Bernie Ecclestone’s lawyers dismantle the claims of the former Ferrari driver in the London trial
Crashgate trial: how we got here
The first round of hearings in the London Crashgate trial has concluded. On one side is Felipe Massa, seeking a substantial sum in damages and recognition as the moral winner of the 2008 championship. On the other side are the defendants — FIA, Formula 1, and Bernie Ecclestone — who oppose the former Ferrari driver’s claims, arguing that the Brazilian lost that World Championship on track, not because of Nelson Piquet Jr’s deliberate crash that influenced that infamous Singapore Grand Prix.
The main argument is that Massa, who scored no points in the race, did not fail due to the “plot” orchestrated by the leadership of the then-Renault team, led by Flavio Briatore, to favor Fernando Alonso’s victory, but because of a mistake made by Ferrari: due to a malfunction with the pit stop light, Massa left the pit while the fuel nozzle was still attached to his car. Massa’s lawyers, however, argue that the race should be annulled due to the manipulation that led to an illegal final result (Alonso’s victory, favored by his teammate’s crash) and that, had the GP been canceled, the 2008 title would have gone to the Ferrari driver.
Ecclestone’s defense crushes Felipe Massa
“Massa’s poor performance in the race was not related to the crash,” explains Bernie Ecclestone’s 95-year-old lawyer, David Quest, according to The Athletic, “nor to Lewis Hamilton’s strong performance, and neither were aware of Renault’s maneuver. It was instead due to the fact that Massa left the pit stop prematurely with the fuel hose still attached to his car.”
There are also procedural issues since the lawsuit started many years after the events: “The other side perhaps intends to treat this court as a sports debate club, asking to engage in a counterfactual exercise about the arbitration of a sporting event from almost 17 years ago and to deprive Mr. Hamilton of his 2008 title, even though he is not a party to this case. He still suffered the consequences of the crash and did not make the same driving errors as Mr. Massa during the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix.”
“The sporting consequences of the incident,” concludes Bernie Ecclestone’s lawyer, “were already addressed by the FIA World Motor Sport Council. But if the Federation was unwilling to recognize Mr. Massa as champion in 2009 after careful review, how can a court be expected to do so now? The court should not allow a hopeless claim just because Mr. Massa wants to revive a memory from his distant past.”
The FOM argument
Anneliese Day, lawyer defending FOM — the organization managing Formula 1’s rights and at the time led by Bernie Ecclestone — shares the same view: “This dispute will not give Mr. Massa the award he seeks, and the only winners of another 12 to 18 months of litigation will be the lawyers. The fact is that, both during the Singapore GP and throughout the 2008 season, Mr. Hamilton beat Mr. Massa and everyone else. There is nothing unusual or unfair about this: Felipe Massa simply had the misfortune of facing one of the greatest drivers the sport has ever seen, and neither he nor anyone else was able to beat Hamilton during that season.”
Leave a Reply