Team Orders WMSC meeting on 8th Sept

The team orders ban was a knee jerk reaction in response to Ferrari implementing team orders with extremely bad taste. They should be allowed, it's impossible to police anyway.
 
Wether the rule should be there or not is a much wider debate, the issue for ferrari is that the rule is there and that they broke it.

I expect the team and drivers to lose the points they gained at that race but the rest of the field wont be promoted.
 
dalin80 said:
Wether the rule should be there or not is a much wider debate, the issue for ferrari is that the rule is there and that they broke it.
Click to expand...

Well, the issue from the POV of Ferrari is that teams have been giving out coded instructions for ages (McLaren telling their drivers to 'save fuel', i.e. stop racing and cruise to the flag, in Turkey being a prime example) and weren't punished. Suddenly the Almighty Satanic Evil That Is Scuderia Ferrari™ does it and the entire F1 world is up in arms.

We'd had the same problem before the last big kerfuffle over team orders. McLaren employed them rather blatantly in 1998 (Australia and Italy the two races where it really was pretty bloody obvious) and weren't punished. Ferrari used them in 2002 and - heavens! - suddenly everyone is clamouring for blood. Maybe it's because more people feel empathy for Rubens than they did for DC, maybe it's because it was Schumacher who was the beneficiary, maybe it's because it was so utterly pointless given the extent of Ferrari domination in '02. Either way, it still boils down to the fact that no-one cared particularly when McLaren did it.

I don't agree with Ferrari doing what they did in Hockenheim, mainly because I figure if Alonso is oh-so superior to Massa as many of you on here say then he should have been able to get by him without Massa pulling over. But then, Alonso is a dirty, cheating, whinging, dago **** who makes it very hard for me to continue supporting Ferrari after 20+ years of doing so :(
 
There is a difference between telling your drivers not to race on the edge and letting a teammate pass.

Ferrari have the ability to exucute team orders in a most obvious and annoying way than others.
 
The thing is, people keep saying all teams do it. But no team has implemented team orders as blatantly obvious as Ferrari. They will probably just get a slap on the wrist - but I am hoping for all points removed from that race for team and the drivers. A suspended sentence is a possibility to - not that it matters, because their season is as good as over anyway.
 
stockhausen said:
Remind me; which driver allowed his team-mate to pass in Turkey, I forget.
Click to expand...

It was RBR who wanted to switch Vettel into the lead, and move Webber into 2nd.

Vettel had got the all clear to take Webber.
Unfortunately, the message to allow Vettel through, never reached Webber.

When Vettel went for what he thought would be a an easy overtake, Webber, didnt back down or make it easy (as he thought he was racing). This resulted in contact. After the crash, Vettel was p'd off that Webber never let him through. Webber was also p'd off that Vettel made such a bold (and presumtious) move. And management were p'd off with Webber because he never allowed Vettel to overtake him.

Little did anybody know at the time, that the message to let Vettel through, didnt reach Webber. Later it was revealed that although Webber's engineer had been told to relay the message to Webber to allow Vettel through, this message was never passed on to Webber.

Had RBR run like clock work, Webber would've received the message and Vettel and Webber (under team orders), would've made the switch...just as Ferrari did later in the season.

Bizarrely, in the same race, Button and Hamilton had also been told to "conserve fuel". Hamilton asked his engineer, "if I back off, will Jenson overtake me?" The reply he received was, "no". How could the engineer have known this unless team orders had been issued?

Hamilton backed off and low and behold, Button overtook. Hamilton then re-took the place and this time, in no uncertain terms, Button was asked to "conserve/save fuel". This time, Button took the hint, backed off and immediately fell away from Hamilton. After the race, despite his first win of the season, Hamilton loked and was p'd off.

It could be argued that in both those races, McLaren and RBR manipulated the final result.
 
Last edited:
The important thing about today isn't the scale (if any) of the punishment, it's the clarification we can expect from FIA on team orders. Going into the last few races of the season we need to know whether team orders are allowed or not. It's critically important for Webber at least.
 
Whichever way this goes, I'm sure it will still be construed as the FIA going soft on Ferrari.
 
As said about it is how obvious Ferrari are with the orders. In terms of RBR at Turkey, the message wasn't passed on so there was no team orders. McLaren's "save fuel" sometimes I think it is team orders, though it is widely known the teams run with less fuel than they need if they drove 100% for the whole race so it is easily argueable that their messages are within the rules. As for "Jenson will not pass" message, again their is doubt because if both drivers have to save fuel to make it to the end of the race then they are not going to fight for position. The reason I find it so objectionable with Ferrari is two fold. Firstly Alonso wasn't that much quicker (if at all over the whole race) than Massa and secondly because, in my mind, there is no doubt that it was a team order.
 
One argument I've head heard about it that it's a team sport. Ok, then why have the Drivers Championship then? Lets get rid of that and just have the Constructors Championship.

As for the 'Hold Postition' - that was cleared as not being a detrimental team order after Monaco 2007 when McLaren were investigated by the FIA for using it to keep Hamilton behind Alonso. So that argument is nullified...

2007 Monaco Grand Prix
30.05.2007

Having studied the radio traffic between Vodafone McLaren Mercedes (McLaren) and its drivers, together with the FIA observer’s report and data from the team, it is clear that McLaren’s actions during the 2007 Monaco Grand Prix were entirely legitimate and no further action is necessary.
The facts

1. A two-stop strategy is the optimum at Monaco unless the safety car is deployed, in which case one-stop can sometimes be better.

2. The safety car has been deployed during four of the past five Monaco Grands Prix.

3. Under current rules the choice between a one-stop and two-stop strategy must be made before the final qualifying period.

4. It is clear from FIA measurements taken after qualifying that McLaren fuelled Hamilton for five more laps than Alonso.

5. This allowed Hamilton the option of a one-stop strategy should the safety car have come out during his first stint.

6. The safety car was not deployed.

7. The McLaren was significantly faster at Monaco than any other car.

Background

The primary objective of any team is for one of their drivers to win. If this can be achieved they will try to ensure their other car finishes second.

With no safety car during Alonso’s first stint, there was a small but finite risk that it would come out during the five laps before Hamilton had to refuel. This would have put him behind the field and at a significant disadvantage to any car on a full (as opposed to optional) one-stop strategy. The latter cars would be expected to refuel around lap 40 – ie after the safety car had pitted if it came out during Hamilton’s extra laps.

For similar reasons Hamilton was called in early for his second pit stop, thus assuring his second place, with or without a safety car.

Had the car in front of Hamilton not been his team-mate, McLaren might (probably would) have decided to risk the safety car and let Hamilton run for as long as his fuel load allowed in the hope that he would come out of the pits in the lead after one of his pit stops. There is, however, no obligation on them to take this risk in order to overtake their own car. Indeed it would be foolish to do so.

It is standard procedure for a team to tell its drivers to slow down when they have a substantial lead. This is in order to minimise the risk of technical or other problems. It is also standard practice and entirely reasonable to ask the drivers not to put each other at risk.

McLaren were able to pursue an optimum team strategy because they had a substantial advantage over all other cars. They did nothing which could be described as interfering with the race result.

Note to Editors:

At its meeting on 28 October 2002 the Formula One Commission decided by 23 votes to nil, with 3 abstentions, that it should be “prohibited to use team orders to interfere with the results of the race”. This decision was confirmed by the World Motor Sport Council and appears as Article 39.1 of the 2007 Formula One Sporting Regulations: “Team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited.”
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom