Why Massa's court case would risk an unhelpful precedent

It was a strange old year in 2025. Andrew Mountbatten Windsor and Christian Horner lose titles that, in one case, brought television exposure to be avoided and, in the other, coverage to be embraced as an art form. Meanwhile, Felipe Massa seeks recompense for a title he never had. And the titular head of the FIA sinks from president to authoritarian in between handing out medals no one wants.

Massa can count himself lucky that his 11 F1 wins were during the reign of Max Mosley, an FIA president who, unlike the present incumbent, made himself scarce when it came to podium ceremonies and the like. Mosley was better at dealing out punishment than serving up platitudes – although Massa would claim that Mosley did not act quickly enough in the aftermath of ‘Crashgate’ in Singapore. (For those who need reminding, Nelson Piquet Jr crashed his Renault two laps after his team-mate, Fernando Alonso, had made a pitstop and, by design, found himself in an advantageous position as a consequence of Piquet’s supposed carelessness.) According to Massa, the staged accident robbed him of the 2008 championship and associated earnings in excess of £80million.

Regardless of Mosley’s keenness to nail the perpetrators – particularly Flavio Briatore – immediate prosecution was prevented by the lack of hard evidence. When this eventually came (courtesy of Piquet), Mosley acted swiftly. But the F1 world had moved on and crowned Lewis Hamilton as champion.

Even though Massa is chasing dollars rather than a belated world title, what sort of precedent is being set? The former Ferrari driver is effectively establishing a Losers’ Charter by attempting to rewrite sporting history in his favour. If he succeeds, whatever next? If we’re talking about a sports person being hard done by thanks to perceived official ineptitude, then what about the Abu Dhabi fiasco in 2021? Will there be a close examination of Under The Carpet Affairs at FIA HQ? There’s about as much chance of that as there is of Massa’s lawyers donating their substantial fee to Hamilton’s rapidly advancing retirement fund.

Moving beyond motorsport, there are numerous instances of ‘We Wuz Robbed’ whataboutery. Take the 2009 World Cup qualifier playoff. During extra time, Thierry Henry used his hand – twice – to control the ball and set up the winning goal for France against Ireland. The referee failed to see the professional foul that helped France to proceed in the competition. On the basis of Massa’s actions, Guinness could lay a claim against FIFA for lost earnings thanks to official incompetence seriously stemming the flow of the black stuff in Irish pubs.

If Massa has a case for the 2008 F1 world title, then Ireland and Guinness could say the same about the 2009 World Cup qualifier against France

Photo by: Getty Images

It seems few glasses will be raised when Mohammed Ben Sulayem walks unopposed into a second term as FIA president. Sadly, this is 2025 and not 1991 when Jean-Marie Balestre had a similar belief about his re-election to the seat of motoring power. Balestre did not reckon with Mosley who, when unobtrusively bidding for the presidency, made clever use of unhappiness among various FIA delegates. These representatives of national motoring clubs lived in dread of Balestre’s sanctions – such as losing their country’s world championship rally or F1 race – should the rumbustious president discover they had not voted in his favour despite promising faithfully that they would.

Mosley tapped into this fear of retribution by calling each national president in turn and quietly informing them of his intentions. Mosley promised that, if elected, he would not serve a full four-year term but would resign and offer himself for re-election after 12 months. Not only would this give delegates the opportunity to get rid of Mosley if they wished, but they would also appreciate that such a conciliatory move by Balestre was as unlikely as someone at Aston Martin daring to inform the boss that his number two driver might actually wish to do something other than race an F1 car. The casting of votes by a secret ballot was the key to Mosley’s campaign. He won by 43 to 29. Balestre was gobsmacked.

"This man told me he needed to sacrifice a horse – and asked if I would help pay for the horse. My wife was horrified when I mentioned this to her. I explained that no horse would actually suffer – it was just a polite way of asking for a bung" Max Mosley

During the course of his campaign, Mosley had been furtively informed by an African delegate that he would walk twice round the room just before the ballot and drop two stones. Apparently, this was some form of ritual in this man’s home country and would have a powerful effect on the outcome. There was, however, a catch. “To make absolutely sure of success,” recalled Mosley, “this man told me he needed to sacrifice a horse – and asked if I would help pay for the horse. My wife was horrified when I mentioned this to her. I explained that no horse would actually suffer – it was just a polite way of asking for a bung. I told the delegate that, unfortunately, I couldn’t help finance the sacrifice.”

Max went on to explain to the man that the gesture would not be possible because his wife loved horses. That fits. According to a nauseating introduction to the Drive to Survive series a couple of years ago, Mr and Mrs Horner made a habit of starting each day dressed in their finery on horseback and hacking blissfully through the Buckinghamshire countryside while discussing the F1 world at large and their unspoken rosy future within Red Bull. An apparent love of horses clearly didn’t help them either.

This article is one of many in the monthly Autosport magazine. For more premium content, take a look at the January 2026 issue and subscribe today.

What the FIA knew during the 2008 'Crashgate' scandal could prove pivotal to Massa's court case

Photo by: Edd Hartley