Mercedes drivers told to obey team orders in future

[Doc Austin]

http://www.motorsport.com/f1/news/me...ders-in-future

What a load.

[Hawkmoon]

Mercedes are right in insisting that their drivers do as they are told. The drivers are employees like any other and should respect the wishes of their employer.

Having said that, they are digging a hole for themselves by saying on the one hand that Hamilton was right to defy them in Hungary but on the other the drivers must obey orders. That's the kind of muddled thinking that got Red Bull into trouble several times during the Vettel-Webber era. Ferrari never have this problem as the drivers seem to know that the team must be obeyed. The drivers don't always like it but they seem to do it anyway.

Mercedes need to pick a stance and stick to it. Either the drivers are free to race or they're not. A foot in either camp will only lead to trouble.

[Duncan]

I don't see anything as really unclear here.

What Toto seems to be saying is that Hamilton didn't ignore the order; the order was to let Nico through, not to slow down. Hamilton's position (and I agree) is that Nico never made any attempt to pass, and was never close enough to make such an attempt, so a decision to obey or ignore the order never arose. I didn't see any instance of Hamilton making a defensive move at that point in the race.

Toto did also explicitly say that there would never be an order to lift off the gas. Let's hope so...

[TheFamousEccles]

The whole "drivers/racers as employees" thing stinks like untreated sewerage. Granted, they get paid squillions to do this, and the team/manufacturer has marketing and image issues to manage, but this is racing ferchrissakes! If it wasn't for superego driving many of these pilots to excel, they wouldn't have a show in the first place.

Besides, ALL publicity is good publicity - and having two big names trading blows in front of millions of viewers (asuming F1 still draws millions of viewers, they seem to be doing their utmost to rain on their own parade) is pretty good TV. Merc have - barring any sudden zombie apocalypse - got the constructors crown in the bag. That's what pays the big bucks. The WDC is just a side show, so let them squabble and fight, er, race that is.

[Mifune]

Ferrari never have this problem as the drivers seem to know that the team must be obeyed. The drivers don't always like it but they seem to do it anyway.

.....Or conversely Ferrari never have this problem as they pitifully rarely have a situation where both of their drivers are neck and neck with one of them being a dead cert for the WDC
Ferrari would love to have Mercs problems!

[Hawkmoon]

.....Or conversely Ferrari never have this problem as they pitifully rarely have a situation where both of their drivers are neck and neck with one of them being a dead cert for the WDC
Ferrari would love to have Mercs problems!

For the last few years that's been true but for most of the team's history they have had a clear driver hierarchy and it's been rather successful.

[truefan72]

For the last few years that's been true but for most of the team's history they have had a clear driver hierarchy and it's been rather successful.

the success came from schumacher, a superior car ( borderline illegal at times) and a lot of assistance by the FIA.
It really didn't matter who was in that other car. Ferrari were going to win the WDC and WCC anyway. the team orders were put in place to ensure MSC dominance and success and had little to do with the overall team success. As left up to their own, Barrichello would have had more wins and a much tighter challenge to MSC. Especially from 2002-2004, what was the point of team orders? that car was beyond dominant. Therefore I say team orders rarely work or are effective and if you look at how they are employed that strategy, then it was never about benefitting the team ,but more about benefitting the one driver. Even if issuing them were patently ridiculous and meaningless.

And with ferrari it stretched far beyond race strategy, it was also the effort devoted to each car, what parts were being given and pretty much having the #2 as a test rabbit, often compromising their own weekend and race just so it could benefit MSC. that level of slant will thankfully never happen again. And as much as i respect the quality of Alonso's driving and skill, he is probably the only guy left on the grid who would wish for that kind of scenario and setup within the team. He certainly did in 2007 and was provided that 2009-2010, and had and implicit understanding of that during his alonso/massa pairing When massa was clearly a #2 and at times got some mysterious pit calls etc, that only served to help alonso and not maximizing the team points. Now vettel enjoyed those kind of benefits too for a number of years, but in a more subtle way.

Late in a season with no chance of success and a championship on the line for your teammate, then I can certainly see teams employing a few strategic calls, etc, which a teammate most often is more than happy to oblige. But i remember MSC not helping out irvine whatsoever, because he wanted to be the first to win the wDC with ferrari in that era, even if it meant compromising the team and teammate.

I for one hate team orders, and they should not be part of the sport. like i said if asked to help a teammate out here and there, then ok, but it should not be an order. And it is funny how only F1 teams think that it is a teamsport, when really it is an individual sport with 2 cars for each participating team. I partly blame it on the entire payout structure of F! which should be geared towards driver performance than team performance. By that same matrix, the top teams will still get most of the prize money and any kind of benefit from finishing higher than rivals, but the actually tethering of the cash windfall to the overall team performance is rather foolish. Establish a proper revenue sharing system and focus more on the drivers championship. That is what most people watch it for.

[Bagwan]

Ferrari did everything they could , in those Shoe years , to win .
They did not relent until they had it won , and Rubens , despite being derided constantly , should instead be lauded for his loyalty to the team , at least when he wasn't whining about it .

They took their best shot , which they felt was with a one-two scenario .
They were ruthless , and took a lot of stick as such , but they were very successful .

It looks cruel to most people , but that true loyalty and self-sacrifice just isn't lauded in today's society .
But then , there wasn't necessarily a lot of real "sacrifice" in Hamilton letting his team mate by , as there would still have been a battle at the end .

Lewis did manage to keep Nico well behind , but he would have likely been better off to have managed his tires instead . He might have had a chance against both Alonso and Ricciardo .
If he got them between himself and Nico , they could have mounted most of his defense for the win .

That's the scenario I was hoping for in those last few laps .

[Hawkmoon]

the success came from schumacher, a superior car ( borderline illegal at times) and a lot of assistance by the FIA.

It goes beyond the Schumacher era. Villeneuve was told to hold station behind Scheckter at Monza in '79 because Scheckter was the team's number one. Collins gave up his car so Fangio could win the title in '56 because the Argentinian was number 1. Driver hierarchies are a part of F1's DNA and Ferrari have embraced that method more than most teams.

It really didn't matter who was in that other car. Ferrari were going to win the WDC and WCC anyway. the team orders were put in place to ensure MSC dominance and success and had little to do with the overall team success. As left up to their own, Barrichello would have had more wins and a much tighter challenge to MSC. Especially from 2002-2004, what was the point of team orders? that car was beyond dominant. Therefore I say team orders rarely work or are effective and if you look at how they are employed that strategy, then it was never about benefitting the team ,but more about benefitting the one driver. Even if issuing them were patently ridiculous and meaningless.

Ferrari felt the best way to win was to backup Schumacher with a 'lesser' driver. The results speak for themselves.

And with ferrari it stretched far beyond race strategy, it was also the effort devoted to each car, what parts were being given and pretty much having the #2 as a test rabbit, often compromising their own weekend and race just so it could benefit MSC. that level of slant will thankfully never happen again. And as much as i respect the quality of Alonso's driving and skill, he is probably the only guy left on the grid who would wish for that kind of scenario and setup within the team. He certainly did in 2007 and was provided that 2009-2010, and had and implicit understanding of that during his alonso/massa pairing When massa was clearly a #2 and at times got some mysterious pit calls etc, that only served to help alonso and not maximizing the team points. Now vettel enjoyed those kind of benefits too for a number of years, but in a more subtle way.

Late in a season with no chance of success and a championship on the line for your teammate, then I can certainly see teams employing a few strategic calls, etc, which a teammate most often is more than happy to oblige. But i remember MSC not helping out irvine whatsoever, because he wanted to be the first to win the wDC with ferrari in that era, even if it meant compromising the team and teammate.

Schumacher came back from injury in Malaysia in '99 and put it on pole by almost a second. He then let Irvine past in the early laps and proceeded to make life hell for Coulthard who was third. After the pit stops Schumacher was again ahead of Irvine and again let him past. Irvine won. How is that not helping Irvine whatsoever?

I for one hate team orders, and they should not be part of the sport. like i said if asked to help a teammate out here and there, then ok, but it should not be an order. And it is funny how only F1 teams think that it is a teamsport, when really it is an individual sport with 2 cars for each participating team. I partly blame it on the entire payout structure of F! which should be geared towards driver performance than team performance. By that same matrix, the top teams will still get most of the prize money and any kind of benefit from finishing higher than rivals, but the actually tethering of the cash windfall to the overall team performance is rather foolish. Establish a proper revenue sharing system and focus more on the drivers championship. That is what most people watch it for.

I have no problems with team orders and I think F1 is a team sport. Golf is an individual sport. F1 takes hundreds of people behind the scenes and dozens on race day to achieve success. It's the very definition of a team sport.

[Doc Austin]

I just wish the teams were honest about it and were not telling us how the drivers were allowed to race while privately telling one to move over for the other.

There was a time team orders were specifically banned. I remember when Coulthard moved over for Mika at Australia one year the FIA was ready for a tribunal, but it was diffused by the drivers saying it was an agreement between the two men and the team had nothing to do with it.

If one of your drivers is a not in the championship hunt and the other is, I believe the low man's main job should be to get out of his teammate's way and the race the hell out of everyone else,

Either have team orders or don't. Just stop jacking us around.