The Gerhard Gribkowsky saga has gone from bad to worse for F1 chief executive Bernie Ecclestone.
Already under investigation by German prosecutors, the 80-year-old now faces a multi-million dollar lawsuit filed by the sport’s former 50 per cent shareholder Constantin Medien.

The German company, formerly known as EM.TV, has filed legal action in London’s High Court, according to a report in the Daily Telegraph.

Also being sued is Ecclestone’s holding company Bambino, business partner Stephen Mullens and the jailed Gribkowsky, who is accused of receiving millions from the F1 chief executive surrounding the sale of the rights to current owner CVC.

Constantin claims the manipulation of the sale to CVC cost it more than $100 million in missing profit proceeds.

Constantin, Ecclestone and CVC all declined to comment.

Dietrich Mateschitz insists that team orders will play no role in whether a Red Bull driver secures the energy drink-owned team’s first title in 2010.

A myriad of pundits believe Mark Webber, with a higher points tally, should now be backed by his teammate Sebastian Vettel in order to chase down the lead of Ferrari’s Fernando Alonso with two races to go.

But Austrian billionaire Mateschitz told Der Spiegel newspaper that there will be no team orders.

“This is a sport and the best should win,” he said.

“Power, politics, manipulation and so on should be kept as far away as possible.

“The game is ‘come and get me, if you can’, and not ‘let me through because I’m better’,” insisted Mateschitz. “Racing must remain racing.”

And their points tallies aside, he is adamant that the events about to happen on the circuit will determine whether Webber or Vettel triumphs.

“They are different in personality, but equally fast,” he said.

Martin Whitmarsh has backed the FIA’s decision to take no action against Fernando Alonso.

In the immediate aftermath of last Sunday’s European grand prix, the enraged Ferrari driver accused the governing body of “manipulation” in issuing a drive-through penalty that still allowed McLaren’s Lewis Hamilton to finish second.

In the past, during Max Mosley’s long reign, the comments would have almost certainly attracted a disrepute charge, but new president Jean Todt let the incident pass with nothing more than a partial retraction by the Spaniard.

And while, in the past, the comments would also have triggered hostilities between long-time rivals McLaren and Ferrari, the British team’s boss Whitmarsh said Alonso’s outburst “doesn’t worry me”.

“Alonso was fairly outspoken but actually people want a bit of that,” the teams association FOTA’s chairman said at a fans’ forum in London on Thursday.

“In the past you have not been able to question,” Whitmarsh is quoted by the news agency AFP.

“There has to be a limit, some fine lines, but not being able to question a referee’s decisions, or umpire’s decisions or stewards’ decision?  Frankly, you have not been able to do that.”

(GMM)

Two days have passed after the contested races in Valencia and Fernando Alonso’s mood has been heated then cooled. In his blog on the official Ferrari site now he regrets his remarks, which he angrily criticized immediately after the race the stewards and the FIA accused of manipulation. Meanwhile, he sees what happened now with a clear head.

“We had the date on which the safety car came out, a special pitch. Only a few seconds earlier or later and the race would have been very different for us,” recalls Alonso. to ruminate about what has happened then bring, not much, “but I’m much calmer now than immediately after the race.”
“It certainly was not the Sunday, we were expecting us,” he explains. “The safety car is on for us came out worst possible time and ruined our race completely. On Sunday evening I was very angry is about all that has happened. But the anger is now transformed into positive energy that drives me the desire, I fight back, .

“At the time I reacted emotionally and in such a situation is all too quick to propose a sound and says things can be misinterpreted and may give cause to suspicion – something that was not my intention at all,” admits the Ferrari Star one. “I understand of course that the race has a difficult job and that they must make decisions that are not easy.”

was “What I wanted a driver who respects the rules as we were at a disadvantage in this situation, unfortunately, more than those who have broken, even if they were given a penalty,” continued Alonso. He refers here not to a specific driver (Lewis Hamilton, editor’s note), says the Spaniard, “This is a basic thing and I think we should talk about it calmly, to ensure that such something does not happen again. ”

He was delighted that the FIA also reacted promptly and an extraordinary meeting of the sporting working group meet as Alonso added: “I am confident even sure that all the contentious issues can be addressed in detail here.”
For Alonso, the subject is checked to a large extent. Its concentration is now the next race at Silverstone. “There we will try to get all the energy accumulated in our car and us to repeat what was denied us in Valencia, for any reason whatsoever. Even though we know Silverstone is theoretically not a route that our car is. ”

Even if the result of Valencia was not what Ferrari had hoped for, “it has left no irreparable damage,” Alonso continued. “It is true that our backlog is at the top now grown to 29 points, but we have not even reached the mid-season. We lack only a little more than a victory, is therefore still open to everything.”
We have been able to catch up with the updates for Spain on the top teams, he stressed: “I am glad, I’m well aware that we have to enter in the development of the F10 on the gas. Because we need a car, we at the Pole and we can fight as soon as possible before our rivals brings. If we now lie 29 points behind the leader, it means that we need to bring in the next ten races at least 30 points more than the leader. ”

was one of the main points of the race from Sunday, however, that Mark Webber his serious accident, “the fear was spectacular and scary”, has survived virtually unscathed, says Alonso: “This shows once again that the work initiated by the FIA at the Security is absolutely essential and that in this field of sport should never be complacent. “

Joan Villadelprat has warned Fernando Alonso to put a lid on his overt criticisms of F1′s governing body.

Spaniard Villadelprat, bidding to bring his Le Mans team Epsilon Euskadi onto the F1 grid next year, was referring to Alonso’s accusation that a mild penalty for Lewis Hamilton in Valencia last week amounted to FIA manipulation.

In his column for the El Pais newspaper, he said countryman Alonso might be excused for mouthing off in the immediate aftermath of the race, but should now quieten his attack or risk official sanctions.

“I think Alonso was heated and just out of the car,” he said.  “I can understand their anger because Ferrari thought this race was a turning point in their championship.

“I also believe the stewards failed to react as they should.  But I cannot say that Lewis Hamilton deserved a more severe penalty because it happened exactly as is in the regulations.

“But the reaction should have been much faster — (the stewards’ decision) took about 14 laps!  I suppose they waited so long because they were analysing it before giving a verdict.

“In any case, Fernando needs to be very careful about what he says, because these types of attacks are of no benefit and could even cost a penalty.

“But even more, it’s because I don’t think he really believes the stewards acted intentionally for Hamilton and against his own interest.

“I know that in times like these it is difficult to keep your head and your tongue cool, but Alonso needs to concentrate on his work, on getting his car on pole position and on stemming the difference that still separates Ferrari from Red Bull and McLaren,” added Villadelprat.

(GMM)

F1′s governing body is not expected to take action against Fernando Alonso or Ferrari.

The Italian team’s response to the outcome of the Valencia race has been incandescent, including Fernando Alonso saying Lewis Hamilton’s meagre treatment by the stewards amounted to “manipulation”.

Ferrari vice-president Piero Ferrari said the mere drive-through penalty for McLaren driver Hamilton’s overtaking of the safety car made the European GP a “false race”.

And reports on the team’s official website have quoted fans as saying Hamilton is a liar and a cheat, McLaren “thieves”, and the FIA a “Federation of clowns”.

British newspaper The Mirror correspondent Byron Young wrote on Twitter that in “Max Mosley’s day”, sanctions would now be likely, adding: “Are the FIA going to act or will Jean Todt dodge the first big F1 test of his presidency?”

According to sources on Monday, the FIA is not considering action.

As Red Bull drew a line under the matter on Thursday, former FIA president Max Mosley waded into the debate about the collision between Mark Webber and Sebastian Vettel in Turkey.

After a meeting in Milton-Keynes on Thursday, the team issued a statement that included a jovial photo of the teammates with the caption ‘Shit happens’.

“I’m sorry for the team that we lost the lead of the race.  Mark and I are racers and we were racing,” German Vettel, 22, is quoted as saying.

With the blame-game apparently put to bed, Mosley however told the German newspaper Die Welt that he thinks the crash was Australian Webber’s fault.

Interestingly, 70-year-old Briton Mosley is a close friend and former F1 ally of Red Bull’s Austrian billionaire owner Dietrich Mateschitz.

Dr Helmut Marko, also Austrian and Mateschitz’s right-hand man on motor racing matters, also initially blamed Webber for the lap-40 shunt at Istanbul Park.

“From my perspective,” said former long-time FIA president Mosley, “I do not think that Sebastian Vettel should receive the blame for the collision.”

Mosley added: “At the time of the accident Vettel was clearly faster than Webber.  At this stage he (Vettel) had the right and the duty to overtake.”

Red Bull has revealed that Webber was running a fuel-saving engine setting while Vettel was not, and that the Australian radioed the pits to ask the McLaren-pressured Vettel to drop back.

Moreover, the team claims Webber’s race engineer Ciaron Pilbeam failed to pass on a radio message warning the 33-year-old not to repel an attack by Vettel, whose tyres were reportedly also in better shape than Webber’s.

Marko aside, most of the F1 world said it was Vettel who aggressively turned right whilst alongside the sister RB6 driven by Webber.

“I do not agree,” said Mosley, strongly siding with Marko, who along with team boss Christian Horner also attended Thursday’s clear-the-air meeting.

Said Mosley: “It can be clearly seen that Vettel had already passed Webber before the collision, and at that time Webber should have given him more space — especially as they were already on the far left side of the track.

“Now you could argue (about the blame) if it had not been Webber’s teammate, but as it was, he (Webber) should have respected his responsibility to the team.

“Remember, both cars were doing almost 300kph, so considering the risk, he (Webber) should have taken a chance to improve his position at another point in the race.”

When told by the Welt interviewer that the same rationale also applies to Vettel, Mosley answered: “The crucial point speaks for Vettel and against Webber — that one driver in this moment was fast, while the other was slow.”

Mosley, who speaks fluent German, also said he does not believe Red Bull’s apparent desire to see Vettel ahead of Webber amounts to illegal team orders.

“I cannot see that,” said the Briton.  “Vettel was under pressure from Lewis Hamilton, he was faster than Webber, and to shake off the McLaren he needed to pass the slower Webber.

“Even if this situation was declared to the drivers by radio, this would not be a team order or a manipulation of the drivers’ championship, but rather an explanation of a particular situation — (it is) necessary information for the drivers.”

Comparing the situation to Ferrari’s infamous place-swapping in Austria in 2002, Mosley said “one was a conscious manipulation of the world championship, the other is the legitimate explanation of a racing situation.”

(GMM)