as if McLaren didn't look at anything.
Reply
K 2:20PM (8/02/2007)
The tip off about the floor came from a "different" source in an email. It had nothing to do with the document.
Reply