Team orders at Ferrari

[Big Ben]

Schumacher agrees ‘100%’ with Ferrari

he would look a hypocrite if he did not agree

I don't like the guy but all my respect for not being a hypocrite about it... like Horner, Withmarsh and some fanboys are...

[Dave B]

And I have said this before - simply because a rule or regulation exists, it does not mean it is just and that it ought to be adhered to.

Eh? I really do fear for my own sanity sometimes, reading this forum. :\

So presumably you'd have no problem if a team turned up in Hungary with a 3-litre turbocharged engine?

The teams have an input on the rulemaking process, and yes maybe one could argue that not every rule in the FIA's rulebook is perfect. But once you pay your entry fee and sign on the dotted line, you agree to conduct yourself by those rules whether you like them or not.

You simply cannot have teams deciding which rules they wish to adhere to - that would be anarchy.

[Big Ben]

Eh? I really do fear for my own sanity sometimes, reading this forum. :\

So presumably you'd have no problem if a team turned up in Hungary with a 3-litre turbocharged engine?

The teams have an input on the rulemaking process, and yes maybe one could argue that not every rule in the FIA's rulebook is perfect. But once you pay your entry fee and sign on the dotted line, you agree to conduct yourself by those rules whether you like them or not.

You simply cannot have teams deciding which rules they wish to adhere to - that would be anarchy.

well.. you're wrong. Hamilton proved you should break the rules where the penalty doesn't fit the crime.

[Dave B]

By the way, do these words from Luca di Montezemolo basically admit race-fixing? Ferrari are going to have a tough time arguing to the WMSC that they were innocent after their president's latest outburst:

"I simply reaffirm what I have always maintained, which is that our drivers are very well aware, and it is something they have to stick to, that if one races for Ferrari, then the interests of the team come before those of the individual.

"In any case, these things have happened since the days of Nuvolari and I experienced it myself when I was Sporting Director, in the days of Niki Lauda and not just then."

Source: http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/85587

[Dave B]

well.. you're wrong. Hamilton proved you should break the rules where the penalty doesn't fit the crime.

Are you talking about overtaking the safety car? That was against the rules, and rightly he was punished for it. As it happens the timing meant he escaped lightly, but nevertheless he broke a rule and was punished.

Our friend is arguing that you can arbitrarily pick and choose which rules you obey, provided you think the rule is unjust. Down that path madness lies.

[Dave B]

Anyway, all this "interests of the team" guff from Luca. How many points do you score for a 1-2 as opposed to a 2-1?

[pino]

Dave just a question for you...what's the difference between what happent on Sunday and what happent in Hockenheim in 2008 between Lewis and Kovalainen ?

[Hawkmoon]

Dave just a question for you...what's the difference between what happent on Sunday and what happent in Hockenheim in 2008 between Lewis and Kovalainen ?

I can answer that for you. Kovalainen wasn't as pissed off as Massa was. Oh, and $100,000.

[Dave B]

Dave just a question for you...what's the difference between what happent on Sunday and what happent in Hockenheim in 2008 between Lewis and Kovalainen ?

Simple. Lewis was being held up by a team mate who would only go on to finish 5th. Heikki knew that if he let Lewis go, the Englishman had a chance to hunt down the guys in front and gain more points for both himself and the team. Hamilton went on to win the race, while Heikki's P5 was evidence that he didn't have the pace of his team mate.

After the race there was no protest, and no investigation. Other teams, and the stewards, did not believe there was a case to answer. There was no evidence ever put forward that it was anything other than Heikki's decision.

When Massa let Alonso past they were 1st and 2nd. They literally could not improve on this, so any suggestion that it was for the good of the team is a smokescreen by Luca di Montezemolo. If they'd even been 2nd and 3rd, and Alonso could have been freed up to fight for the win, I'd have no problem with their move.

[Retro Formula 1]

Dave just a question for you...what's the difference between what happent on Sunday and what happent in Hockenheim in 2008 between Lewis and Kovalainen ?

Pino

I have no doubt that Heikki made a bit of room for Lewis on that day. Now, it might have been that the team had a word with him before the race and said "don't hold Lewis up" or it might be that decided to let his team mate past as he knew it would disadvantage them both if he tried to hold onto it.

The fact is that nobody came on the radio moaning about a rediculous situation and the team didn't clearly give as close to a direct order as is possible.

Team orders are something that will subtly happen in the background. What we saw on Sunday was the sport being brought into disrepute again and the worlds media exposing it as a sham.

As I have said previously, it is not just breaking the rules of the sport but I think is a criminal act as well.