Grand Prix Rejects

mario wrote:
Even in this case, whilst it is obvious what has happened, Ferrari, technically, never told Massa to move over. Had Ferrari taken legal action, the WMSC would then have to prove in a civil court that Ferrari's code words were deliberate team orders - not necessarily easy to do, when Ferrari can claim that they were merely informing Massa of Alonso's relative pace.

Exactly. I'm not sure how the stewards got away with fining them in the first place - presumably Ferrari didn't make a big fuss because it was such a small amount.

To be honest, I thought it was a total no-brainer for Ferrari to get Alonso in front of Massa at Hockenheim by whatever means they could, if you ask me it was nothing like Austria 2002 (championship situation and race situation as Vettel wasn't far behind them). I agree the the rule is totally unworkable.

Just been watching highlights of the 1991 Italian GP on the BBC website and it's obvious that both Patrese and Berger are there to help their respective team-mates who are fighting for the WC. And nobody thought anything of it then!

James1978 wrote:To be honest, I thought it was a total no-brainer for Ferrari to get Alonso in front of Massa at Hockenheim by whatever means they could, if you ask me it was nothing like Austria 2002 (championship situation and race situation as Vettel wasn't far behind them). I agree the the rule is totally unworkable.

Just been watching highlights of the 1991 Italian GP on the BBC website and it's obvious that both Patrese and Berger are there to help their respective team-mates who are fighting for the WC. And nobody thought anything of it then!

Bingo! And, as a token of gratitude, Senna gifted the win at the Japanese GP of that year to Berger for his help, when the title was already wrapped.

I don't see how 'we thought nothing of it then' is an argument (just think of the appalling things you could sanction using that logic), nor are you comparing like with like.

Ronnie often sat dutifully behind Mario in 1978. There were expressions of support for Ronnie (who was likely the quicker of the two), but there was no untoward criticism of Lotus, Chapman or Andretti. People understood & accepted it. The drivers were on good terms & both looked forward to a contest in 1979 when Ronnie would have been at McLaren. (As it turned out both teams were off the pace in 1979).

eytl wrote:
Thirdly, to all those of you who are out of the trench, if in Abu Dhabi this year Vettel is told to move over to let Webber past to secure enough points for the championship, and Vettel grows a conscience and actually does so, would you be complaining?

Depends who it's to beat.

A McLaren driver - yes
A ferrari driver - no

In terms of who I want to win either McLaren driver would do - if not then Webber. Vettel and the two ferrari drivers can rot as far as I'm concerned.

eagleash wrote:Ronnie often sat dutifully behind Mario in 1978. There were expressions of support for Ronnie (who was likely the quicker of the two), but there was no untoward criticism of Lotus, Chapman or Andretti. People understood & accepted it. The drivers were on good terms & both looked forward to a contest in 1979 when Ronnie would have been at McLaren. (As it turned out both teams were off the pace in 1979).

That isn't where the sport is right now. The front running teams can afford to run two machines of equal speed and employ two top drivers, and Ferrari claim to do this. Massa himself states he 'is no number 2 driver'.

As I keep reiterating, simply watch the aftermath of the race and tell me what it looks like? It looks embarrassing. It's the sight of a team disgracing themselves in front of an angry public. You can front up any argument you like to defend team orders, but you can't explain, why if they hadn't done anything wrong, the reaction was as it was, from the team, the drivers and the fans.

Felipe was upset because he had been deprived of a win, Fernando was slightly embarrassed, (he did ask over the radio if Felipe was OK). The team were dropped in it by their own employee & the fans just lacked a degree of feeling for the sport.

I find that quite patronising accusing the majority of F1 fans of lacking feeling for the sport- maybe it's you are aren't keeping up to speed with how the sport's changing? As I said, times have changed now and neither drivers nor fans accept what happened as being the way to do things. Webber, Massa, Button etc don't expect to have to help their teammates until they are out of the running, and their teammate has the title on the line. Germany was too early for Ferrari to make any such call and the way they chose to do it was embarrassing, as was their attempt to lie to the public about it, as was the booing, the sheepish celebrations, the stony-faced Massa and every other aspect of it. If what they did was correct, why did it feel so wrong?

I'm quoting what someone's posted elsewhere:

...as someone on one of the J's blogs pointed out, it would have been far easier to have a ficticious engine setting for this kind of thing: "Felipe, go to engine map P5, go to engine map P5". But that would need prearranging, and one got the impression that this wasn't.

Hell, for that matter they could have got him to go to a real engine mapping that would have made him slow down, e.g. a fuel-saving mode, which would have let Alonso have a better chance of passing him, and at least that would then have been a genuine overtaking move, even if only by crippling the other driver.

As it is, Alonso DNF'd in Spa, and the correct result in Germany would've had them seperated by only 16 points at this stage.

eagleash wrote:The fans just lacked a degree of feeling for the sport.

If you've paid upwards of a hundred quid to go see a motor race, you don't want to witness a blatant manipulation. Even investing just 90 minutes of your viewing time into it, it's galling enough. I think Ferrari are not necessarily the bad guys, they did what they had to do, I just feel it needs to be prevented from happening, or at least happening in a blatant way which spoils the enjoyment of what is essentially a very expensive entertainment. It's like paying £100 to go see your favourite band in concert - kinda ruins it if you find out they're miming.

http://www.planet-f1.com/editorial/6366 ... Of-The-FIA

I tend to agree with the reasonings here which you'll find are fairly considered, after the opening gambit. As a supplement to the comments I've made already.

jackanderton wrote:I find that quite patronising accusing the majority of F1 fans of lacking feeling for the sport- maybe it's you are aren't keeping up to speed with how the sport's changing? As I said, times have changed now and neither drivers nor fans accept what happened as being the way to do things. Webber, Massa, Button etc don't expect to have to help their teammates until they are out of the running, and their teammate has the title on the line. Germany was too early for Ferrari to make any such call and the way they chose to do it was embarrassing, as was their attempt to lie to the public about it, as was the booing, the sheepish celebrations, the stony-faced Massa and every other aspect of it. If what they did was correct, why did it feel so wrong?

I'm quoting what someone's posted elsewhere:

...as someone on one of the J's blogs pointed out, it would have been far easier to have a ficticious engine setting for this kind of thing: "Felipe, go to engine map P5, go to engine map P5". But that would need prearranging, and one got the impression that this wasn't.

Hell, for that matter they could have got him to go to a real engine mapping that would have made him slow down, e.g. a fuel-saving mode, which would have let Alonso have a better chance of passing him, and at least that would then have been a genuine overtaking move, even if only by crippling the other driver.

As it is, Alonso DNF'd in Spa, and the correct result in Germany would've had them seperated by only 16 points at this stage.

So what you're saying, leaving aside your personal remarks, is that Alonso should have sat politely behind Felipe, probably on the orders of the team (!),meaning that he was then helping Massa. Or should he mount an attack which could have 1 of 3 outcomes? He got past with Felipe defending to the hilt; fair enough, Felipe realising he couldn't defend yields rather more subtly or one or both cars gets eliminated. The team were never going to let that happen & really had no alternative to what they did. & yes the sport has changed but not for the better IMO, hence the current search for ways to improve it. Hopefully improvements will be made in the near future as I have yet to hear a convincing argument for the continuation of the ban on team orders. The majority of fans of my acquaintance have said (like yourself) "it's a bit early in the season", have a degree of sympathy for Felipe, but are not unhappy with what Ferrari did. Those that disagree mainly do so (when you get down to it) as a result of a dislike of one team. I would also point out that I did not say a majority of fans & also only lacked a degree of feeling. Finally, Eytl made the point that fans do not decide the results in any sport. Well maybe cricket, but let's not go there.

fjackdaw wrote:

eagleash wrote:The fans just lacked a degree of feeling for the sport.

If you've paid upwards of a hundred quid to go see a motor race, you don't want to witness a blatant manipulation. Even investing just 90 minutes of your viewing time into it, it's galling enough. I think Ferrari are not necessarily the bad guys, they did what they had to do, I just feel it needs to be prevented from happening, or at least happening in a blatant way which spoils the enjoyment of what is essentially a very expensive entertainment. It's like paying £100 to go see your favourite band in concert - kinda ruins it if you find out they're miming.

We kind of agree in that if you go to a Motor Race you have to be aware of all the possible eventualities. Of which teams employing their drivers as they see fit is just one. Caveat Emptor & all that! Ferrari won the race, the finishing order may or may not be relevant. Some fans have said they felt cheated, but of what? One overtake perhaps, which would not have been the most exciting ever. It's possible that if Alonso had held station behind Felipe both cars may have been caught by VET. The team could not allow that & as you rightly say, did what they had to do.

jackanderton wrote:http://www.planet-f1.com/editorial/6366310/Asking-Questions-Of-The-FIA

I tend to agree with the reasonings here which you'll find are fairly considered, after the opening gambit. As a supplement to the comments I've made already.

Yes it makes for interesting reading. But it is just one opinion. Other "blogs" etc take the opposing view. The comments seem also to be divided but I did not have time to read them all.

So what you're saying, leaving aside your personal remarks, is that Alonso should have sat politely behind Felipe, probably on the orders of the team (!),meaning that he was then helping Massa. Or should he mount an attack which could have 1 of 3 outcomes? He got past with Felipe defending to the hilt; fair enough, Felipe realising he couldn't defend yields rather more subtly or one or both cars gets eliminated.

I'm saying it's motor racing and there are two cars, one of which is in front, the other which is behind. Both their aim is to win the race. That's how racing works, not what we received. It's not up to me to say what they should've done, it should've been apparent. It was mid season and both drivers were at the team on the understanding of equal treatment. IE- Go Racing.

McLaren, Red Bull and Mercedes have allowed their drivers to race each other with differing outcomes, but the point is that when they did so it hugely increased the excitement and spectacle for the fans, because it delivered what the fans want- balls to the wall high-stakes racing that has winners and losers- not orchestrated manouvres dictated from the pits that rob a driver of a win. Fans ultimately are rooting for drivers and teams, but when they win fans want to feel that they've done so fairly and against strong competition. This is the same for all sport when it gets down to it. Any steps that reduce that, which will be the revised rulings whenever they come in, will be retrogressive. I can't think of any possible argument to the contrary.

Orchestrated manouvres dictated from the pits has been one of the problems with F1 in the last 10 years. Whether it be long brake pedals, turning down the settings or fluffed pit stops. (Or sundry other "minor" adjustments). It has however been not so obvious to people. We are agreed that we want to see good racing. Ferrari won the race against strong opposition & chose to use their employees as they see fit, which it is my view they have the right to do..

eagleash wrote:

fjackdaw wrote:

eagleash wrote:The fans just lacked a degree of feeling for the sport.

If you've paid upwards of a hundred quid to go see a motor race, you don't want to witness a blatant manipulation. Even investing just 90 minutes of your viewing time into it, it's galling enough. I think Ferrari are not necessarily the bad guys, they did what they had to do, I just feel it needs to be prevented from happening, or at least happening in a blatant way which spoils the enjoyment of what is essentially a very expensive entertainment. It's like paying £100 to go see your favourite band in concert - kinda ruins it if you find out they're miming.

We kind of agree in that if you go to a Motor Race you have to be aware of all the possible eventualities. Of which teams employing their drivers as they see fit is just one. Caveat Emptor & all that! Ferrari won the race, the finishing order may or may not be relevant. Some fans have said they felt cheated, but of what?

The correct race winner. Ferrari won, but most people who watch F1 are just as interested in the individual drivers as they are the teams, if not more so. F1 is an entertainment, but it's an entertainment based almost wholly around the idea of fair competition. If the result is manipulated, you lose the sense of having watched a race, which is pretty galling if you'd spent a huge lump of cash on watching a race. If Webber had pulled aside to allow Vettel to win (or vice versa) at Silverstone, I'd have gone home with the feeling of, "what was the point of me even being here?"

fjackdaw wrote:
The correct race winner. Ferrari won, but most people who watch F1 are just as interested in the individual drivers as they are the teams, if not more so. F1 is an entertainment, but it's an entertainment based almost wholly around the idea of fair competition. If the result is manipulated, you lose the sense of having watched a race, which is pretty galling if you'd spent a huge lump of cash on watching a race. If Webber had pulled aside to allow Vettel to win (or vice versa) at Silverstone, I'd have gone home with the feeling of, "what was the point of me even being here?"

Some people may understandably feel that way,but as you yourself said a couple of posts ago, Ferrari did what they had to do.
It has always happened in Motor Sport, probably always will, whatever changes are made to the regulations & people paying their hard earned have to bear this sort of thing in mind when parting with it.

Trying not to set a precident by resisting the urge to grow a pair, in doing so have set a precident.

Fresh from the Rantbox

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86508

So, the FIA KNEW they were using team orders, but decided to not punish them because the rules were inconsistent, which means...

Fbathplug Indicisive Arsenals.

Does anyone at the FIA know how to grow a pair? Because thats what they should have done, otherwise this will happen, and WILL happen:
http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86509

What makes this case even more infuriating is that the WMSC ignored the 160 page report of their own investigator.

He recommended that the penalty should be, the $100,000 fine, a 5s penalty for Alonso, and a suspended drivers' and constructors' points penalty. He also said that before the pass, both Ferrari engines were turned down (probably to allow Vettel to catch up a bit), and then Alonso's was turned up. (So, Alonso didn't even have the speed to catch Felipe with equal machinery...)

Interestingly, he also took the 'fan's' perspective in regards to team orders: “Motor racing ought to be unpredictable, as it has been to date. Part of that competitive element is to take equal interest in all competitors. Irrespective of their fitness, talent or position in the race, competitors should be able to rely on themselves for purposes of winning the race without any form of external aid influencing their sporting performance.”


Todt says there wasn't enough evidence, and yet the FIA report says it was clear they were guilty. Words fail me at the way this hearing was handled.

Ed24 wrote:Todt says there wasn't enough evidence, and yet the FIA report says it was clear they were guilty. Words fail me at the way this hearing was handled.

I think I'm starting to question the FIA's ability to run the sport if even they can't agree on what happened. (And yes I know Todt took no part in the meeting as far as I know)

Guess who's said he'll help review the team orders rule?

Wizzie wrote:Guess who's said he'll help review the team orders rule?

Haven't read your link....but....was it that nice Mr Schumacher, Daniel?

eagleash wrote:

Wizzie wrote:Guess who's said he'll help review the team orders rule?

Haven't read your link....but....was it that nice Mr Schumacher, Daniel?

Yes it is Mr Schumacher that has offered the assistance, Mr Ash

http://www.planet-f1.com/news/3213/6368 ... rs-To-Win-

The two McLaren drivers close to my views on things here. What's most interesting is how they both have a different mindset to how it may have been in the past.

For those who want to read the full FIA press release on the proceedings and decision making progress, a pdf copy is available via the FIA's website: http://www.fia.com/en-GB/mediacentre/pr ... cision.pdf
Having quickly read the document, I'll summarise some of the points made:
1) Ferrari firstly use the defence that they did not actually order Massa to pull over, because at no point did they say anything which could be construed as an order - in other words, it was ultimately up to the discretion of Massa as to what he did, based on the information that Alonso was catching him.
2) The FIA reviewed this, along with the radio transcripts and television footage, and concluded that Alonso was only catching Massa because, following an order to both drivers to turn their engines down, Alonso had subsequently turned his engine back up, and Massa had been neither informed about this, or been instructed to turn his engine back up.
3) Based on the above evidence, they concluded that Ferrari had used a team order to manipulate the result of the race, and had materially affected the race order by issuing that instruction.
4) The WMSC then considered what penalties it may levy; to confirm the original fine by the stewards, to award Alonso a 5 second penalty, demoting him to second place, and a one year suspended withdrawal of points.
5) The WMSC then considered additional information; letters from Peter Sauber and Sir Frank Williams, both of whom supported Ferrari, and stated that they considered that team orders were not detrimental to the sport.
6) Based on the fact that Ferrari had co-operated fully with the WMSC, along with the evidence that there was considerable interest from other teams in having the team order rule revoked, the WMSC therefore decided that they would not impose any additional penalties on Ferrari, beyond the cost of paying for the WMSC hearing.

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86557

If by some miracle Williams build a good car next year, could Rubens finally benefit from team orders? If Schumi struggles next year while he's off winning the title, expect plenty of two finger salutes from him...

I want Rubens to be World Champion next season simply so he can finally tell Schumacher where he can shove his 7 undeserved titles.

Williams's status as the "racer's racer" is done after this. They're not 'racers' if they support team orders for any reason. Period.

Cynon wrote:Williams's status as the "racer's racer" is done after this. They're not 'racers' if they support team orders for any reason. Period.

I thought that was McLaren.

Williams has been in no position to need orders since 2003...

kostas22 wrote:http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86557

If by some miracle Williams build a good car next year, could Rubens finally benefit from team orders? If Schumi struggles next year while he's off winning the title, expect plenty of two finger salutes from him...

I want Rubens to be World Champion next season simply so he can finally tell Schumacher where he can shove his 7 undeserved titles.

I'm merging this with the "no punishment" thread.

I am not surprised. Sir Frank has always maintained the drivers are not important, and that it's the team that matters. They learned their lesson in 87, they won't fall for it again.

CarlosFerreira wrote:

kostas22 wrote:http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86557

If by some miracle Williams build a good car next year, could Rubens finally benefit from team orders? If Schumi struggles next year while he's off winning the title, expect plenty of two finger salutes from him...

I want Rubens to be World Champion next season simply so he can finally tell Schumacher where he can shove his 7 undeserved titles.

I'm merging this with the "no punishment" thread.

I am not surprised. Sir Frank has always maintained the drivers are not important, and that it's the team that matters. They learned their lesson in 87, they won't fall for it again.

Actually it was in 1986, with a foreword in 1981.

Phoenix wrote:

CarlosFerreira wrote:

kostas22 wrote:http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/86557

If by some miracle Williams build a good car next year, could Rubens finally benefit from team orders? If Schumi struggles next year while he's off winning the title, expect plenty of two finger salutes from him...

I want Rubens to be World Champion next season simply so he can finally tell Schumacher where he can shove his 7 undeserved titles.

I'm merging this with the "no punishment" thread.

I am not surprised. Sir Frank has always maintained the drivers are not important, and that it's the team that matters. They learned their lesson in 87, they won't fall for it again.

Actually it was in 1986, with a foreword in 1981.

*cough*anorak*cough*