BASMUN 23’ Chair report

Committee: Special committee (formula 1)

Topic: The Crash Gate scandal
Chairs: Remas Jamal and Raya Alhamed
 Table Of Contents:

Letters from Chairs

Introductions

Topic One

MUN Terminology

Key Terms

The Procedure of Committee

Citations
 Letters from Chairs:

Hello, Delegates!! Welcome to Basmun’23. I'm honored to chair you for this conference, seeing that many
people have joined this committee. My name is Remas Jamal, I'm a freshman at AHISK Can't wait to meet you
all!!

As your chair, I aim to ensure this is a productive, and rewarding experience for all of you. MUN is such a great
opportunity for people to learn about many new issues our world is facing. We will be debating and negotiating,
to find solutions to these problems. As we do so, I encourage you to keep an open mind, listen to each other's
perspectives, and work together to find common ground. The reason we are on this committee is to build our
public speaking skills and we are here to broaden our understanding of the world and the challenges it faces.
And we are here to make new friends and connections that will last a lifetime. So, let's make the most of this
opportunity. I will try my best so no single delegate would feel lost, nervous, alone, and regret applying to this
conference. Let's challenge ourselves, support each other, and have fun. I can't wait to see what we will
accomplish together. A piece of advice I'd give to my Delegates is that never underestimate yourself and do well
research on your topic. If you're a first-timer and scared don't worry this is my first time charing as well; if you
need anything we will be here. I wish you all the best!!

Hello, Delegates!! I'm honored to join this conference as a chair at Basmun 23’. I'm Raya Alhamed and I'm a
student at AHISK. As your chair at this conference, my goal is to ensure a comfortable, memorable, exciting,
and debatable conference. In fact, in my first experience as a delegate I was terrified, anxious, fearful, and
frightened, but let me tell you the conference I attended was entertaining and amusing. At this conference, this is
what I'm looking for, an amusing and entertaining debate that everyone will recollect and think back to. During
the conference, you might be nervous, but I want you to step out of your comfort zone and show all you've got.
Debating might be a dense and vigorous step during MUN conferences in general, but as soon as you feel
comfortable around others, you’ll find it unchallenging. Remember confidence is key and trust yourself and
your own words. Most importantly, my co-chair and I are here to assist you with whatever help you may need to
ensure that this experience will go smoothly. I don't want to make this any longer, but as a matter of fact, I can't
wait to meet you all !!

For any form of help, contact me or my co-chair:

@remasfarah09@gmail.com
@raya.hrar15@gmail.com
 Introduction

Background information on special committees:

Another example of a special committee is ours which is about the cash gate scandal.
The Special Committee on the Charter of the United Nations and the Strengthening of the Role of the
Organization opened its 2022 session today with delegates debating questions related to sanctions, working
methods, and the peaceful settlement of disputes. These committees are “ specialized” in their topic areas and
have a narrow scope that delegates focus on. Ex. International Olympic Committee Each specialized committee
has the special mechanics that make it unique - which is why these committees are difficult to generalize. An
example of a unique mechanic could be adding an election in a Presidential Cabinet committee. Another
example of a special mechanic is a mock trial.

Background information on Formula 1:

Starting in 1950, Formula 1 has maintained a similar structure over the years, with minor modifications to rules
and structure in response to growing interest.
The current lineup (hereafter referred to as grid) consists of 10 teams. There are historic teams that have been
around for decades such as Ferrari, McLaren, and Williams, which have broad fan bases and multiple drivers
and constructors titles under their belts. There are also newer teams such as Red Bull, and Haas, the former of
which is in its second period of domination. Finally, some teams bounce around ownership, essentially acting as
a company’s or private individual’s passion project. Current examples are Mercedes, Aston Martin, Alpine,
Alpha Tauri, and Alfa Romeo. As Formula 1 is a very expensive sport to partake in, if a team faces poor
performance for consecutive years they often turn to a buyout, resulting in an ever-changing bottom half of the
grid. Each team has its unique history that impacts its finances, the goal in the sport, and organizational
structure. The 10 teams compete for the constructor’s championship title at the end of the year, which awards
both prestige and financial awards based on the cumulative number of points their drivers have earned (more
about the specific financial benefits in the financial section). Recently, Red Bull has had a two-year winning
streak, and Mercedes dominated for the 2013-2020 seasons, with other teams fighting for the best of the rest.

Each team consists of 2 drivers, aged 20-41 who have been racing since they were young children. Working
their way through go-karting tournaments and then the Formula 1 feeder of F3 and F2, these men have raced
each other since they were young, resulting in both strong friendships and strong rivalries. Due to the extensive
time and travel commitments, drivers often turn to homeschool around the age of 10, resulting in complete
dedication to the sport, yet few achieve the final goal of an F1 seat due to extreme structural and financial
pressure. Usually, each year only the top two drivers of F3 get a spot in F2, and only the top 2 in F2 get a spot in
F1, yet if they don’t perform well in F1 they will only stay around for about 2 years. This forced scarcity of
drivers results in only a few drivers who can make a career out of racing. When combined with the lofty costs of
participating in the feeder leagues, the opportunity to become an F1 driver is limited to only the most skilled and
wealthy boys.

The current grid is the most geographically diverse ever, with drivers from Mexico, America, China, Japan,
Australia, and Thailand, with the rest from European countries. These men all compete for the end-of-the-year
title of Driver’s champion. There are three current winners on the grid: Max Verstappen who has won the last
two titles with Redbull, Lewis Hamilton who has won 7 titles (1 with McLaren and 6 with Mercedes), and
Fernando Alonso who has won 3 titles with McLaren but now drives for Aston Martin.
 Topic
The topic: the crash gate scandal

Overview of the topic?

Sport and controversy go together hand in hand. But rarely can an attempt to abuse the system have involved
such serious stakes, namely the personal safety of a driver. Given that and the high-profile nature of those
involved, it is unsurprising that when Crashgate, as it quickly became known, broke it did considerable damage
to the image of Formula One in a year it was already on the back foot.

The basics of what happened are quite simple, even if blame and accountability were passed between members
of the Renault team.

At the Singapore Grand Prix in September 2008, Nelson Piquet Jnr crashed into the wall at the 17th turn on the
14th lap of the race. The location of the accident meant the safety car had to be deployed while the debris was
cleared, and Piquet's team-mate Fernando Alonso went on to win. Piquet described his crash as a simple mistake
and that was that.

On August 3, shortly after the 2009 Hungarian Grand Prix, Piquet was released by Renault. Piquet, claiming he
had an 'understanding' with the team, was livid and within days claimed he had crashed on orders. After weeks
of speculation and rumor, on September 4 Renault was charged with conspiracy.

Renault insisted it would vigorously deny the charges (which were due to be heard on September 21) but on
September 16 in a complete about-turn, it said it would not contest the allegations, and managing director,
Flavio Briatore, and executive director of engineering, Pat Symonds, had quit.

At the FIA hearing, Renault was disqualified from F1, and suspended for two years. Briatore was suspended
from all Formula One events and FIA-sanctioned events indefinitely, whilst Symonds received a five-year ban.
Both bans were overturned by a French court in January 2010, although they both agreed not to work in
Formula One or FIA-sanctioned events as part of a later settlement reached with the governing body
 Timeline of the topic
Crash Gate Scandal

As for the timeline of the incident, it occurred on September 28, 2008, during the 13th race of the 2008 Formula
One season. After the incident, the FIA launched an investigation into the matter. Renault initially denied any
wrongdoing but later admitted to orchestrating the crash. As a result, the team was banned from Formula One
for two years, although the ban was later suspended. Renault also lost several key sponsors, and Briatore and
Symonds were banned from the sport. Piquet Jr. was also heavily criticized for his role in the incident, and his
career in Formula One never fully recovered. Timeline

September 28, 2008,

Piquet crashes at the Singapore Grand Prix; team-mate Fernando Alonso goes on to win

July 26, 2009,

Piquet Jnr was fired by Renault after the Hungarian Grand Prix. He did not go quietly. "A manager is there to
encourage and support you and provide you with opportunities. In my case, it was the opposite. Briatore was my
executioner."

July 30, 2009,

Piquet gives evidence to the FIA about events in Singapore.

On August 30, 2009

Brazilian TV states Piquet Jnr was ordered to crash in Singapore. The FIA immediately announced it was
investigating "alleged incidents at a previous F1 event".

September 10, 2009,

Piquet gives a second statement to the FIA, but at the same time, his original statement was leaked in full to the
media. In the transcript, Piquet Jnr states that he was asked by Briatore and Symonds to crash his car at a
specific corner.

● September 11, 2009,

Max Mosley, the FIA president, confirmed Piquet Jnr would face no action after making his two
statements. Meanwhile, Renault issues a release saying it will take legal action against Piquet Jnr and
his father "concerning the making of false allegations and a related attempt to blackmail the team into
allowing Mr. Piquet Jnr to drive for the remainder of the 2009 season". Piquet replies: "Because I am
telling the truth I have nothing to fear, whether from the Renault team or Mr. Briatore, and while I am
 well aware of the power and influence of those being investigated, and the vast resources at their
disposal, I will not be bullied again into making a decision I regret".

September 14, 2009

Symonds was reported to have been offered immunity from the action if he provided the FIA with details of the
alleged conspiracy. He was reported to have told FIA investigators that the initial idea of a crash had come from
Piquet.

September 15, 2009,

The Times published extracts of Renault F1 radio conversations transmitted before and after the Singapore race
between Renault F1 personnel including Piquet Jnr, Alonso, Symonds, and Briatore.

September 16, 2009,

In a complete u-turn, Renault announced it would not be contesting the charges at the meeting of the FIA World
Motor Sport Council in Paris five days later, adding both Briatore and Symonds had left the team. "I was just
trying to save the team," Briatore said. "It's my duty. That's the reason I've finished."

On September 17, 2009,

Patrick Pelata, Renault's chief operating officer, said: "The team believes that a mistake has been made, and
punishment must follow. Flavio Briatore considered himself to be morally responsible and resigned."

September 21, 2009,

At an extraordinary meeting of the World Motorsports Council in Paris, Renault was banned from F1, and
suspended for two years; Symonds was banned for five years; Briatore was barred indefinitely from any
FIA-sanctioned event and also, in effect, banned from managing drivers. Alonso was cleared of any
involvement.

October 19, 2009,

Briatore announced his intention to challenge the FIA's decision in court.

January 5, 2010,
A French court overturned the ban and awarded Briatore €15,000 in compensation. However, it did not absolve
anyone of blame, merely decided the FIA's action was against its own rules.
January 11, 2010,
The FIA announced it would appeal the court's decision.

April 12, 2010,

The FIA announced a settlement with Briatore and Symonds, and that the legal action had been ended. Both
men agreed not to work in Formula One until 2013, or any other FIA-sanctioned championship until the end of

The previous attempts to resolve the issue:

After the race, all seemed well. Piquet Jr. called his crash a “simple mistake” because the team asked him to
push harder, and Renault itself expressed restrained amazement that Alonso had been able to pull off such a
“brilliant tactical drive.” As a result, stewards saw no reason to take any action against Piquet Jr. or Renault. A
few skeptics noted that it was extremely convenient for Piquet Jr.’s crash to happen when and where it did, but
no one had any proof — especially since some of the biggest skeptics came from Brazilian television station
Rede Globo who were upset that Felipe Massa’s poor Singapore finish could have been the main reason behind
his losing the 2008 Championship by a single point.

It wasn’t until a year later, in late August of 2009, that Rede Globo formally accused Renault of instructing
Piquet Jr. to crash, forcing the FIA to investigate. On September 4, 2009, the FIA stated that it found Renault
guilty of “a breach of Article 151c of the International Sporting Code, that the team conspired with its driver,
Nelson Piquet Jr, to cause a deliberate crash at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix to cause the deployment of the
safety car to the advantage of its other driver, Fernando Alonso.” All parties involved were called to a meeting
of the FIA World Motorsport Council on September 21.

Evidence supporting the FIA’s accusation largely came in the form of a leaked transcript in which Piquet Jr.
confirmed that he was asked by Renault leads Flavio Briatore and Pat Symonds to crash at a specific corner.
Piquet Jr. alleged that he was in a “fragile and emotional state of mind” because he had no idea if he was going
to be signed by Renault for a second season; Briatore allegedly forced Piquet Jr. to sign an option that prevented
him from negotiating with other teams, then regularly brought Piquet into his office to parse out every single
detail of his performance.

“When I was asked to crash my car and cause a safety car incident to help the team, I accepted because I hoped
that it could improve my position within the team at this critical time in the race season,” Piquet said. “At no
point was I told by anyone that by agreeing to cause an incident, I would be guaranteed a renewal of my contract
or any other advantage. However, in this context, I thought that it would help achieve this goal. I, therefore,
agreed to cause the incident.”

For his part, Alonso stated that he did not know about the potential crash, and he was absolved of any blame.
The FIA also cleared Piquet Jr. of any fault.

But things were far from over. After Piquet’s transcripts leaked, Renault decided it was going to sue both Nelson
Piquet Jr. and his father for “the making of false allegations and a related attempt to blackmail the team into
allowing Mr. Piquet Jr to drive for the remainder of the 2009 season.” Piquet Jr. had been dropped by the team
after the July 26, 2009 running of the Hungarian Grand Prix, to be replaced by Romain Grosjean.

However, Renault seemed to understand it was on shaky ground. After attempting to accuse Piquet Jr. of
formulating the crash idea, both Pat Symonds and Flavio Briatore resigned from the team, perhaps to prevent the
team from facing further punishment.

It wasn’t enough. During the September 21 meeting, Renault was disqualified from the sport and suspended for
two years; if Renault repeated a similar incident to that of the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix, it would be banned
entirely from the sport. Briatore was issued a lifetime ban from any FIA-sanctioned event and was also banned
from managing drivers — the FIA refused to issue super licenses to any driver who worked with Briatore in the
future. Symonds, for his part, was given a five-year ban from FIA events. The punishments were handed out due
to Symonds’ admission that he had been involved in orchestrating Piquet Jr.'s crash, whereas Briatore had
adamantly denied the allegations. Briatore’s lifetime ban remains one of the harshest penalties ever issued by the
FIA.

The scandal rocked F1, which had been subject to two other scandals in a short period: one being industrial
espionage between teams, the other being Hamilton lying to race stewards at the 2009 Australian Grand Prix.
Further, Renault’s launch of four electric vehicles was interrupted by constant questions about the Crashgate
affair. In the aftermath, multiple teams and drivers spoke out against Renault, Briatore, and Symonds appealed
their bans, and Piquet Jr. won a libel case against Renault.

The scandal ultimately killed Piquet Jr.’s F1 hopes; while he was never a particularly impressive driver at
Renault, no team wanted to touch him after Crashgate, forcing him to move to NASCAR and later Formula E.
Symonds returned to F1 as a consultant for Virgin Racing in 2011 and now serves as F1's Chief Technical
Officer. And this year, Briatore returned to F1 as an ambassador for the sport. Alonso, for his part, seemed to
suffer no fallout from the incident.

Perhaps even stranger is the fact that very little — if anything — happened within the sport of F1 to prevent this
from happening again. The series seemed to sweep Crashgate under the rug, ultimately allowing its key players
back into the sport without censure. Piquet Jr. received the worst punishment of all, despite being absolved of
guilt; because he only came forward with allegations about the Singapore Grand Prix after he had been cut from
the Renault team halfway through 2009, he received a reputation as something of a fair-weather driver. And as
we approach this year’s Singapore Grand Prix, it’s worth remembering that far more goes on behind the scenes
in F1 than we can ever know.

People with/against the topic:

1-Nelson Piquet Jr:
Nelson Piquet Jr. has this crash gate scandal in Singapore in 2008 to help the team’s other driver, Fernando
Alonso win the Grand Prix. Fernando Alonso won 1st place during the Grand Prix, in 2008. Nelson Piquet Jr. is
the one who caused the crash, allegedly manipulated by Team Boss Flavio to allow Alonso to win. “ It was
something I was forced to do and journalists turned it into something huge”, Piquet Jr. once mentioned.

2-Fernando Alonso:
Fernando Alonso won the 1st position during the Grand Prix, in 2008. “The first person they summoned was
Alonso, and he denied all knowledge of what had happened.” Mosley once said. People thought Alonso had
knowledge about what had happened during the F1, but in reality, he didn't. Alonso also still counts the race as a
win.

3-Felipe Massa:
Felipe Massa lost the 2008 Formula 1 Championship to Lewis Hamilton by a point and insists that the season’s
Singapore Grand Prix crash gate is the reason. Felipe Massa believes that the reason for their loss was the
Crashgate scandal. Felipe Massa is against the Crashgate scandal.

4-Team Boss Flavio:

Team Boss Flavio was banned for life from Formula 1 after the crash gate scandal at the 2008 Singapore Grand
Prix. As ever experienced, Team Boss Flavio would guide the outfit. Team Boss Flavio manipulated Nelson
Piquet Jr. to cause the crashgate scandal which resulted in the other team driver Alonso winning the race. Pat
Symonds was considered as the ‘sidekick’.

5-Pat Simmons:
Pat Symonds was considered a ‘sidekick’, and he is a director of engineering. He was also banned for life from
Formula 1 after the crash gate scandal at the 2008 Singapore Grand Prix. He was involved in the helping of the
crash gate scandal.
 MUN Terminology

Delegate: A delegate is an individual representative of a country in a MUN committee. A delegate moves their
policy ideas forward through speeches, lobbying, negotiation, and writing to influence the outcome of the
committee session in their favor.

Chair: Facilitate debate according to the Rules of Procedure. They are seated in the front of the committee room
and can call on delegates to speak, time speeches, open the floor to motions and facilitate votes on motions
offered by the delegates. At the end of the conference, they choose the delegates to receive diplomacy awards.
They also often give feedback to the delegates.

Admin: A volunteer who functions as a page and also helps with other tasks around the committee.

Points:

2. Point of Parliamentary Inquiry: Also called a ‘Point of Inquiry’. A question from a delegate to the chair
about the Rules of Procedure (RoP) or anything else they don’t understand in the committee.

3. Point of Information: When a delegate asks a question of another delegate. These usually take place after a
delegate completes a speech on the Speaker’s List. Some conferences do not have Points of Information.
Consult each conference's rules to understand how exactly they work.

4. Follow-Ups: A request to ask a second question after having already asked one as a point of information.

5. Point of Personal Privilege: Can be called for when a delegate feels hindered by something outside of the
debate, which is not covered by the RoP. Examples can be going to the bathroom, room temperature, and the
inability to hear another speaker.

6. Point of Order: Called by a delegate on another delegate, or the chair, when the Rules of Procedure are not
being followed. The specifics of a Point of Order vary between conferences and the specific RoP should be
Consulted.

Motions:

1. Motion: How you ask for something in MUN in the official request form. You can motion for many different
actions to guide the debate forward in a specific way. Some examples of motions are motions for different types
of caucuses (discussion), to move to vote, or end the committee session altogether.

2. Right of Reply: When a delegate feels their country was insulted during another delegate's GSL speech, they
can ask for the Right of Reply. If approved by the chair, the insulted delegate gets a certain amount of time to
respond to the insult. There is no Right of Reply to a Right of Reply.
3. Motion to move into Moderated Caucus: A form of continuous debate in which speakers give their
positions on the topics at hand. A motion for a moderated caucus may be made by any delegate and must
include a time limit for the caucus, a speaking time for the caucus, and the purpose of the caucus.

4. Motion to move into Unmoderated Caucus: An informal form of debate where delegates are free to leave
their seats and discuss with other delegates. This motion is normally made when it’s time to merge or write draft
resolutions.

5. Motion to move into Voting Procedure: Only judges can move into the voting procedure so that whatever
was being discussed is put to a vote.

1. Second: A second delegate agreeing with a motion that has been proposed. Most motions require a second to
be voted on by the entire committee. If there are no seconds a motion automatically fails.

2. Objection: After a motion gets a second, the Dias asks if there are objections. At least one delegate needs to
object to the motion to proceed to a vote by the entire committee. If there is no objection the motion
automatically passes.

3. “Honorable Chair, Distinguished Delegates”: This is how MUN speeches usually start. While it is
customary to start a speech with these words it is not the end of the world if you don’t say them.

4. Roll Call: A procedure performed by the chairs at the beginning of each committee session to know how
many delegates are present in the room.

● Present: What a delegate says when they are present in the committee and want to reserve the right to
abstain on the final vote.
● Present and Voting: What a delegate stays during roll call when they forgo their right to abstain. This
means they can only vote for or against the draft resolution. This is usually done when they feel
strongly about the topic.

5. Yield: Used in MUN for when a delegate finishes their speech with the extra time that needs to choose what
to do with it. The delegate can yield, or give up, their time to

The Chair: This means they give up the rest of their time.

Another Delegate: Another delegate gets to use the remaining time in their speech.

Question: The speaker will take questions and answer them with the remained of their time

6. Placard: The cardboard or paper sign with the country name written on it. Placards are used to
identify presence, vote, and signal to the chair
 Key Terms

Crashgate scandal: The Renault Formula One crash controversy, dubbed Crashgate by some in the media, was
a sporting scandal caused when Renault F1 driver Nelson Piquet Jr.

Backmarker: A slower car that is often lapped (sometimes multiples times) during the race by the leading cars

FIA; The Federation Internationale de l'Automobile (FIA) is the governing body for many international racing
series, including Formula 1. Established over 100 years ago in France, the FIA currently has member
organizations in 145 countries and also promotes road safety around the world.

Flatspot: When a driver locks the brakes, causing the tires to stop rotating immediately. This leads to an
immediate loss of grip.

DRS: This is known as a drag reduction system. A DRS is a flap in the rear spoiler, and when lifted, it can allow
the car to travel faster and aid overtaking by reducing drag forces.

ERS: Short for Energy Recovery Systems, the ERS is a component of the power unit that recovers kinetic
energy lost through braking.

Debris: any item present on the track during a race that could endanger the drivers' safety.

Sectors: For timing purposes, the lap is split into three sections, each of which is roughly a third of the lap.
These sections are officially known as Sector 1, Sector 2, and Sector 3.

Inlap: the lap that happens immediately after the hot lap.

Hotlap: a lap around a racetrack that is not part of a competition. Hot laps are often completed before a race,
giving drivers a chance to practice handling their vehicles on the track.

Pits: An area of track separated from the start/finish straight by a wall, where the cars are brought for new tires
and fuel during the race, or for set-up changes in practice, each stopping at their respective pit garages.

Chicone: a series of corners on a circuit, normally taken at low speed, that features at least two changes of
direction. Chicanes are often added to high-speed sections of a circuit to slow the cars down, improving safety
and encouraging more overtaking.
 Procedure of Committee

● The chairs will start with any type of icebreaker, and introduce the procedures.

● Then the chairs will move into role call to know how many delegates are present in the room

● We will start with opening speeches

:- Each Delegate will prepare an opening speech for one to two minutes. Afterward, POI”s are
welcomed first by the Judges, Then the Prosecution, and lastly the Defense.
-After all the Delegates finish their opening speeches and prosecution will have ONE opening
speech for all of them. 5-10 Minutes where they state their position on the stance. POIs will be
opened for The Delegates first, the Judges second Defense last.
-After Prosecution, Defense will have one opening speech for 5-10 minutes.POIs will follow Delegates
first, Judges second, and Prosecution last.

● Then the committee will move into an unmoderated caucus for lobbying procedure where the delegates
will spread out to either prosecution or Defense, and they will discuss their tactics to win the Judges
over. During this time they will make their evidence packet. This must take no less than half an hour.
(they'll probably need more)

● After the time for lobbying is over we will move into the evidence packets Judges will evaluate the
evidence based on the following criteria: Reliability, Accuracy, Bias, Date of Publication, and
Relevance. If judges determine that the evidence does not meet the criteria, or determine that it’s not
substantial enough to support the party’s arguments, they will eliminate the evidence and you will not
be able to use the evidence to support your arguments. When presenting the evidence to the court.
-The Prosecution goes first with the evidence packet, presenting for no less than
5 minutes. 10 Maximum. POIs will then be granted. (in the same order)
-Defense Needs to prepare a rebuttal during the Prosecution presentation.

- Their rebuttal speech should be no shorter than 2 minutes. (NOTE: POIs and Rebuttals are
different.)
-Repeat with defense.
Judges and delegates do not get a rebuttal speech.

● After we are done with evidence packets we will move into lobbying(2) which will be used for both
parties to make a witness list. This list must include the witnesses + description. And the questions that
will be asked.
-Prosection goes first. After each witness, POI”s will be accepted (same order)
-Defense goes second
-Objections are allowed: hearsay, badgering, and leading questions.

● Last but not least we will move into closing speeches one last speech to win the judges over. A 5-10
minute speech. Once by the prosecution, and once by the defense. Delegates and judges do not get a
closing speech
 Citations

● https://f1.fandom.com/wiki/Crashgate_scandal

● https://talksport.com/sport/motorsport/1385704/what-is-crashgate-renault-formula-1-controversy-lewis
-hamilton-felipe-massa/

● https://www.grandprix247.com/2023/04/13/piquet-jnr-briatore-symonds-treated-me-like-a-dog-f1-crash
gate-singapore-2008/

● https://www.sportskeeda.com/f1/news-f1-crashgate-scandal-team-principal-makes-return-sport

● https://bleacherreport.com/articles/1780963-nelson-piquet-jnr-and-crashgate-was-2008-singapore-gp-fo
rmula-1s-darkest-hour

● Crashgate - Complete Story (BBC)

● https://thesportsrush.com/f1-news-crashgate-f1-how-fernando-alonsos-teammate-crashed-deliberately-
to-make-him-win-inaugural-singapore-grand-prix/

● https://www.planetf1.com/news/nelson-piquet-jr-opens-up-on-crashgate/

● https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/comments/2gg148/crashgate/

● The Most Shameful day in Formula 1: Crashgate

● https://thesportsrush.com/f1-news-crashgate-not-lewis-hamilton-cost-me-2008-title-felipe-massa-blam
es-fernando-alonsos-teammate-and-boss-for-heartbreak-at-interlagos/

● How Lewis Hamilton's 2008 F1 Title is under threat

Note that: Wikipedia is undesirable.