Conspiracy Theories - Thread 2012

[razta]

Right, every now and then we see something that would make us Stand up..
here are 2 for this year courtesy of Planet-f1

http://www.planet-f1.com/editorial/7694 ... acy-This...

Are you standing???

[McJaggers]

Like all conspiracy theories regarding favoritism. People forget one important thing. F1 is a business first, then a sport.

Business has little room for sentiment, especially when theres money at stake. Mercedes may 'hate' Micheal, Martin Whitmarsh might 'hate' Hamilton, but why would they deliberately lose money just to spite him?

[fjackdaw]

A good little article that outlines just how dumb most of these conspiracy theories are.

[IceG]

I have to say the quality of journalism on PlanetF1 is execrable. Their use of pejorative verbs (insists, admits, concedes, etc.) when quoting people to try and make a story interesting is infuriating. And all they seem to do is trawl the internet and either rewrite other peoples' stories badly or quote the story exactly (excepting typographical errors) and say "according to a story in..." at the end. The less said about the quality of the user comments, the better.

They can't even get their "Results centre - full constructors championship" page working properly - am I the only person who finds its insistence on putting HRT in first place amusing?

[jackanderton]

There is on average one spelling mistake in every PF1 article. All the more embarrassing given theyre usually a couple of paragraphs long at most and contain quotes copied and pasted elsewhere.

[jackanderton]

Oh and openly baiting the sites users and readers is trolling. Even if they do have such a low opinion of their own customers they should keep it to themselves.

[CoopsII]

A good little article that outlines just how dumb most of these conspiracy theories are.

And popular media driven.

[AdrianSutil]

Planet F1. Another poor article. Honestly, I prefer JS

[mario]

Planet F1. Another poor article. Honestly, I prefer JS

At least JS sometimes brings up corroborating evidence (like his recent comments about Group Lotus being taken over by Youngman automotive, which were at least backed up by a Companies House report showing that somebody at Group Lotus has registered a company called "Lotus Youngman UK Automotive Company Ltd.", not to mention that the MP for South Norfolk has now claimed in the House of Commons that KPMG has been appointed to sell Group Lotus to a Chinese company http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-17834710 ).

Now, although I have not read the article in question, I can guess that they are going to be commenting on the recent spate of problems for Schumacher and Hamilton, with claims that these problems were malicious in some way.
To be frank, I would be very sceptical of such claims - the only thing I do wonder about is why McLaren have taken so long to rethink their pit stop procedures, because they have thrown away so many points and positions through botched pit stops and poor strategy choices. In China, they threw away a chance for Button to catch up with Rosberg in the latter stages of the race with their pit stop problems, and if it hadn't been for Kimi backing up all the other drivers Button could have failed to finish on the podium in that race. As for Bahrain, although Hamilton was struggling for pace at times, the botched pit stops probably cost him a chance of 5th and the chance to remain in the lead of the WDC, not to mention helping put Red Bull ahead of McLaren in the WCC. And it isn't as if McLaren haven't been criticised for poor pit stop performance in the past - remember Button being sent out in the 2011 British GP with an unsecured wheel that forced him to retire?

Compare their problems with Red Bull and Ferrari - both of those teams have been making consistently quick pit stops with fewer problems than McLaren have had over the past few years (in fact, both of those crews were, on average, faster last year than McLaren whilst making fewer mistakes, a trend that seems to be continuing this year). Furthermore, the problems do not seem to be down to a particular individual - there were different rear wheel gun operatives in China and Bahrain - suggesting that the problem is technical in nature.
Some have been speculating that McLaren might have tried to redesign their wheel nuts for quicker stops - Ferrari, for example, have reduced the length of thread on their wheel nuts so they can tighten and loosen them more quickly - which might have backfired in some way. They didn't seem to have the same sort of problems in pre-season testing as they do now, which seems to suggest that something has changed between now and then.

[Sunshine_Baby_[IT]]

Formula 1 is business before anything else. Points for constructor championship bring money to a team, and points from the not-favourite driver could help his team mate to win the championship in the end. Thinking about it I used to think that should be impossible that a team damages is own driver, even if he’s a second driver or will be fired at the end of the year. Besides if a team doesn’t want a driver anymore for the future, has pratical options to sack him. This happened to Raikkonen in 2009: he was signed until the end of 2010, but he had to leave at the end of 2009.
This is logical, but a little doubt could. But just in some cases. In Schumacher case I just see a team which finally seems to have a good car but continues doing some mistakes. About Hamilton, the only thing I can say is that this one was one of the few races where he had some problems. At the end nor Mercedes neither McLaren seems toh ave some gain from this events, otherwise the both lost some points because of that.

[dr-baker]

Formula 1 is business before anything else. Points for the constructors' championship bring money to a team, and points from the not-favourite driver could help his team mate to win the championship in the end. Thinking about it I used to think that should be impossible that a team damages his own driver, even if he’s a second driver or will be fired at the end of the year. Besides if a team doesn’t want a driver anymore for the future, they have pratical options to sack him.

One exception I can think of from the top of my head is Perry McCarty at Andrea Moda in 1992...

[Sunshine_Baby_[IT]]

Formula 1 is business before anything else. Points for the constructors' championship bring money to a team, and points from the not-favourite driver could help his team mate to win the championship in the end. Thinking about it I used to think that should be impossible that a team damages his own driver, even if he’s a second driver or will be fired at the end of the year. Besides if a team doesn’t want a driver anymore for the future, they have pratical options to sack him.

One exception I can think of from the top of my head is Perry McCarty at Andrea Moda in 1992...

I was talking about team who could score points for the constructor championship!

[Aerospeed]

This is probably the worst publicocrap ever. I could make more believeable crap if I could...

hmm...

Why is Toro Rosso so bad? Maybe they divert all their profits to Red Bull from 2009 to 2011? That's probably why Red Bull is so good now. But why aren't they dominating this year? Maybe Toro Rosso decided to not give them as much profits anymore... or maybe Toro Rosso isn't making as much profits... maybe drivers like Buemi and Alguersuari were there only for the money, and all their money goes to Red Bull...

I could expand on that...

[Pieman]

The only conspiracy theory I have thought of this year is (as I'm sure has been discussed elsewhere) why Sergio Perez did not pass Fernando Alonso to win in Malaysia.

The two theories that have been mentioned are that Sauber did not want to beat Ferrari in a straight fight as they have customer Ferrari engines, and Perez knows he might be in the frame to replace Felipe Massa in the near future so wanted to keep things sweet...

[Aerospeed]

The only conspiracy theory I have thought of this year is (as I'm sure has been discussed elsewhere) why Sergio Perez did not pass Fernando Alonso to win in Malaysia.

The two theories that have been mentioned are that Sauber did not want to beat Ferrari in a straight fight as they have customer Ferrari engines, and Perez knows he might be in the frame to replace Felipe Massa in the near future so wanted to keep things sweet...

If he intentionally went off briefly,
Then why did the crew members get surprised when he did?
I doubt that's an acting job.

[Ferrim]

Now, although I have not read the article in question, I can guess that they are going to be commenting on the recent spate of problems for Schumacher and Hamilton, with claims that these problems were malicious in some way.

Just in case someone is in your same situation: the article does not suggest that there is something malicious, but criticises other people (mainly their own "commenters") for suggesting that in their comments.

[Jocke1]

This is a conspiracy if ever I saw one. Has the producers of Beverly Hills taken over F1 Rejects?
Well, I guess it was just a matter of time.

[Earnard Beccelstone]

Crazy conspiracy theory #1: Webber will not win a race until Vettel has the title sewn up.

Crazy conspiracy theory #2: Ralf Schumacher will make a comeback and take the second Ferrari seat for 2013

Crazy conspiracy theory #3: Michael Schumacher will win a race before the end of the season

[GwilymJJames]

http://paddocktalk.com/news/html/story-207201.html

A Spanish newspaper reporter has concocted a conspiracy theory in the days since Fernando Alonso's first-lap retirement at Suzuka last weekend.
Diario AS Correspondent Manuel Franco reminds his readers that, at Spa, it was Lotus' Romain Grosjean who triggered the chaos that ended former runaway championship leader Alonso's race.
Then in Japan, it was the sister Lotus, driven by Kimi Raikkonen, who made contact with the Ferrari.
"There are suspicious ones in the paddock," Franco insisted.
Perhaps he is referring to the fact that it was Alonso who pushed Raikkonen out of Ferrari - and, indeed, F1 - at the end of 2009.
Or maybe there is an Enstone factor at play, like when Renault's Vitaly Petrov blocked Alonso in Abu Dhabi, ultimately costing the Spaniard the 2010 title.
Renault, remember, is now Lotus, and they both shared an engine supplier with Ferrari's main championship rival, Red Bull.
"This is F1," Franco, defending the possible conspiracy, concluded

Well, I'm convinced.

[Nuppiz]

http://paddocktalk.com/news/html/story-207201.html

A Spanish newspaper reporter has concocted a conspiracy theory in the days since Fernando Alonso's first-lap retirement at Suzuka last weekend.
Diario AS Correspondent Manuel Franco reminds his readers that, at Spa, it was Lotus' Romain Grosjean who triggered the chaos that ended former runaway championship leader Alonso's race.
Then in Japan, it was the sister Lotus, driven by Kimi Raikkonen, who made contact with the Ferrari.
"There are suspicious ones in the paddock," Franco insisted.
Perhaps he is referring to the fact that it was Alonso who pushed Raikkonen out of Ferrari - and, indeed, F1 - at the end of 2009.
Or maybe there is an Enstone factor at play, like when Renault's Vitaly Petrov blocked Alonso in Abu Dhabi, ultimately costing the Spaniard the 2010 title.
Renault, remember, is now Lotus, and they both shared an engine supplier with Ferrari's main championship rival, Red Bull.
"This is F1," Franco, defending the possible conspiracy, concluded

Well, I'm convinced.

Coincidentally, this image was posted on a humor site I frequent just yesterday (ignore the poor English):

[TheBigJ]

You've got it all wrong guys. When you look at the Lotus targets, Alonso (main championship rival), Hamilton (main championship rival) and Mark Webber...This can only point to one man...




































































Helmut Marko.

[RonDenisDeletraz]

You've got it all wrong guys. When you look at the Lotus targets, Alonso (main championship rival), Hamilton (main championship rival) and Mark Webber...This can only point to one man...




































































Helmut Marko.

I am thinking that Helmut Marko and Vettel have mede a deal with Lotus...

CTSU

[tristan1117]

I didn't know where to put this, but Bernie has suggested that a lack of peripheral vision is the reason for Grosjean's failure. He's gone as far as to tell Lotus to give Grosjean a vision test! I think this is the funniest thing Bernie has said in a long time.

[Shadaza]

Bernie has suggested that a lack of peripheral vision is the reason for Grosjean's failure.

Romain Grosjean: The Blind Assassin.

[RonDenisDeletraz]

I didn't know where to put this, but Bernie has suggested that a lack of peripheral vision is the reason for Grosjean's failure. He's gone as far as to tell Lotus to give Grosjean a vision test! I think this is the funniest thing Bernie has said in a long time.

Somehow I doubt that he would have even got near F1 if this was the case

[mario]

I didn't know where to put this, but Bernie has suggested that a lack of peripheral vision is the reason for Grosjean's failure. He's gone as far as to tell Lotus to give Grosjean a vision test! I think this is the funniest thing Bernie has said in a long time.

Somehow I doubt that he would have even got near F1 if this was the case

Considering that Grosjean would have had to go through a medical test with the FIA before obtaining his licence (not just for F1, but in the FIA's lower racing series too), I likewise can't see how he'd have managed to make it this far into his career without something like that being spotted.

[Ferrim]

The days of "anti-Alonso" conspiracies have returned to Spain. Now some people believe that Lotus drivers (Grosjean in Spa, Räikkönen in Suzuka) are deliberately taking out Alonso because, you know, after all Lotus is the former Renault team and Renault have an interest on Vettel winning the championship because they are supplying Red Bull with their engines.

[TomWazzleshaw]

The days of "anti-Alonso" conspiracies have returned to Spain. Now some people believe that Lotus drivers (Grosjean in Spa, Räikkönen in Suzuka) are deliberately taking out Alonso because, you know, after all Lotus is the former Renault team and Renault have an interest on Vettel winning the championship because they are supplying Red Bull with their engines.

Completely ignoring the fact Alonso won both his titles for Renault and was responsible for his own demise in Japan anyway. Man, the Spanish media are downright hilarious sometimes

[James1978]

My conspiracy theory for today is the latest episode of McLaren's "Tooned" did not feature Lewis Hamilton because he's signed for Mercedes. Not only that, they had Professor M say that Jenson Button has won the world championship for McLaren - hmmmmm.

[Phoenix]

My conspiracy theory for today is the latest episode of McLaren's "Tooned" did not feature Lewis Hamilton because he's signed for Mercedes. Not only that, they had Professor M say that Jenson Button has won the world championship for McLaren - hmmmmm.

Why, oh why, is McLaren wasting time and resources doing that silly cartoon when they still have days like today?

[James1978]

My conspiracy theory for today is the latest episode of McLaren's "Tooned" did not feature Lewis Hamilton because he's signed for Mercedes. Not only that, they had Professor M say that Jenson Button has won the world championship for McLaren - hmmmmm.

Why, oh why, is McLaren wasting time and resources doing that silly cartoon when they still have days like today?

I was of the impression that all the shows were voiced in one session as they're only about 3 minutes long each.

I guess we'll all know in 2 weeks time if the Lewis Hamilton character won't appear again! (I was hoping there'd be one about him leaving the team)

[Captain Hammer]

I was of the impression that all the shows were voiced in one session as they're only about 3 minutes long each.

That's correct.

Also, the episodes might only be three minutes long, but it takes more than a week to storyboard, write, animate, record dialogue and edit an episode.