Some people think that the truth can be hidden with a little cover-up and decoration. But as time goes by, what is true is revealed, and what is fake fades away.
Read more here
It remains astonishing, that TJ13 appears to be the only publication questioning the disingenuous nature of that presentation – whether intentional or not.
After grand words from the F1 Emperor with no clothes, Whiting opened by dealing with the matter of speed.
There had been rumours initiated by loose words from driver steward Mika Salo immediately following the race, that Jules Bianchi had been speeding prior to his off. These claims were in actuality that Bianchi had breached the 0.5 second time/speed reduction regulation issued by Whiting March 2014 as an appropriate measure for slowing the drivers when under a double waved yellow flag caution.
Whiting began the grand inquisition by discussing the issue of speed.
“I know what speed he left the track at. We have seen the data from all cars, and everyone slowed down.
Some didn’t slow down much, some a lot. We don’t need to go into how much he [Bianchi] slowed down compared to others. He did slow down; it is a matter of degree.”
However, the effect of this obviously coded response was simply to propagate the perception that Bianchi was speeding – leaving those listening to draw the inference, that either the crash was Jules’ responsibility…. or at least a contributory factor.
Certain irresponsible sections of the media have noted the nudge from Charlie Whiting and written stories to the desired effect. Some even claimed the team instructed Bianchi to drive more quickly under the double waved yellow flags.
All this whilst Jules lies critically ill and helpless in hospital: unable to speak for himself.
Thankfully, whatever deals were done to allow Marussia to run only one car, they have not felt the need to be gagged.
“These allegations are entirely false. Jules did slow down under the double waved yellow flags, that is an irrefutable fact, as proven by the telemetry data, which the team has provided to the FIA”.
The statement adds, “Charlie Whiting, the FIA’s race director, confirmed that the team had provided such data, that he himself had examined this data and that Jules did slow.”
Marussia refute categorically Jules was instructed to increase his speed. “It is quite clear from the [radio] transmission and the transcript that at no point during the period leading up to Jules’ accident did the team urge Jules to drive faster, or make any comments suggesting that he should do so,
The team is distressed to have to respond to deeply upsetting rumours and inaccuracies in respect of the circumstances of Jules’ accident.
However, given that these allegations are entirely false, the team has no alternative but to address these.
The team sincerely hopes that, having clarified these facts, it can now avoid any further distractions to its primary focus at this time, which is providing support for Jules and his family.”
What is astounding is that none of the big F1 publications have once published opinion editorial pieces which even ask one question regarding possible culpability from the FIA or Whiting.
The reason Whiting gave during the press briefing for not deploying the safety car during the removal of Sutil’s stranded vehicle was that race/control/he thought it was far enough from the track.
What does this mean? The cars could travel legally under double waved yellow flags at over 180kph (time/speed reduction factored in for 0.5s rule.
It transpires Adrian’s Sauber was a mere 50-55 feet (approx 15 metres) from the edge of the asphalt.
Worsening pouring rain – light at around 50% brightness of normal – cars travelling at high speed (legally as defined by Whiting’s time/speed regulation for DWYF) – round a corner – incident on outside of the corner being attended to by people on foot and on the slippery grass – damaged car being removed by modified digger????????????
If this wasn’t a matter of life and death, you would be forgiven to believe that somewhere… somebody is just having a laugh!
Given this information – it was arguably PROBABLE…. HIGHLY LIKELY…. ALMOST UNAVOIDABLE – that another vehicle would spin off at the same spot. Clearly grip was more of an issue at that point on the circuit.
Whiting asserted in the Friday propaganda session, that the start time of the race had no bearing on Jules accident. He gave no evidence and was not questioned on the matter.
Yet we know that the FIA spoke with the race promoter Honda on two occasions, offering to bring forward the start time.
In a room full of critically minded journalists – did not one think to ask, why the FIA felt it necessary to offer the promoter an unprecedented opportunity.
Of course Whiting asserts the start time of the race had no impact on Bianchi’s accident, the direct implication is that the level of light around the time of Jules’ crash was not a contributory factor.
Really, I wonder why Charlie and the FIA are desperate to cling to the assertion the start time is irrelevant?
Maybe, BECAUSE IF IT WAS – Whiting has failed in his duty of care as race director to red flag the race for the safety of the marshal’s and the drivers.
The FIA and Whiting did not need to discuss the matter with promoter. On the grounds of safety, they could have rescheduled the race – and leave Bernie to worry about whether he gets paid or not by Honda.
The late start time in Japan 3pm – for the benefit of keeping TV numbers in Europe up – meant that even on a glorious day, sunset was around just 2 hours 30 minutes from the race start.
It is ridiculous for Whiting to assert, that in nigh on Monsoon conditions, the fast deteriorating light had no influence on the drivers abilities to drive appropriately in the given soaking conditions.
The cynical running of the safety car by Whiting for just 2 laps to start the GP said it all for many. 2 laps meant that the contractual obligations were met which precipitated the contractual payment from Honda to the commercial rights owners.
Be not surprised at this though, Whiting made sure Bernie got paid simply because they are good friends and Charlie is Mr. E’s man inside the FIA (as was Mosely). This is hardly a great revelation as all three were cronies dating back to the Bernie and Brabham days.
Further, why are no big F1 publications calling for an independent inquiry?
Asking the organisation responsible for safety in F1, to gather the evidence, weigh it and conclude whether they indeed are culpable – is laughable beyond the farce that was the Russian GP.
We encourage TJ13 readers to challenge the people they follow on twitter or even by email, who write for the big news outfits.
TJ13 had a fruitless engagement with @FakeCharlie the other night – though considering the F1blog which @FakeCharlie contributes towards, is under threat from FOM at present – they want their domain name – don’t expect anything but the establishment line to emit from that source any time soon.
However, we must press the matter – there are many questions to be asked.
TJ13 is about the power of social media, and we the fans owe it to Jules to ensure proper accountability and responsibility is accepted by those paid by us to protect drivers and marshals in Formula 1.