For me, the most intriguing ongoing aspect to the FIA’s judgement in the Renault matter, is Flavio Briatore‘s involvement with Championship football club Queens Park Rangers.

Briatore owns the club with that man Bernie Ecclestone and someone called Lakshmi Mittal, is chairman of the club’s holding company, and sits on the club’s board of directors. So he’s pretty involved.

The Football League has a Fit and Proper Persons Test for just such people which, amongst other clauses, excludes:

“Anyone subject to a ban from a Sports Governing Body relating to the administration of that sport.”

Yet the Football League has asked the FIA for more details of Briatore’s ban. My immediate reaction was: why?!

But actually, maybe the language in the FIA‘s judgement is a bit on the woolly side.

With regards to Renault F1, it couldn’t be clearer. The FIA talks of “permanent disqualification from the FIA Formula One World Championship” – albeit, of course, only if they do something like this again in the next two years. Which they won’t. But that’s by the by.

Now look at the wording when talking about Briatore: it’s all “does not intend”. The FIA “does not intend” to allow him to be involved in anything under its jurisdiction.

That’s wide ranging, certainly, but it’s not explicitly a ban, is it?

It’s been widely reported as a ban, and in practical terms it probably is. But for the purposes of a presumably carefully worded Football League policy, it might not be good enough.

Which begs the question: why has the FIA not been more definite on the sanctions it has placed on Briatore (and equally Pat Symonds)? Can it not issue a “permanent disqualification” to a person, or did it choose not to?