So what happens next in the career of Nelson Piquet Jr? There has been much noise about the rights and wrongs of what he did in Singapore last year and whether or not he should have been granted immunity by the FIA. I agree that Nelson Piquet should have said no, but he did not. The defence that he was only following orders – often called the Nuremburg Defense, because it was used by Nazi war criminals during the Nuremberg Trials – is not acceptable. The judges at the time ruled that provided a moral choice was possible, a person was not relieved of his or her responsibilities because they were ordered to do something. Today the argument is used to mitigate a penalty, but it does not excuse the person involved.
I am big fan of Derek Warwick but I do not agree with remarks he has made in recent days to my colleagues at http://www.crash.net saying that Piquet should be banned for life. Nelson must share some of the blame, but he did help to bring the real culprits to justice. The scandal may make life difficult for him.
“I would never, ever, ever employ Nelson Piquet Jr again,” Warwick said. “What I struggle with is that for me, what he’s done – breaking the confidence of a team on an agreement that he had – is outrageous, and I think that’s something he has to now live with for the rest of his life. I don’t think there’s a team out there that will employ him. What’s that saying, ‘what goes away stays away’? I could tell a few stories, I could write a few books – but they’re confidences.”
Warwick’s argument is probably a realistic reflection of the way motor racing is, but this does not make it right. There should be no need for “confidences”. Clearly if Nelson was giving important technical secrets to another team that would be a breach of confidence, but if a team has nothing to hide, it has nothing to fear. The cynics might add that the team would probably not be competitive, but one likes to try to think the best of people until proven otherwise.
In any case, I also do not believe that Piquet’s behaviour will have any effect on teams deciding whether or not to hire him. Let us not forget that in 2007 Fernando Alonso provided the FIA with information that resulted in his team (McLaren) getting into huge trouble. Worse than that, he allegedly tried to use this information to persuade McLaren to make him the team number one. McLaren called his bluff. This was certainly a breach of confidence (as defined by Warwick), and one might use other more emotive words to describe elements of the story, and yet not only is Alonso still employed in F1, but he is also about to be signed by Ferrari.
So why would one rule apply for Piquet and another for Alonso? The reality is very simple. Alonso is super-fast. Piquet thus far has not been. Perhaps if he was given another F1 car he would be able to show his ability. But will he be given another chance? He has had two years with Renault and apart from a fortunate podium in Germany in 2008 had little to show for it. It is doubtful that any team would bother when there are always new boys coming up. Nelson is fortunate in that with the help of his old man he might be able to raise some cash that would make him attractive to a team down at the back of the field. He might use this to rebuild his reputation.
He has made an important mistake and it may ruin his career, but Nelson Jr has money and contacts and you don’t win a British Formula 3 title and five GP2 races against the very best drivers of your generation without having some basic ability.
Perhaps the story is not over yet.
joeblogsf1 
I am actually slightly amused by the reactions of people like Warwick and Carlos Gracia – in any industry, whistle-blowers are rarely popular, they will always be regarded with a degree of suspicion by those around them afterwards and I suspect some time reflecting on his mistake will be Piquets punishment – in the fast moving world of F1, that is not a light punishment for a young driver trying to make his mark, other youngsters will come along and fill the void very quickly. As you rightly point out Joe, there is a major difference between Piquet and Alonso – FA had already made himself a very valuable asset indeed before being involved in skududdery and being granted immunity by the authorities in exchange for information. Piquet Minimus may have money behind him, but will have to start again in terms of building a reputation, I don’t think he has got off as scot-free as some seem to think – only time will tell.
Absolutely correct Joe. F1 teams would hire Bin Laden if he were half a second faster than Hamilton!
Yup!
Very sensible article.
Many people like Derek Warwick and Carlos Gracia seem to be grabbing the limelight with their inflamatory comments about Piquet but if you read between the lines they both end up saying things like: it should have been kept quiet, it happens all the time, I also know dirty stories but wont tell, I feel sorry for Briatore, sorry for Renault, sorry for Alonso…
Truth is, everyone commenting on this has a side – some defend their former team, some defend their favourite driver and compatriot… doesn’t make their views right or accurate, and some of them end up doing further damage to F1 in the eyes of the fans.
To be fair he was not the greatest driver in the first place. Sorry to be cynical but looking at his track record for the 2008 season he probably would’ve crashed of his own accord at some stage throughout the race anyway!
I’m not sure a direct comparison between Alonso’s whistle-blowing at McLaren and Piquet’s and Renault is entirely fair.
The key difference is that Piquet, a supposedly mature adult racer, made the final decision to put his life, the lives of the Singapore marshalls and spectators, as well as his racing peers lives at risk by instigaing a crash on the track.
Whilst I don’t agree with Warrick’s views either, its is this damning evidence that will prevent him from being hired by another team, and that is why Alonso is still in F1 whilst Piquet (so far) isn’t.
Piquet´s career is over in F-1, and the real problem is not the son but the father. He is to influencial on his son´s career and no team will want to have the preassure of the dad, I am sure he knew of the crash agreement because his son probably told him. When things didn´t go his way he spilled the beans, he might have a personal satisfaction in claiming Briatore´s head, but he has certainly ruined his son´s future in F-1.
That will be his punishment, not now he is still young and things are warm, but time puts everyone in his place. In years to come Piquet will look back and see what he has done…… frustation and remorse will be his thought ……
This would all have looked good, if Nelson was driving pretty OK, was still employed by Renault, but had to reveal a story, because he fundamentally didn’t like being part of a cheating scheme.
Fact is though, that the reason we heard about all this, was a quest for revenge, rather than a quest for justice and fairness.
In that sence Warwick is absolutely right. ALL teams do things, that they prefer to keep for themselves. All teams eventually have to fire drivers, because they are not fast enough. But if I was a team-owner, I wouldn’t stop hiring Nelson because he revealed the Crashgate scandal. I would stop hiring him because of WHY he revealed Crashgate.
That’s a point that are being missed way too much in all this.
The sad part is that all this wouldn’t have happened if NP Jr. was a faster driver getting more points for the team and scoring regularly. If that was the case he would have never agreed to such a plan no matter who brought it up. And isn’t it sad that his 2009 contract had a clause that he could be booted if he didn’t score 40% as many points as FA. Imagine negotiating that… His agent and father sitting down and bargaining for a figure of 25% and Renault wanting 50-60% in the contract before they agreed upon 40%. I would be ashamed to have such a paltry figure in my contract. No matter what you may think of LH’s 2007 season, he would never accept scoring 40% as many points as his teammate no matter if he had just won two WDCs on the trot. And I dare say Nico would never have such a clause in his contract either. For Sr. to put that in the contract must only be interpreted as a giant vote of no-confidence in his son. How can NP Jr. ever have a shred of self respect with this kind of thing negotiated? I would say that getting such a low regard from your own father is more psychologically debilitating than any amount of abuse that Flav could ever pour on him.
Whether Flav and PS thought up the plan because it became clear to then that all the help to the team that they could ever expect from NP was a few crumbs and some seriously bent cars, or whether NP thought it up because it was something he could offer the team…. well it is all a pretty sad commentary on NP Jr’s driving and his ability to contribute to the team. All this is apart from the ethics. Even if FB, PS and NP Jr all had ZERO ethics, if NP Jr was faster such a plan would not have been considered because NP Jr would be solely focussed on getting his own points if in fact he was fast enough to achieve them. Since he was not fast enough either FB and PS were able to convince him that he could “contribute” to the team by crashing or NP Jr. suggested it because he knew getting points on merit was beyond his ability.
Im so pleased somone has acknowledged Nelsinhio might have some tallent! Reading the media for the past few weeks you would think he was absoloutly hopeless.
To be fair his record in F1 has been hopeless, but you have to question how much of the blame for that has to be placed on the team. If they came to the conclusion that the best he could do for them was to simply put the car in the wall, after 14 races, it might not be too far fetched to imagine they werent all that suportive of their young driver. His F1 results certainly dont match up to his perfomances in earlier series, and he definatly hasnt looked the same as the driver who was matching Lewis in GP2.
His career might have been so different had Alonso not returned from Mclaren. He would likely have been the focus of the teams efforts, but instead he was understandably put second behind the returning double world champion. 2nd drivers at that team have always seemed to struggle, perhaps it was flavs management policy, perhaps Piquet just blew his chance.
I would love to see him have another go. However unlikely it seems. The performances he put in in lower formula’s were impressive regardless of who owned the car, i know many see him as a joke, but i would love to see him proving them wrong.
I don’t agree with the tenor of the argument. Junior is not a whistleblower – he’s merely an instrument for his Dad to settle scores with a few people he doesn’t like, and at the same time do Something Nasty to his old boss. Whistleblowing that’s not. In fact it’s commonly known as cutting off your nose to spite your face.
What I think questionable is the fact that other driver (Warwick) slams Piquet not for him causing an accident, but for being a “whistleblower”…
That makes me think: can we be sure that race fixing never occured before, or even worst things?
I agree with Dennis Dithmar: in and of itself it’s a positive gesture that Nelson eventually brought the facts and evidence to light.
However, it only takes a bit away from the facts that 1) he didn’t say ‘no’ to committing the offense and 2) there can justifiably be cast serious doubts as to whether he would have disclosed the whole thing, had he not had the fallout with Flavio and had he retained his seat.
Regarding Singapore plot I would like us to remember Nelsinho is still very young and I think (being pretty much a spoiled child) also not at all mature as many other young men. Someone of more independent, grown-up, positive character would probably never come up with such an idea or accept it.
Another thing is the safety issue. Most of the people easily get lulled into a belief that modern F1 is now a very safe sport, if there hasn’t been a serious accident for many years. Of course such beliefs are stimulated by the FIA and the teams (car manufacturers) who all need some show off in this area – first for political and the others for commercial resons. I’ve been though that many years ago, when until Martin Donnelly’s terrible accident in Jerez I thought carbon fibre monocoques would prevent extreme bloodshed in F1 forever. I would presume the plotting parties might have underestimated the risks of a “contorlled” crash on a street circuit just as well as any risk was largely overestimated since the two odd accidents of Messrs. Surtees and Massa.
Finally I’d like to know, would Nelsinho still perform his action in exactly the same corner at about the same lap, if he was unavoidably involved in close racing with a competitor. It would have increased the risks enormously. Was that question ever asked? Was it answered?
Warick hate PiQuet Fathrer and Senna, because they are much faster and Warick was too slow driver…that´s the reason!!
Sorry about my english