German Grand Prix 2010, Hockenheimring Circuit - Race 11/19

There is not one single post I can see about Team orders in the thread, people are more worried about the BMW fuel temp and those cars being excluded to give the title to Hamilton :D

Becuase there was no evidence of team orders, it was carried out correctlly.

Good article here from 2008 on team orders


F1’s unwritten rules: team orders edition
To spot the occasions where teams have influenced race outcomes in the past 12 months you don’t need to be a cynic – just a realist.

Ferrari shuffled Felipe Massa out of Kimi Raikkonen’s path at Interlagos last year to deliver the drivers’ championship to his team mate; Nick Heidfeld presented Robert Kubica with no resistance at Montreal this year, allowing Kubica to score the team’s maiden victory; Heikki Kovalainen refrained from racing Lewis Hamilton at Hockenheim in the closing stages.

A brutally tough interpretation of article 39.1 could brand any of these decisions as interference with a race result.

But, as we discussed a few weeks ago, unwritten rules play just as big a role in how F1 works. In the case of team orders, teams can get away with a lot of things you might expect Article 39.1 to prevent. They would have to be quite blatant to get caught and punished.

Why did the stewards leave McLaren, Ferrari and BMW alone in these examples? Probably because there was no radio communication between team and driver beforehand giving an instruction, as we heard at Austria in 2002 (“Let Michael past for the championship, Rubens, please” – Jean Todt.) Presumably the teams now tell their drivers beforehand what is expected of them in these situations.

At Interlagos last year, Massa was out of the championship running and was surely told by the team before the race that if he could guarantee the championship for Raikkonen by moving aside he must do it. In the event, with a comfortable one-two, Ferrari were able to take the most low-profile way of pulling the old switcheroo – doing it via the pit stops.

Similarly it makes sense for teams not to allow their drivers to hold each other up when the following car is much faster than the leading one – as was the case for BMW and McLaren this year in the other examples above.
 
Becuase there was no evidence of team orders, it was carried out correctlly.

Good article here from 2008 on team orders


F1’s unwritten rules: team orders edition

I agree with you and that article but I'm not about to cry about ferrari doing it when I know the rest of the grid are doing it as well.

The cries of robbing us of a race are ludicrous when the other example in the quotes you made equally robbed us of a grandstand finish to races or drivers in the midfield moving over. That still effects and changes the outcome of the race.

Yes of course I understand they went the wrong way about it but I don't expect they thought for a minute Smedley and Massa would make it so obvious to the world.

What I dont understand is why they didn't do it earlier in the season when multiple times Alonso has lost points recovering in races from issues to get stuck behind massa. Especially the one where he had gearbox troubles but was still faster than massa. It left him open to attack with drive out the corner from another driver when they could have released alonso to get away from massa holding him up.

Would anyone have cared then?

As your example showed they have left BMW and Mclaren alone for changing results because no radio conversation was broadcast. Again I don't think for a minute Ferrari expected Smedley to tell the world.

Smedley should go.

The only logical way would be to allow team orders in what is a team sport, as much as I hate to see outright no2's most have them anyway.
 
There are two key differences here:
- Massa would presumably have been happy to let Kimi have the win to get the championship. If Kimi had cruised up behind him would he have got out of the way by himself? Probably IMO.

I'm sure Massa would feel the same way about this race if at the end of the season it turns out his 5 points are what won Alonso the championship. The difference then was that it was at the last race so Im sure he understood whats at stake. In this case, its not clear since we do not know what the points tally will be at the end, but this is why Ferrari did what they did yesterday.

- They didn't make it blindingly obvious by having them swap on the track (though with fuel stops it was much easier than it would be today)
Kimi letting Massa through in China was blatantly on track and obvious.

We all know, as does the FIA, that there are team orders. But nobody minds as long as there is plausible denyability
There have been other instances when responses given were rather unplausible, but FIA decided to look the other way.

I see what you are saying bud, but as you said, agree to disagree.
 
The diffrence was, other teams did it in a way which is not obvious and not provable. Ferrari on the other hand have. That is a major diffrence.
 
Kimi letting Massa through in China was blatantly on track and obvious..

Exactly, or Monaco 2007 with Lewis being ordered not to race Alonso. That robbed us of a great race, which is what half the cries have been about. They manufactured the potential results of the gp. No penalty, no fine.

The double standards in all this I find frankly bemusing. That it's somehow ok when the title is at stake.
 
The diffrence was, other teams did it in a way which is not obvious and not provable. Ferrari on the other hand have. That is a major diffrence.

Does this also include the previous times Ferrari have done team orders?

Out of interest, when was it compulsory for pit-car radio messages to be broadcast over the air to public?
 
The double standards in all this I find frankly bemusing. That it's somehow ok when the title is at stake.

Why do you keep saying this, it is not double standards one is blatant and I expect provable. Telemetry combined with radio comms. All the others since 2002 haven't been.
 
Exactly, or Monaco 2007 with Lewis being ordered not to race Alonso. That robbed us of a great race, which is what half the cries have been about. They manufactured the potential results of the gp. No penalty, no fine.

The double standards in all this I find frankly bemusing. That it's somehow ok when the title is at stake.

Infact:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/motorsport/formula_one/6696953.stm

McLaren insist Lewis Hamilton is free to race for the world title even though they imposed team orders to stop him fighting for victory in Monaco.

In the eyes of the media they used the words TEAM ORDERS.
Farce, farce and thrice farce.
 
Why is ot classic?

He has honestly said he used team orders when it was legal. At present they are not.

Its funny because if they did ditch them, this would be the second time that Ferrari would be screwed over a rule which was unwritten, then written into the rulebook and then taken out again for different reasons.
 
One way to solve all this mess would be to just abolish the Drivers Championship and give both drivers of the winning constructor a medal.

If F1 is a team sport with constructors fixing races for drivers then lets not pretend there is a fair Drivers Championship which the best driver wins on merit.

If anything Shumacher this season has proven that the drivers championship means very little, he won it 7 times and is getting blown away by rookies.
 
Last edited:
Oh wow....

I have found an awesome article. I urge all to read it:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/jul/21/formulaone.motorsports
Ron Dennis acted quickly yesterday to reject any suggestion that his McLaren drivers had been acting under team orders, which are banned in formula one. Lewis Hamilton was largely dependent for his win in the German grand prix on his team-mate, Heikki Kovalainen, allowing him past on lap 52 after the Briton had emerged from his second stop behind the Finn.

According to Dennis, Kovalainen was simply told that Hamilton was much quicker and he took the decision himself to allow his team-mate by. "The only thing we advise drivers is the respective pace of the other driver and they ultimately call it," the team principal said.

Sound familiar?
 
did they have all the other team radio though?

It really is all the team radio put together that is so damming. if they had simply said Alonso is faster. Then There is no chance they could prove team orders.
As it stands I think they have a very good case for team orders.
 
Last edited:
Why do you keep saying this, it is not double standards one is blatant and I expect provable. Telemetry combined with radio comms. All the others since 2002 haven't been.

But it is, actually read Cavallinos link to the 2007 gp. Mclaren even admit to employing team orders.

But Dennis admitted he "virtually had to decide in advance" which one of the drivers would win in Monaco.

Hamilton said: "It is something I have to live with. I've number two on my car and I am the number two driver."

"There will be places where they will be free to race, but this is not one of them because one driver pushing another will induce a mistake, and then you've a car out.

Am I shocked no, I guess it's just because I'm used to seeing team orders legal or otherwise. I didn't care about monaco 2007 either. Just like I didn't care when DC moved over for Mika in 97 at jerez. I just thought DC was knob.
 
Does it matter though? Do you need team radio to discern if yesterday was team orders? It blatantly was with or without the radio.

yes provability

It really is all the team radio put together that is so damming. if they had simply said Alonso is faster. Then There is no chance they could prove team orders.
As it stands I think they have a very good case for team orders.


Everyone knows team orders exist, but FIA can't prove it.
 
Back
Top Bottom