Italian Spirit
27th July 2010, 17:02
Since there is a lot of time from here to the next GP and WMSC, I thought interesting to do a (long), press review. The results are interesting and amazing. Next to the (in)famous English WGP (Worst Gutter Press) that only lives on sensationalism and hatred it's refreshing to find some Journalism that can be spelled with a cap "J".
Inevitably they are mainly excerpts. But each with a link to the full article so you can read them in the context.
Bear with me if before such press review I give a personal opinion. :-D
Amongst the stupidest rules of the FIA for F1 the one relating to "team orders" is probably the most absurd. The only goal it ever achieved was to introduce an additional layer of hypocrisy. Ask Christian Horner and his "Save fuel!..." jokes.
But before continuing on the subject let sweep in front of our own door.
Ahead the German GP, the Scuderia has clearly set strategy: should Massa be in front and Fernando in a position to pass him, Felipe should move over. Given the WDC standings FA still has a chance, not FM. That became very clear to everybody when Felipe resisted the first attack of Fernando who shout in the radio "That's ridiculous!". What followed was a pitiful kindergarten show. Rob telling Felipe "Fernando is faster than you. Can you confirm that you understood the message?", Felipe not answering but theatrically slowing down and moing to the side to let his team mate pass!
I will spare you Rob's following messages, you all herd them. And I don't want to remind you the painful post race press conference.
There are at least a trillion different words to tell a driver what he has to do, especially when he has been previously instructed about it, there was no need to broadcast it in such a dumb way. There was even a simpler way of achieving the result: 3 seconds longer during the pit stop.
Now, whoever read some of my posts knows how much I admire Felipe the driver and how much I love Felipe the person. But the way he handled the situation was very disappointing and even unprofessional. I like Rob very much too and, given the ties that he has with Felipe, I pity him to have to pass such order. But, hey, that's what he's (very well) paid for. Unfortunately he let his personal feelings take over. I'm afraid this may have some unpleasant consequences for both of them and I'm sorry to say that they deserve it.
The mea culpa done, I think that it's worth putting things in their right perspective. This, of course, has been done a zillion times by a zillion people, most of them more competent than me on the subject, but sometimes "repetita juvant", repeating does good.
Whether the dreamers and the naive souls like it or not F1, even before being a sport, is a business, where hundreds of millions are invested for a team to race and win.
To be coherent, next to its laughably foolish rule banning team orders, the FIA should have banned the world "team":
- Team (noun): a number of persons associated in some joint action;
- a group of people organized to work together;
- a group on the same side, as in a game"
or (verb)
- to gather or join in a team, or a cooperative effort".
Even the synonyms of "team" reinforce the idea: "Combine, unite, ally, merge".
The main goal in F1 is the WCC (the brand) but it so happen that, because the star system "sells", the media, and therefore the sponsors, put much more emphasis on the WDC (the driver, the glamour), hence the importance of winning it too. Which imply a "team" strategy that may lead to "team orders".
The team orders ban, heritage of the nefarious Mosley's era, in an absurdity that should disappear.
You may think that the opinion of a Ferrari fan is necessarily biased. Well, read the excerpts that follow, mainly from the British (yes! Yes!) press and sites, starting with the origin of the mess, the (in)famous Article 39.1 of the sporting regulations.
Here we go. :-D
:cflag
Article 39.1 of the sporting regulations is deliberately vague and states that “team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited”.
The rule was introduced in 2002 after the Austrian GP when Ferrari, run at the time by Jean Todt.
http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/team-orders-in-formula-1/
:goodpoint
It's worth pointing out that the previous version of this rule said "team orders that are against the interests of competition are forbidden".
Under that wording, you could even make the case that what Ferrari did was explicitly allowed, even encouraged, by the rules - in that letting Alonso win was absolutely in the interests of competition, ie in increasing the prospects of an interesting world championship fight.
That wording was changed because of its inherent vagueness, but there is a far wider point here - and that is whether the rule should be there in the first place."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2010/07/team_orders_rule_ties_f1_in_kn.html
:Hmm
Bernie Ecclestone thinks formula one should overturn its 2002 ban on team orders.
As the sporting world debates Ferrari's order for Felipe Massa to hand Hockenheim victory to Fernando Alonso, there are those who believe teams should be free to run their businesses on track.
"I must confess I would agree with anyone who thinks that," said the F1 chief executive.
http://uk.autoblog.com/2010/07/27/f1-should-scrap-team-order-ban-ecclestone/
:oops
Despite being critical of Ferrari's decision to order Felipe Massa to let Fernando Alonso through to win the German Grand Prix, Eddie Jordan has called on the rule banning team orders to be removed from F1. (…)
Jordan was critical of Ferrari's actions in the immediate aftermath of the race and while he again hit out at the manner in which the move took place, the former team boss said the ban on team orders to be removed.
“Ferrari believe the best way to win the championship is for Alonso to be the main driver,” he told BBC Radio Five Live. “But it is the way it happened. It was a nonsense and the way they handled this was appalling.
“[The team order ban] is a nonsense, it needs to be repealed. Every team has to have team orders and now they are just cloaked over as a guise. But fundamentally the regulators have to sort that out.
http://www.crash.net/f1/News/161946/1/jordan_team_order_ban_should_be_dropped.html
:furious
What happened in Hockenheim on Sunday was different (than 2002). Alonso has been Ferrari's stronger driver all year and is clearly the only one who has a chance of the championship.
This - unlike the situation between the two Red Bull drivers at Silverstone - is not an example of two evenly matched drivers in one team battling it out for the title and the team making a call that potentially disadvantages one of them.
Massa has simply not been strong enough this season compared to Alonso for anyone to make a case that he will be consistently beating him for the rest of the season, and by extension feature in the world championship battle.
As BBC F1 analyst Martin Brundle put it during the race, Alonso has had a tough couple of weekends, suffering badly at the hands of some stewards' decisions, and he needs as many points as he can get to haul himself back into the title chase.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2010/07/team_orders_rule_ties_f1_in_kn.html
:thumb
Schumacher himself was very interesting on this subject after the race on Sunday.
"Watching the TV occasionally (on the big screens during the race), I've seen Felipe being in first position and I felt happy because he is a good friend of mine," he said. "Then hearing that Alonso won the race I was wondering what kind of strategy was that?
"I have been criticized in the past for exactly that and I have to say that I would do exactly the same if I was in their situation. At the end of the day, what are we here for? It's fighting for a championship and there is only one that can win it.
"By the end of the year, if you think you would have lost the championship for exactly that point you will ask yourself, all the fans, the television, the journalists, why didn't you do so?
"If you go back to other years, other teams and other situations, in the last race there were clear team orders and everybody accepts those. Whether it's the last race, second last race or even earlier, what's the point?
"I can see that in the years when we did it, because we were leading so much, that people thought it was unnecessary and I can agree on that one in a way.
"But in principle I cannot. I agree with what's going on. You have to do it in a way that is nice and maybe not too obvious - make it nice fight. But there's only one target, and that's winning the championship."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2010/07/team_orders_rule_ties_f1_in_kn.html
:-!
But the reality of F1 is as David Coulthard described it after the race on Sunday: "Every team in this pit lane gives team orders and anyone who says they don't is lying."
F1 is a team sport; teams constantly manipulate races. Having a rule banning team orders doesn't mean they don't happen, it simply means teams have to find duplicitous ways of employing them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2010/07/team_orders_rule_ties_f1_in_kn.html
:cheers
Just because Ferrari effectively asked Massa to let Alonso win, was that necessarily the wrong thing to do? Is it right that the F1 rules ban team orders? Did Ferrari even technically break the rule?
Now just hear me out. I know that what we saw at Hockenheim on Sunday, when Felipe Massa was ordered aside for Fernando Alonso, was unpalatable to many fans but for goodness sake, wake up and smell the coffee.
Team orders happen in F1. They always have and they always will. Just because Ferrari were ham-fisted in breaking the rules, does it make their transgression any worse? I cannot believe some of the hypocrisy we’ve heard in the past couple of days.
The only way to stop team orders would be to race with one car. As long as there are two (and some teams want three — how difficult would it be then to control team orders?) the rule is unenforceable.
Team principals should be allowed to do the best they can for their team, for their employees, for their owners. That is what they always used to do. At some point during the past 60 years we seem to have lost sight of that fact.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/ferrari/7911426/F1-German-Grand-Prix-ludicrous-ban-on-team-orders-should-be-scrapped.html
An than there is the usual idiot...
:spam
"I think team orders are wrong," said Christian Horner.
"You employ professional drivers and we shouldn't dictate how they drive the car. I think it would be wrong to deny the public from what a grand prix should be about which is man and machine competing with each other," said the Red Bull team principal.
http://totalf1.com/full_story/view/343111/F1_bosses_happy_with_team_order_ban/
...who raised some interesting comments from readers:
:-P
- blukeys said...
C'mon Christian ! talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Taking Webber's front wing away from him and giving it to Vettel, the number one Red Fool driver and then crying foul when Massa gives up his place to Alonso ! This whole rule is ridiculous you can't legislate against team orders. Every team has a number one and number two driver. Its obvious which is which especially at Red Fool, Webber's quote at Silverstone, "not bad for a number two" .
Horner has blown it by letting his drivers fight to the death. If Red Fool had ordered their drivers to stay in position in past races this year they could be leading both championships.
:dighole
- simonyong said...
Absolutely true blukeys; I says the clearest devil & trouble maker of F1 today, is guy from Red Fool (it’s too “filthy” to even mention his name) the only reason he’s making such a big thing about this is because he wishes that FIA will penelize Ferrari so that his bloody German driver will get 1st place… what a dirty a****** he is,
Pity the sponsors Red Bull and Renault for providing this team with such a fantastic car, but they really fell short by just acquiring a "reasonably good" Team Principal to guide this team to secure the championship, it should be easily achieved by now.
And if this team does not win all the championship this year, then Red Bull, Renault and etc... will be the BIGGEST FOOLS for funding them.
:redcard
- The Dane said...
Ferrari has always taken "team orders" to a new level. One time cannot remember the year, in the late '50s, the old man pulled all his drivers during a race. It was at Monza or maybe LeMans. There was a terrible crash where a driver and several spectators were killed. How did he do it? Took the Ferrari flag and walked out to the track and waved it and all the Ferrari drivers came in.
:haha:
- The Dane said...
Addition to my last comment: Horner (Homer Simpson)
would know a "team order" if it hit him in the face!
http://totalf1.com/details/view/348054/Horner_The_clearest_team_order_Ive_ever_seen/
:wave
Ban team orders is call from Virgin's F1 chief
(…) Team chiefs and drivers up and down the pit lane have been almost unanimous in their belief that the Maranello marque's most heinous crime was not necessarily the order itself, more the clumsy way they told Felipe Massa to cede the leadership of the German Grand Prix to his team-mate Fernando Alonso.
(…) The backlash from fans worldwide has been one of feeling cheated that they were deprived of a proper race but the impression from inside the paddock is that Formula 1 is a sport torn between team priorities and individual gains.
(…) "These things do happen, it was just handled very clumsily," Virgin Racing team principal John Booth told the Yorkshire Post last night.
Booth's South Yorkshire team are new to Formula 1 this season and are involved in a desperate fight for 10th place in the constructors' championship and an enormous £17m in prize money which could define their future in the sport. But as a driver himself in his youth, he sees the situation from both angles. "If it was me who was driving there's not a chance in hell I would have let anyone past," Booth added.
"If it was the last lap of the season and he (Alonso) needed the points for the championship, you could forgive it, because winning the world championship is so important for teams commercially and in terms of prize money.
"If it's us, and there's a point available towards the end of the season and that point is so important for the team, then I would expect the drivers to do the right thing, but I would never instruct them to do so.
"Team orders should be eradicated completely.
(…) Booth's opposite number at Lotus – the Dinnington team's main rivals for 10th place – was more unequivocal in his condemnation of Ferrari's method.
Mike Gascoyne said: "There are team orders, and we have to accept there will be. It was just handled very badly
"There will come a point in the season when you have to prioritize one driver because he has the best chance of winning a championship.
(…) "The team bosses have to take note that people don't want to see it, but if you are going to do it then you have to do so cleanly and fairly."
Gascoyne even admitted to feeling a degree of sympathy with Ferrari given the championship situation and the pressure they were likely to be under.
"If they are going to win the drivers' championship, Fernando is the only one who is going to do it and you have to prioritize," he added.
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/Ban-team-orders-is-call.6441144.jp
:ferrarifl
Ferrari had the right to do it – By Bertrand Houle (From a French site. Translated by Italian Spirit)
I know I'm not going to please many F1, but in the ruthless world of high level competition, Ferrari was right, in Germany, to ask its pilots to switch positions.
Do I like it? No. I prefer teams that let their pilots fight on the track (McLaren, Red Bull maybe).
But here is the argumentation: Ferrari had the right to secure a victory.
Felipe Massa, after he changed to hard tires, was slower than his teammate Fernando Alonso.
The proof? Once he has taken the lead at the 49th lap, the Spaniard quickly moved away from the Brazilian (3.6 s in ten rounds). This last has been caught by Sebastian Vettel, who has narrowed the gap to 1.022 s second in the 61st round. However, Massa had everything to gain from efforts to stay ahead of Red Bull to show the world that his team did not need to ask for a position switch.
But Massa failed his demonstration. Vettel was indeed a threat to Ferrari 1-2. It could very well join Alonso (slowed by Massa) and overtake on a track where it can be done. Then repeat the process with Massa. One can even say that Ferrari engineers have very well done their work in predicting a lower level of performance of Massa.
Both Ferrari drivers could have lost a march on the podium. In addition, the Scuderia would have given valuable points Vettel in the title race. There were special circumstances in Germany, which meant that the Ferrari was entitled to give instructions to its drivers to ensure victory and, if possible, a 1-2.
Was it cruel for Massa? Yes, of course. But this is part of the universe in a Formula One team that
plays the title.
(…)
Here are some exemples:
:cflag
2007 Monaco - Lewis Hamilton (2nd) complained after the race that McLaren asked him not to attack his teammate Fernando Alonso, the race leader. McLaren said it had the right to do so in order to preserve from a possible intervention by the safety car. After investigation, the FIA has exonerated McLaren. In its ruling, she even said: "The primary objective of a team is that one of its drivers won the race. If this goal can be achieved, it will then attempt to get his other car to second place".
Isn't it what Ferrari did at Hockenheim?
:cflag
Brazil 2007 - Last race of the season. Massa dominate the race in front of his audience, his teammate Kimi Raikkonen is second and Alonso (McLaren then) third. This would have given the title to Alonso. It is clear that Massa has sacrificed himself, his teammate took the lead and was crowned champion. The maneuver was hidden in a pit stop, but nobody was fooled. But nobody found anything to say about a move that, given the stakes, was perfectly understandable
:cflag
Canada 2008 - Nick Heidfeld is a one-stop strategy. After his the pit stop, he returns to the track ahead of his teammate Robert Kubica who is on a two stops strategy. In order not to undermine the strategy of Poles (who is still on the track drive "full speed" since he has an additional stop to do), BMW asks Heidfeld not to defend his position and let him pass. This was done. Result of the race? Kubica first, Heidfeld second. Acceptable, given that Heidfeld did have to interfere with the strategy of his teammate. Faced with a driver from another team, he would surely Heidfeld would have been very, very difficult to pass.
France 2008 - In order to let him "catch up", Heikki Kovalainen (McLaren) lets pass his teammate Lewis Hamilton, who started 13th following a penalty from the previous Grand Prix.
Germany 2008 - Heikki Kovalainen (again) lets his teammate Lewis Hamilton pass on lap 52 to kindly give him the fourth place that would ultimately become the first place ...
As you can see, team tactics have continued to exist in spite of Article 39.1 , even in the pure McLaren. Difficult to cast opprobrium on Ferrari because it is not an isolated case. Ferrari's misfortune has been not to have better hidden his order. Indeed, it is now impossible to use the fuel pit stop to switch position between teammates..
DC rules! :msking
http://www.rds.ca/f1/chroniques/303199.html
A remarkable article by By David Coulthard
David Coulthard: ludicrous ban on team orders should be scrapped
Formula One is a team sport. There, I said it. It is not a popular view but it is the truth. And because it is a team sport, the frankly ludicrous ban on team orders that everyone is getting so worked up about should be scrapped.
Now just hear me out. I know that what we saw at Hockenheim on Sunday, when Felipe Massa was ordered aside for Fernando Alonso, was unpalatable to many fans but for goodness sake, wake up and smell the coffee.
Team orders happen in F1. They always have and they always will. Just because Ferrari were ham-fisted in breaking the rules, does it make their transgression any worse? I cannot believe some of the hypocrisy we’ve heard in the past couple of days.
The only way to stop team orders would be to race with one car. As long as there are two (and some teams want three — how difficult would it be then to control team orders?) the rule is unenforceable.
Team principals should be allowed to do the best they can for their team, for their employees, for their owners. That is what they always used to do. At some point during the past 60 years we seem to have lost sight of that fact.
The public furore is based on a fundamental misunderstanding, which is that Formula One is about the individual.
When I raced I lost sight of that as much as anyone else. Like every driver, I was racing for myself as well as the team. Unfortunately I was asked to make way for Mika Hakkinen at Jerez in 1997 and Melbourne a year later. Both times I acquiesced; both times reluctantly.
As I have written in previous columns, I have often wondered what would have happened if I hadn’t been so compliant. Perhaps I would have won more respect? Perhaps I would have been world champion? Perhaps I would have been fired? These are the kind of decisions a driver must weigh up.
No doubt Massa is grappling with such questions. The most damaging aspect of Sunday’s race is what it could do to his reputation. People will see him now as a ‘yes man’ who bends to the will of the company. And maybe they are right. Team player or stooge? The line is thin.
But it doesn’t change the underlying truth. My old team boss, Frank Williams, used to make decisions that would anger us drivers but when we complained about them he would say it was not about us, it was about the 700 employees in the team. We were just two paid drivers. He was right.
Ah, people will say, if it is a team sport then why is the drivers’ title the holy grail? You didn’t see Ferrari celebrate the constructors’ crown in 2008 after Lewis Hamilton pipped Massa to the drivers’ title.
That’s true. Sponsors need stars so teams will try to win that crown above all. That is the ultimate goal. It is tough luck for one of the two drivers but only one of them can win the thing.
Like the Tour de France, which is all about getting the team leader across the line first. Like a football team, who can sometimes sacrifice a player to man-mark a member of the opposition in order to give his striker room to score.
Like any team sport, in fact, the manager must be free to decide how best to manage his team. The players involved are free to obey or disobey — often the best sportsmen are not team players — but they do so at their own risk.
That is all part of the delicate and unique team-driver relationship.
The only possible drawback I can see to repealing the team orders rule is the encouragement it might give to the illegal gambling industry.
But it remains the only way of stopping charades such as the one we saw on Sunday.
:wave
This press review wouldn't be complete without a mention of somebody that people here don't like much, James Allen. Please, don't judge before having read.
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/
Oh, I nearly forgot: I look forward to hear about Todt at the WMSC... :-D
Inevitably they are mainly excerpts. But each with a link to the full article so you can read them in the context.
Bear with me if before such press review I give a personal opinion. :-D
Amongst the stupidest rules of the FIA for F1 the one relating to "team orders" is probably the most absurd. The only goal it ever achieved was to introduce an additional layer of hypocrisy. Ask Christian Horner and his "Save fuel!..." jokes.
But before continuing on the subject let sweep in front of our own door.
Ahead the German GP, the Scuderia has clearly set strategy: should Massa be in front and Fernando in a position to pass him, Felipe should move over. Given the WDC standings FA still has a chance, not FM. That became very clear to everybody when Felipe resisted the first attack of Fernando who shout in the radio "That's ridiculous!". What followed was a pitiful kindergarten show. Rob telling Felipe "Fernando is faster than you. Can you confirm that you understood the message?", Felipe not answering but theatrically slowing down and moing to the side to let his team mate pass!
I will spare you Rob's following messages, you all herd them. And I don't want to remind you the painful post race press conference.
There are at least a trillion different words to tell a driver what he has to do, especially when he has been previously instructed about it, there was no need to broadcast it in such a dumb way. There was even a simpler way of achieving the result: 3 seconds longer during the pit stop.
Now, whoever read some of my posts knows how much I admire Felipe the driver and how much I love Felipe the person. But the way he handled the situation was very disappointing and even unprofessional. I like Rob very much too and, given the ties that he has with Felipe, I pity him to have to pass such order. But, hey, that's what he's (very well) paid for. Unfortunately he let his personal feelings take over. I'm afraid this may have some unpleasant consequences for both of them and I'm sorry to say that they deserve it.
The mea culpa done, I think that it's worth putting things in their right perspective. This, of course, has been done a zillion times by a zillion people, most of them more competent than me on the subject, but sometimes "repetita juvant", repeating does good.
Whether the dreamers and the naive souls like it or not F1, even before being a sport, is a business, where hundreds of millions are invested for a team to race and win.
To be coherent, next to its laughably foolish rule banning team orders, the FIA should have banned the world "team":
- Team (noun): a number of persons associated in some joint action;
- a group of people organized to work together;
- a group on the same side, as in a game"
or (verb)
- to gather or join in a team, or a cooperative effort".
Even the synonyms of "team" reinforce the idea: "Combine, unite, ally, merge".
The main goal in F1 is the WCC (the brand) but it so happen that, because the star system "sells", the media, and therefore the sponsors, put much more emphasis on the WDC (the driver, the glamour), hence the importance of winning it too. Which imply a "team" strategy that may lead to "team orders".
The team orders ban, heritage of the nefarious Mosley's era, in an absurdity that should disappear.
You may think that the opinion of a Ferrari fan is necessarily biased. Well, read the excerpts that follow, mainly from the British (yes! Yes!) press and sites, starting with the origin of the mess, the (in)famous Article 39.1 of the sporting regulations.
Here we go. :-D
:cflag
Article 39.1 of the sporting regulations is deliberately vague and states that “team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited”.
The rule was introduced in 2002 after the Austrian GP when Ferrari, run at the time by Jean Todt.
http://joesaward.wordpress.com/2010/06/08/team-orders-in-formula-1/
:goodpoint
It's worth pointing out that the previous version of this rule said "team orders that are against the interests of competition are forbidden".
Under that wording, you could even make the case that what Ferrari did was explicitly allowed, even encouraged, by the rules - in that letting Alonso win was absolutely in the interests of competition, ie in increasing the prospects of an interesting world championship fight.
That wording was changed because of its inherent vagueness, but there is a far wider point here - and that is whether the rule should be there in the first place."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2010/07/team_orders_rule_ties_f1_in_kn.html
:Hmm
Bernie Ecclestone thinks formula one should overturn its 2002 ban on team orders.
As the sporting world debates Ferrari's order for Felipe Massa to hand Hockenheim victory to Fernando Alonso, there are those who believe teams should be free to run their businesses on track.
"I must confess I would agree with anyone who thinks that," said the F1 chief executive.
http://uk.autoblog.com/2010/07/27/f1-should-scrap-team-order-ban-ecclestone/
:oops
Despite being critical of Ferrari's decision to order Felipe Massa to let Fernando Alonso through to win the German Grand Prix, Eddie Jordan has called on the rule banning team orders to be removed from F1. (…)
Jordan was critical of Ferrari's actions in the immediate aftermath of the race and while he again hit out at the manner in which the move took place, the former team boss said the ban on team orders to be removed.
“Ferrari believe the best way to win the championship is for Alonso to be the main driver,” he told BBC Radio Five Live. “But it is the way it happened. It was a nonsense and the way they handled this was appalling.
“[The team order ban] is a nonsense, it needs to be repealed. Every team has to have team orders and now they are just cloaked over as a guise. But fundamentally the regulators have to sort that out.
http://www.crash.net/f1/News/161946/1/jordan_team_order_ban_should_be_dropped.html
:furious
What happened in Hockenheim on Sunday was different (than 2002). Alonso has been Ferrari's stronger driver all year and is clearly the only one who has a chance of the championship.
This - unlike the situation between the two Red Bull drivers at Silverstone - is not an example of two evenly matched drivers in one team battling it out for the title and the team making a call that potentially disadvantages one of them.
Massa has simply not been strong enough this season compared to Alonso for anyone to make a case that he will be consistently beating him for the rest of the season, and by extension feature in the world championship battle.
As BBC F1 analyst Martin Brundle put it during the race, Alonso has had a tough couple of weekends, suffering badly at the hands of some stewards' decisions, and he needs as many points as he can get to haul himself back into the title chase.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2010/07/team_orders_rule_ties_f1_in_kn.html
:thumb
Schumacher himself was very interesting on this subject after the race on Sunday.
"Watching the TV occasionally (on the big screens during the race), I've seen Felipe being in first position and I felt happy because he is a good friend of mine," he said. "Then hearing that Alonso won the race I was wondering what kind of strategy was that?
"I have been criticized in the past for exactly that and I have to say that I would do exactly the same if I was in their situation. At the end of the day, what are we here for? It's fighting for a championship and there is only one that can win it.
"By the end of the year, if you think you would have lost the championship for exactly that point you will ask yourself, all the fans, the television, the journalists, why didn't you do so?
"If you go back to other years, other teams and other situations, in the last race there were clear team orders and everybody accepts those. Whether it's the last race, second last race or even earlier, what's the point?
"I can see that in the years when we did it, because we were leading so much, that people thought it was unnecessary and I can agree on that one in a way.
"But in principle I cannot. I agree with what's going on. You have to do it in a way that is nice and maybe not too obvious - make it nice fight. But there's only one target, and that's winning the championship."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2010/07/team_orders_rule_ties_f1_in_kn.html
:-!
But the reality of F1 is as David Coulthard described it after the race on Sunday: "Every team in this pit lane gives team orders and anyone who says they don't is lying."
F1 is a team sport; teams constantly manipulate races. Having a rule banning team orders doesn't mean they don't happen, it simply means teams have to find duplicitous ways of employing them.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/andrewbenson/2010/07/team_orders_rule_ties_f1_in_kn.html
:cheers
Just because Ferrari effectively asked Massa to let Alonso win, was that necessarily the wrong thing to do? Is it right that the F1 rules ban team orders? Did Ferrari even technically break the rule?
Now just hear me out. I know that what we saw at Hockenheim on Sunday, when Felipe Massa was ordered aside for Fernando Alonso, was unpalatable to many fans but for goodness sake, wake up and smell the coffee.
Team orders happen in F1. They always have and they always will. Just because Ferrari were ham-fisted in breaking the rules, does it make their transgression any worse? I cannot believe some of the hypocrisy we’ve heard in the past couple of days.
The only way to stop team orders would be to race with one car. As long as there are two (and some teams want three — how difficult would it be then to control team orders?) the rule is unenforceable.
Team principals should be allowed to do the best they can for their team, for their employees, for their owners. That is what they always used to do. At some point during the past 60 years we seem to have lost sight of that fact.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/motorsport/formulaone/ferrari/7911426/F1-German-Grand-Prix-ludicrous-ban-on-team-orders-should-be-scrapped.html
An than there is the usual idiot...
:spam
"I think team orders are wrong," said Christian Horner.
"You employ professional drivers and we shouldn't dictate how they drive the car. I think it would be wrong to deny the public from what a grand prix should be about which is man and machine competing with each other," said the Red Bull team principal.
http://totalf1.com/full_story/view/343111/F1_bosses_happy_with_team_order_ban/
...who raised some interesting comments from readers:
:-P
- blukeys said...
C'mon Christian ! talk about the pot calling the kettle black. Taking Webber's front wing away from him and giving it to Vettel, the number one Red Fool driver and then crying foul when Massa gives up his place to Alonso ! This whole rule is ridiculous you can't legislate against team orders. Every team has a number one and number two driver. Its obvious which is which especially at Red Fool, Webber's quote at Silverstone, "not bad for a number two" .
Horner has blown it by letting his drivers fight to the death. If Red Fool had ordered their drivers to stay in position in past races this year they could be leading both championships.
:dighole
- simonyong said...
Absolutely true blukeys; I says the clearest devil & trouble maker of F1 today, is guy from Red Fool (it’s too “filthy” to even mention his name) the only reason he’s making such a big thing about this is because he wishes that FIA will penelize Ferrari so that his bloody German driver will get 1st place… what a dirty a****** he is,
Pity the sponsors Red Bull and Renault for providing this team with such a fantastic car, but they really fell short by just acquiring a "reasonably good" Team Principal to guide this team to secure the championship, it should be easily achieved by now.
And if this team does not win all the championship this year, then Red Bull, Renault and etc... will be the BIGGEST FOOLS for funding them.
:redcard
- The Dane said...
Ferrari has always taken "team orders" to a new level. One time cannot remember the year, in the late '50s, the old man pulled all his drivers during a race. It was at Monza or maybe LeMans. There was a terrible crash where a driver and several spectators were killed. How did he do it? Took the Ferrari flag and walked out to the track and waved it and all the Ferrari drivers came in.
:haha:
- The Dane said...
Addition to my last comment: Horner (Homer Simpson)
would know a "team order" if it hit him in the face!
http://totalf1.com/details/view/348054/Horner_The_clearest_team_order_Ive_ever_seen/
:wave
Ban team orders is call from Virgin's F1 chief
(…) Team chiefs and drivers up and down the pit lane have been almost unanimous in their belief that the Maranello marque's most heinous crime was not necessarily the order itself, more the clumsy way they told Felipe Massa to cede the leadership of the German Grand Prix to his team-mate Fernando Alonso.
(…) The backlash from fans worldwide has been one of feeling cheated that they were deprived of a proper race but the impression from inside the paddock is that Formula 1 is a sport torn between team priorities and individual gains.
(…) "These things do happen, it was just handled very clumsily," Virgin Racing team principal John Booth told the Yorkshire Post last night.
Booth's South Yorkshire team are new to Formula 1 this season and are involved in a desperate fight for 10th place in the constructors' championship and an enormous £17m in prize money which could define their future in the sport. But as a driver himself in his youth, he sees the situation from both angles. "If it was me who was driving there's not a chance in hell I would have let anyone past," Booth added.
"If it was the last lap of the season and he (Alonso) needed the points for the championship, you could forgive it, because winning the world championship is so important for teams commercially and in terms of prize money.
"If it's us, and there's a point available towards the end of the season and that point is so important for the team, then I would expect the drivers to do the right thing, but I would never instruct them to do so.
"Team orders should be eradicated completely.
(…) Booth's opposite number at Lotus – the Dinnington team's main rivals for 10th place – was more unequivocal in his condemnation of Ferrari's method.
Mike Gascoyne said: "There are team orders, and we have to accept there will be. It was just handled very badly
"There will come a point in the season when you have to prioritize one driver because he has the best chance of winning a championship.
(…) "The team bosses have to take note that people don't want to see it, but if you are going to do it then you have to do so cleanly and fairly."
Gascoyne even admitted to feeling a degree of sympathy with Ferrari given the championship situation and the pressure they were likely to be under.
"If they are going to win the drivers' championship, Fernando is the only one who is going to do it and you have to prioritize," he added.
http://www.yorkshirepost.co.uk/sport/Ban-team-orders-is-call.6441144.jp
:ferrarifl
Ferrari had the right to do it – By Bertrand Houle (From a French site. Translated by Italian Spirit)
I know I'm not going to please many F1, but in the ruthless world of high level competition, Ferrari was right, in Germany, to ask its pilots to switch positions.
Do I like it? No. I prefer teams that let their pilots fight on the track (McLaren, Red Bull maybe).
But here is the argumentation: Ferrari had the right to secure a victory.
Felipe Massa, after he changed to hard tires, was slower than his teammate Fernando Alonso.
The proof? Once he has taken the lead at the 49th lap, the Spaniard quickly moved away from the Brazilian (3.6 s in ten rounds). This last has been caught by Sebastian Vettel, who has narrowed the gap to 1.022 s second in the 61st round. However, Massa had everything to gain from efforts to stay ahead of Red Bull to show the world that his team did not need to ask for a position switch.
But Massa failed his demonstration. Vettel was indeed a threat to Ferrari 1-2. It could very well join Alonso (slowed by Massa) and overtake on a track where it can be done. Then repeat the process with Massa. One can even say that Ferrari engineers have very well done their work in predicting a lower level of performance of Massa.
Both Ferrari drivers could have lost a march on the podium. In addition, the Scuderia would have given valuable points Vettel in the title race. There were special circumstances in Germany, which meant that the Ferrari was entitled to give instructions to its drivers to ensure victory and, if possible, a 1-2.
Was it cruel for Massa? Yes, of course. But this is part of the universe in a Formula One team that
plays the title.
(…)
Here are some exemples:
:cflag
2007 Monaco - Lewis Hamilton (2nd) complained after the race that McLaren asked him not to attack his teammate Fernando Alonso, the race leader. McLaren said it had the right to do so in order to preserve from a possible intervention by the safety car. After investigation, the FIA has exonerated McLaren. In its ruling, she even said: "The primary objective of a team is that one of its drivers won the race. If this goal can be achieved, it will then attempt to get his other car to second place".
Isn't it what Ferrari did at Hockenheim?
:cflag
Brazil 2007 - Last race of the season. Massa dominate the race in front of his audience, his teammate Kimi Raikkonen is second and Alonso (McLaren then) third. This would have given the title to Alonso. It is clear that Massa has sacrificed himself, his teammate took the lead and was crowned champion. The maneuver was hidden in a pit stop, but nobody was fooled. But nobody found anything to say about a move that, given the stakes, was perfectly understandable
:cflag
Canada 2008 - Nick Heidfeld is a one-stop strategy. After his the pit stop, he returns to the track ahead of his teammate Robert Kubica who is on a two stops strategy. In order not to undermine the strategy of Poles (who is still on the track drive "full speed" since he has an additional stop to do), BMW asks Heidfeld not to defend his position and let him pass. This was done. Result of the race? Kubica first, Heidfeld second. Acceptable, given that Heidfeld did have to interfere with the strategy of his teammate. Faced with a driver from another team, he would surely Heidfeld would have been very, very difficult to pass.
France 2008 - In order to let him "catch up", Heikki Kovalainen (McLaren) lets pass his teammate Lewis Hamilton, who started 13th following a penalty from the previous Grand Prix.
Germany 2008 - Heikki Kovalainen (again) lets his teammate Lewis Hamilton pass on lap 52 to kindly give him the fourth place that would ultimately become the first place ...
As you can see, team tactics have continued to exist in spite of Article 39.1 , even in the pure McLaren. Difficult to cast opprobrium on Ferrari because it is not an isolated case. Ferrari's misfortune has been not to have better hidden his order. Indeed, it is now impossible to use the fuel pit stop to switch position between teammates..
DC rules! :msking
http://www.rds.ca/f1/chroniques/303199.html
A remarkable article by By David Coulthard
David Coulthard: ludicrous ban on team orders should be scrapped
Formula One is a team sport. There, I said it. It is not a popular view but it is the truth. And because it is a team sport, the frankly ludicrous ban on team orders that everyone is getting so worked up about should be scrapped.
Now just hear me out. I know that what we saw at Hockenheim on Sunday, when Felipe Massa was ordered aside for Fernando Alonso, was unpalatable to many fans but for goodness sake, wake up and smell the coffee.
Team orders happen in F1. They always have and they always will. Just because Ferrari were ham-fisted in breaking the rules, does it make their transgression any worse? I cannot believe some of the hypocrisy we’ve heard in the past couple of days.
The only way to stop team orders would be to race with one car. As long as there are two (and some teams want three — how difficult would it be then to control team orders?) the rule is unenforceable.
Team principals should be allowed to do the best they can for their team, for their employees, for their owners. That is what they always used to do. At some point during the past 60 years we seem to have lost sight of that fact.
The public furore is based on a fundamental misunderstanding, which is that Formula One is about the individual.
When I raced I lost sight of that as much as anyone else. Like every driver, I was racing for myself as well as the team. Unfortunately I was asked to make way for Mika Hakkinen at Jerez in 1997 and Melbourne a year later. Both times I acquiesced; both times reluctantly.
As I have written in previous columns, I have often wondered what would have happened if I hadn’t been so compliant. Perhaps I would have won more respect? Perhaps I would have been world champion? Perhaps I would have been fired? These are the kind of decisions a driver must weigh up.
No doubt Massa is grappling with such questions. The most damaging aspect of Sunday’s race is what it could do to his reputation. People will see him now as a ‘yes man’ who bends to the will of the company. And maybe they are right. Team player or stooge? The line is thin.
But it doesn’t change the underlying truth. My old team boss, Frank Williams, used to make decisions that would anger us drivers but when we complained about them he would say it was not about us, it was about the 700 employees in the team. We were just two paid drivers. He was right.
Ah, people will say, if it is a team sport then why is the drivers’ title the holy grail? You didn’t see Ferrari celebrate the constructors’ crown in 2008 after Lewis Hamilton pipped Massa to the drivers’ title.
That’s true. Sponsors need stars so teams will try to win that crown above all. That is the ultimate goal. It is tough luck for one of the two drivers but only one of them can win the thing.
Like the Tour de France, which is all about getting the team leader across the line first. Like a football team, who can sometimes sacrifice a player to man-mark a member of the opposition in order to give his striker room to score.
Like any team sport, in fact, the manager must be free to decide how best to manage his team. The players involved are free to obey or disobey — often the best sportsmen are not team players — but they do so at their own risk.
That is all part of the delicate and unique team-driver relationship.
The only possible drawback I can see to repealing the team orders rule is the encouragement it might give to the illegal gambling industry.
But it remains the only way of stopping charades such as the one we saw on Sunday.
:wave
This press review wouldn't be complete without a mention of somebody that people here don't like much, James Allen. Please, don't judge before having read.
http://www.jamesallenonf1.com/
Oh, I nearly forgot: I look forward to hear about Todt at the WMSC... :-D