People are still racing to the finish, he shouldn't crawl down to a snails pace on the main straight - this goes to any driver not just Seb.
Malaysian Grand Prix 2013, Kuala Lumpur - Race 2/19
- Thread starter Duke
- Start date
People are still racing to the finish, he shouldn't crawl down to a snails pace on the main straight - this goes to any driver not just Seb.
Why historically do we have "teams" in motor racing, consisting of two motorcars/bikes that are looked after by one team? Why not 3 or 4 or 5?
Why not 1?
If each "team" has enough resource to manage two cars, why not split each team so that you have:
Mclaren A
Mclaren B
Ferrari A
Fearrari B
and so on. Or just named after the drivers names.
This would eradicate the team orders problem.
Interestingly, in Motorcycle racing such as MotoGP, it's very much always been about racing regardless as to whether it be against your own team mate. Look at Hayden and Pedrosa in what was it... 2007? Pedrosa took out his team mate when he low sided which nearly cost Hayden the championship.
Why do team orders not occur as much if at all in motorcycle racing? They do not have radios to talk to the riders for a start, but then they do not make pit stops. All comms are done via information boards on the pit straight.
I think banning radio is backwards. It all comes down to one simple thing. Ban team orders. But you can't because of point 1 above, they are "TEAMS" with an interest in both cars. It's just not working currently in F1 as it is so tactical.
Why not 1?
If each "team" has enough resource to manage two cars, why not split each team so that you have:
Mclaren A
Mclaren B
Ferrari A
Fearrari B
and so on. Or just named after the drivers names.
This would eradicate the team orders problem.
Interestingly, in Motorcycle racing such as MotoGP, it's very much always been about racing regardless as to whether it be against your own team mate. Look at Hayden and Pedrosa in what was it... 2007? Pedrosa took out his team mate when he low sided which nearly cost Hayden the championship.
Why do team orders not occur as much if at all in motorcycle racing? They do not have radios to talk to the riders for a start, but then they do not make pit stops. All comms are done via information boards on the pit straight.
I think banning radio is backwards. It all comes down to one simple thing. Ban team orders. But you can't because of point 1 above, they are "TEAMS" with an interest in both cars. It's just not working currently in F1 as it is so tactical.
You mean like with
Red Bull A and Red Bull B? We already have that. Toro Rosso's move over for RBR all the time.
The only reason we have teams of 2 cars in F1 is because that's what the regulations currently state.
It wasn't always like this, I don't think, and it isn't like this in most other motorsport series.
Splitting the teams to 1 car setups wouldn't really work, as teams would still hold stakes in other teams. We have that now anyway with teams in partnership, or sharing owners, or running other teams drivers in exchange for benefits.
But given that the WCC standings define the money the teams make from the sport, the regulations have to keep it fair, hence 2 cars per team. Having uneven numbers of cars across teams would mean this wouldn't work.
Associate
- Joined
- 13 Sep 2003
- Posts
- 1,641
- Location
- Oxford, UK
You can already order t-shirts 
He was slowing down/weaving as he exited turn 15, before the flag ...
I genuinely cannot understand why this is even being discussed?
Probably already posted but I can't be bothered reading through 50 pages. What Vettel did yesterday was pretty much out of order, but does Webber really have a right to be as much of a ***** as he's being?
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/93033
Seems Webber has conveniently forgotten about this incident. The only reason there wasn't as much of a fuss a couple of years ago was that Webber couldn't get past.
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/93033
Seems Webber has conveniently forgotten about this incident. The only reason there wasn't as much of a fuss a couple of years ago was that Webber couldn't get past.
Last edited:
I'm saying it's an issue, I'm just saying that IS what he did.
I'd forgotten about that.
So that's 2 races in the past where Webber has ignored team orders...
Should be banned, tbh.
As far as Webber was concerned they were not racing, he was under the impression the racing was done and they were just bringing the cars home.
Why shouldn't we?
To be honest, it's Red Bull's own fault for using team orders this early in the season. I can understand them wanting to save engines/tyres/points, but all Webber's engineer had to do was say "listen, Vettel is ignoring team orders, turn your engine back up and go for it". Then, all of this moody stroppy behaviour from Webber when he has blatantly done exactly the same thing before has lowered my opinion of Webber more than it has of Vettel.
I expect Vettel thought the same at Silverstone.
As far as Webber was concerned they were not racing, he was under the impression the racing was done and they were just bringing the cars home.
I am of the opinion that anyone ignoring their team's instruction is in the wrong, this weekend Seb is in the wrong so he is the focus of the discussion. Webber has been compliant most times and the odd discretion doesn't give Vettel free reign to ignore the teams wishes.
It became pretty obvious that this wasn't the case, though, as Seb started to make moves.
Does Seb have respect for Mark and the team - not much it would seem. Does it make for more exciting racing - absolutely!
I had this chat with a mate last night. Its quite clear from quite early on (3 or 4 laps before he started to try and pass) that RBR knew Vettel was ignoring them from all the radio messages. But nobody bothered to tell Mark. I'd have thought they would have at least warned him.