Team Orders WMSC meeting on 8th Sept

FIA considered a 5 second penalty for Alonso to drop him behind Massa.

That would have been great...
Reward the guy who followed the team order and in effect caused the rule to be broken and no punishment to the guys who issued the order.
 
Come on JRS, what do you think of the punishment...suitable or not?

I actually, am glad that no points were deducted. At least it keeps the championship alive for Ferrari. The more potential candidates there are for the championship, the better.

I dont like to see championship contenders being removed due to politics and off-track decisions.
 
it's not off track politics it was a clear violation of a rule.
So if they are championship contenders, then they should have no punishment for cheating.
 
Mclaren where investigated and deemed not to be team orders, no over take happened. Things like save fuel are not obvious, they could well be saving fuel as every kilo of fuel costs 0.1 seconds roughly. So are filled light.

RBR never been showen to be team orders and again no overtake happened they crashed.

Yes they have, Horner said himself that the call was made to Webbers engineer to let Vettel through but the engineer didn't pass on the message. They then changed the tune to 'no team orders'. They can't even lie consistently.

Mclarens own Ron Dennis admitted that he had to decide who would win the monaco GP in 2007 before the event. Thats just as bad as letting someone through on the track. Perhaps if dennis had told us all which of his drivers was preferential to win that weekend we could have the betting altered to reflect that. It's still conning the public that they are watching a competetive event.

Personally I think it's all a sham, but Ferrari should have been excluded from the constructors just because they did it so blatantly, even though I see it as no different from Massa letting Kimi by or Heikki letting Hamilton by.
 
got a link, as far as I can remember the, no passing on team orders was nothing more than a rumour.

And yes the difference is it was blatant, if he just missed an apex or something it would have been fine.

there has been a nice balance between the pretence of no team orders and letting subtle team orders exist. Ferrari have broken that little give and take and messed it all up.
 
got a link, as far as I can remember the, no passing on team orders was nothing more than a rumour.

And yes the difference is it was blatant, if he just missed an apex or something it would have been fine.

there has been a nice balance between the pretence of no team orders and letting subtle team orders exist. Ferrari have broken that little give and take and messed it all up.

Stop making crap up. Ferrari are just exposing the rule for what it is-unenforceable hence why it's going to be done away with. It's seems that if Ferrari had been punished today then they were willing to go court where they would have easily have won.
 
got a link, as far as I can remember the, no passing on team orders was nothing more than a rumour.

http://www.yallaf1.com/2010/06/01/red-bull-boss-denies-team-orders-at-play/

"The message to Webber should have been ‘You’re too slow. At this rate, Hamilton is going to be straight past you. If Vettel is faster, don’t fight against him, concentrate on Hamilton"

The above was spoken by Red Bull Racing team advisor Helmut Marko.

Unfortunately, Webber's engineer didn't pass on any info, so Webber defended rigorously.

According to that quote, Mark's engineer was supposed to tell Mark that, "Ok … so … Sebastian is faster … than you. Did you receive that?"

Ring any bells?

:p
 
So not a team order or a let past command. Many teams have said dobtwaste time fighting. They did not say you must let him through regardless of what vettle was doing.

See this Is the big difference covert vs blatant.
 
How would they of won.

A) Because they never gave an order- they just gave massa info. Yes we all know what it meant.
B) Because there is plenty of precedence to show that 'managing races'(I believe that is the preferred phrase of McLaren) has happened a number of times over the last few years without ANY punishment- not even a fine.

Exhibit one
 
So not a team order or a let past command.

RBR wanted to do exactly the same thing which Ferrari succesfully did.

The only difference is that Massa's engineer passed on the order, while Webber's engineer didnt.

Had the order gone out, Webber would've had no choice but to let Vettel past, just as Massa did.
 
A) means nothing can still be done for it

B) that is not set precedence, courts deal with a current case not previuse cases.


There's a bog difference between letting some one past and if under pressure not wasting time fighting. The latest has happened many times.
 
Well since Ferrari got away with murder ...again.

i really hope they re-make the rules so that this cant happen again.

oh well

Come on Italy :) + Mclaren win // Ferrari = FAIL - engine blow up - mainly Alonso
 
B) that is not set precedence, courts deal with a current case not previuse cases.


There's a bog difference between letting some one past and if under pressure not wasting time fighting. The latest has happened many times.

Precedence is probably a poor choice of words as it has a legal meaning. It would certainly be within Ferrari's right to highlight previous 'team orders' in the sport and to show that they were been victimised. Paraphrasing Coulthard-"Anyone that doesn't believe ALL teams use team orders is an idiot". Heck Ferrari might of even got him to appear in court on their behalf! Point is that it would have been a ****storm that the FIA really didn't need- win or lose and I am sure they would have lost.
 
Precedence is probably a poor choice of words as it has a legal meaning. It would certainly be within Ferrari's right to highlight previous 'team orders' in the sport and to show that they were been victimised. Paraphrasing Coulthard-"Anyone that doesn't believe ALL teams use team orders is an idiot". Heck Ferrari might of even got him to appear in court on their behalf! Point is that it would have been a ****storm that the FIA really didn't need- win or lose and I am sure they would have lost.

Not really, these other "orders" where never investigated and ad such no conclusion can be made and no legal weight given.

What your saying is now massa did not get punished for a false start, other teams can use it. They can't it was simply missed and not investigated in time, as such holds no weight.
 
Not really, these other "orders" where never investigated and ad such no conclusion can be made and no legal weight given.

A court of law wouldn't care if they were investigated or not. All they have to do is show that info was passed to a driver and that info changed the outcome of a race. For example Ferrari's lawyer's could approach someone like Kovalainen to testify about Hockenheim 2008.

Anyway I can see I am wasting my time. You are firmly in the 'McLaren can do no wrong, Ferrari are evil corner' and nothing I will say will change that.
 
That Is not how law works. It makes no diffrence f they get any drivers in. Unless thighs cases where investigate it will hold no wait in law.

This guy got away with murder, never went to court. That is now my defence. You are very much mistaken it does not work like that.

Mclaren have done wrong, look at lying to stewards. I'm a driver supporter not team. Last team I supported was Williams in the earlie 90's before f1 was killed off with far to strict a rules.
 
Last edited:
On 25 July 2010, at the Grand Prix of Germany, the Stewards of the meeting found an infringement by the Scuderia Ferrari to the prohibition of team orders interfering with a race result and then decided to impose a fine of $100,000 and to forward the dossier to the World Motor Sport Council for further consideration.

The Judging Body of the World Motor Sport Council held an extraordinary hearing in Paris on 8 September 2010 to examine this matter.

After an in depth analysis of all reports, statements and documents submitted, the Judging Body has decided to confirm the Stewards’ decision of a $100,000 fine for infringing article 39.1 of the Sporting Regulations and to impose the payment of the costs incurred by the FIA.

The Judging Body has also acknowledged that article 39.1 of the Sporting Regulations should be reviewed and has decided to refer this question to the Formula One Sporting Working Group.

Proceedings

In March 2010 at Bahrain at the initiative of the FIA President, the World Motor Sport Council adopted a new transitional disciplinary procedure, in order in particular to ensure the separation between the prosecuting body and the judging body. At the General Assembly on 5 November 2010, a more global reform of the FIA judicial system will be submitted for approval, including in particular the creation of an International Tribunal which will exercise the disciplinary power in the 1st instance in place of the World Motor Sport Council.

In application of this new procedure, previously applied within the context of the US F1 case, the FIA President exercises the role of prosecuting body. As such, he has the authority to notify any person being prosecuted of the grievances brought against him and to submit the matter to the Judging Body of the World Motor Sport Council, chaired by the Deputy President for Sport, Mr Graham Stoker.

The Deputy President for Sport has the power to proceed with an investigation and, within this context, to designate a reporter from among the members of the World Motor Sport Council.

In the present case, the Deputy President for Sport designated Mr Lars Österlind, a member of the World Motor Sport Council, as reporter. Mr Österlind’s report was forwarded to the Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro as the party being prosecuted.

Prior to the hearing, the members of the Judging Body of the World Motor Sport Council received all the documents in the case, including the observations submitted by the Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro.

The FIA President did not attend the hearing but was represented by Maître Jean-Pierre Martel from the law firm Orrick Rambaud Martel.

The hearing before the Judging Body of the World Motor Sport Council, assembled on 8 September 2010 in an extraordinary meeting, was chaired by the Deputy President for Sport and allowed the hearing, in person, of Mr Stefano Domenicali, Team Principal of the Scuderia Ferrari Marlboro, assisted by lawyers, Mr Henry Peter and Nigel Tozzi. The World Motor Sport Council had the possibility to join the drivers Mr Fernando Alonso and Mr Felipe Massa via video conference.
 
Back
Top Bottom