Team orders at Ferrari

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

There is nothing wrong with this.

If you or I were to disobey an order from the boss, we should expect to be no longer employed.

Of course, there are times when to disobey is the correct thing to do, even if employment termination is the result. That is a matter for the conscience.

But Mr Barrichello did not disobey, he chose to keep his job, so his conscience cannot have been too troubled by the order.

---

Well, at least you have accepted that team orders were employed now.

I have a question for you Mr B. Why did Ferrari make it so obvious in your opinion that Rubens was to move over? Lets leave the inflammatory bits out about better liars etc and look at the mess they dropped themselves in.

As a Ferrari fan, didn't you cringe? We all accept (I hope) that team orders play some part in the sport to a greater or lesser degree. Some teams will have a blatant #1 and #2 driver, some will try to favour a driver and some will let their drivers duke it out as long as they don't take each other off. But, I believe they all use team orders to some degree. Do you concur?

Personally, I think Ferrari scored a bit of an own goal. The team tried to get Alonso in the lead before this and Rob may have been a bit peeved at having to "order" his driver out of the way. Perhaps he was making a point to the team but didn't realise it would have such implications?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

Please read more carefully.

---

I did; and you were objecting that it was acceptable that McLaren were better liars. Correct??

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skc

Well, at least you have accepted that team orders were employed now.

---

I have never said they were not in Austria. You must have misunderstood.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skc

I have a question for you Mr B. Why did Ferrari make it so obvious in your opinion that Rubens was to move over?

---

Why shouldn't they? It was not illegal, so nothing to hide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skc

As a Ferrari fan, didn't you cringe?

---

No, as I have been watching and understanding Formula One long enough to know that team-orders were part of racing.

The aim of Ferrari, as I expect with every team, is to win championships as effieciently as possible.

That is what they were doing in Austria, so no reason to cringe.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

I did; and you were objecting that it was acceptable that McLaren were better liars. Correct??

---

No. It was not my assertion that Mclaren were better liars. That was the assertion of Mr Henners88.

I was objecting that, in his opinion, being a better liar was more acceptable.

I find that attitude very strange. Certainly, it is not something to be pleased about.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by skc

But, I believe they all use team orders to some degree. Do you concur?

---

No, as an order is an instruction. It has to be proven that a driver was given an order.

Until then, with definitive proof that an order was given, then a team cannot be said to have given an order.

Nowhere at Hockenheim did you hear a direct instruction given. Ergo, no team order.

A driver can understand that the team is more important than the individual without being ordered that it is so.

An expectation by the team of a certain attitude and a certain behaviour is not the same as an instruction to do something.

It is important to remember this as a legal argument, as it will be decided, like most things in Formula One, by lawyers and not by self-appointed fans spokesmen such as Mr Henners88.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

No, as an order is an instruction. It has to be proven that a driver was given an order.

Until then, with definitive proof that an order was given, then a team cannot be said to have given an order.

Nowhere at Hockenheim did you hear a direct instruction given. Ergo, no team order.

A driver can understand that the team is more important than the individual without being ordered that it is so.

An expectation by the team of a certain attitude and a certain behaviour is not the same as an instruction to do something.

It is important to remember this as a legal argument, as it will be decided, like most things in Formula One, by lawyers and not by self-appointed fans spokesmen such as Mr Henners88.

---

You are correct. Nowhere did Ferrari directly order Massa to allow Alonso to pass. We will have to await the WMSC hearing to see whether Ferrari has anything to answer for. However, Massa's chief engineer will be asked to explain why he repeatedly told Massa that Alonso, who was behind him, was faster; and then asking Massa if he understood. His explanation will be most interesting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

I have never said they were not in Austria. You must have misunderstood.

---

I think I must have done. I don't recall you ever mentioning Austria specifically. I was under the assumption we were talking about the current situation.

Oh well, I was hoping we could open the conversation up a little but it seems we are stuck in a hole still.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

To Alonso maybe.
Vettel never managed to catch Felipe once they were in direct competition for 2nd place.
But hey, don't let the facts stand in your own reality's way.

---

You cover your bases. Who would've known Massa would hold off Vettel? (Perhaps Vettel settled for third or can Vettel overtake when it counts most?)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Load of BS.
The money is paid by FOM in function of the constructors championship standings, most teams only care about the WCC.

---

LOL

Most teams care about the WCC because so they can better themselves for WDC.

When you're one of the apex teams, winning races, WDC is the goal.

Were Ferrari happy winning the WCC in 1999 as consolation prize? Not as happy at winning the WDC, that's for damn sure.

The only reason you can say that Ferrari screwed up here is that they did not have complete control over all thier employees .

Alonso was faster at that moment , and in fact , after Felipe had already received two transmissions about his team-mate being faster , Fernando dropped back and took back the gap easily , to demonstrate the fact .

Ferrari have no employees at Red Bull , so , could not have had any way to tell if Vettle was able to make a late race charge .

The fact that his team had to mention three times that his team-mate was faster shows how fragile Felipe is in his position .
It also shows he's loved at Ferrari , but , with this insolence , the love will not last .

Rubens knew he would no longer be employed by the reds if he didn't move over for Mike in Austria .
And , even Mike knew he had been given a gift , as it was his supposedly making a mockery of pushing Rubens up to the top step that garnered his team the penalty in the end , not the order itself .

But , as here , instead of lauding Rubens in the case , as they should Felipe , for being the dutiful number two , as putting him up the step does , the crowd tore into Michael and Ferrari , for being cruel .
Simply , as in Felipe's case here , Ferrari put the eggs in the basket of the one who can win the title .


Ferrari did not give a team order .
They told the driver that he drives for a team .
That is what they told him right after he signed his name on the contract .

Felipe gets lots of instructions from his team , and lots more from his race engineer .
I can't imagine his contract says that he gets to pick and choose which instructions he will follow .

Now , to be fair , Massa did move over .
But , he did it in such a way that cost his team $100,000.00 and the possibility of more sanction in future .


Had Felipe said " Because my team-mate was much faster , and I didn't want to risk either of our cars , I didn't make it too hard for him . The result for the team were most important , and we didn't know how much more that Sebastian had for the end of the race ." , we might have looked at this as a good team effort , and the best he could achieve that day .

That's an honourable way to take the fact that you're slower and turn it into a positive .

If Felipe was faster in that moment , he might have had something to whine about .
But he wasn't , end of story .
He turned into "Felipe-baby" .

It is important to remember that the rules which apply here are those implemented and policed by the FIA. The FIA stated that a breach of Article 39.1, which bans team orders, and 151c, which relates to bringing the sport into disrepute, had been committed and Ferrari were fined $100,000 and referred to the WMSC.

Ferrari are not appealing that outcome.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wedge

You cover your bases. Who would've known Massa would hold off Vettel? (Perhaps Vettel settled for third or can Vettel overtake when it counts most?)
:D
.

---

Or maybe Smedley forgot to tell Massa that Vettel was behind him and Vettel was faster. :p : :D :rotflmao:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ioan

Load of BS.
The money is paid by FOM in function of the constructors championship standings, most teams only care about the WCC.

---

Thanks for the kind words... always a gentleman

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by wedge

Were Ferrari happy winning the WCC in 1999 as consolation prize? Not as happy at winning the WDC, that's for damn sure.

---

I'm pretty sure Ioan was delighted at the end of that season :laugh:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

It is important to remember that the rules which apply here are those implemented and policed by the FIA. The FIA stated that a breach of Article 39.1, which bans team orders, and 151c, which relates to bringing the sport into disrepute, had been committed and Ferrari were fined $100,000 and referred to the WMSC.

Ferrari are not appealing that outcome.

---

Yes they are, but not to the stewards.

"As for the Stewards' decision, given after the race, in the interests of the sport, we have decided not to go through a procedure of appealing against it, confident that the World Council will know how to evaluate the overall facts correctly,"

http://en.espnf1.com/ferrari/motorsp...ory/24408.html

You do not have to appeal to the stewards when the matter is referred to the WMSC, as the WMSC has the power to overturn a stewards decision.

They are going to the WMSC confident that the decision will be overturned, so no need to appeal at a lower level.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

You do not have to appeal to the stewards when the matter is referred to the WMSC, as the WMSC has the power to overturn a stewards decision.

---

It may have the power to do so but it's been suggested that that the hearing is "is to consider whether Ferrari should face further sanctions for the team orders controversy."

Despite Ferrari's confidence, the wording of the FIA statement ("Fine $100,000. The case will also be referred to the FIA World Motorsport Council for further consideration.") suggests to me that anything coming out of the WMSC hearing will be in addition to the fine.

But, time will tell.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

Yes they are, but not to the stewards.

"As for the Stewards' decision, given after the race, in the interests of the sport, we have decided not to go through a procedure of appealing against it, confident that the World Council will know how to evaluate the overall facts correctly,"

http://en.espnf1.com/ferrari/motorsp...ory/24408.html

You do not have to appeal to the stewards when the matter is referred to the WMSC, as the WMSC has the power to overturn a stewards decision.

They are going to the WMSC confident that the decision will be overturned, so no need to appeal at a lower level.

---

I'm sorry but playing Devils Advocate, where do Ferrari mention that they expect the decision to be overturned?

They have said they are confident that the WMSC will be able to evaluate the facts correctly but let us not forget that the Stewards referred this case, not Ferrari.

I think it very unlikely the WMSC will overturn the decision and doubt Ferrari even offer a defense. However, they may find that no further punishment is needed which would confirm the original judgement.

At least a line can be drawn under the issue and Ferrari fans accept the judgement that Ferrari themselves are confident in.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

If you are naive enough to think that team orders no longer exist and this incident with Ferrari is a simple misunderstanding, then you are welcome to your view, but please don't suggest my attitude is disgusting, because it insults peoples intelligence.

---

Please do not insult peoples intelligence yourself by claiming things you cannot prove.

Please do not insult peoples intelligence by claiming that the Ferrari President made an admission of using Team Orders when he did not.

It is not right and it is not true that he did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Can you prove it was not team orders? The flipside of this arguement is just as valid.

---

Nobody at Ferrari mentioned team orders. Trying to prove something that did not happen is ridiculous.

Alonso was quicker and Massa should have moved over without a song and dance - well before "the incident". The Ferrari team was concerned that there would be a collision and this HAS occurred between these drivers this season.

Those like yourself that object to rough defense tactics such as used by Schumi now think that Alonso and Massa ought to have fought it out? This is a contradiction.

Those who are against Schumi should be agreeable that when it is a team the slower driver in front must be a perfrct gentleman and allow the quicker driver through.

Why? Because based on the history, Silverstone being just one example from this season, the odds that Alonso and Massa would collide are pretty high.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

Please do not insult peoples intelligence yourself by claiming things you cannot prove.

Please do not insult peoples intelligence by claiming that the Ferrari President made an admission of using Team Orders when he did not.

It is not right and it is not true that he did.

---

This is not an Italian court. There were team orders, other teams have had those in the past and will have in the future.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

Nowhere at Hockenheim did you hear a direct instruction given...

---

That's true. Rob did not say "this is a team order, let Fernando through". You're quite correct.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

...Ergo, no team order.

---

Article 39.1 does not define in what form a "team order" must be given to be in breach of the rules; all it says is "team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited." The stewards clearly interpreted the way the "information" was given to Felipe, and the resulting switch in positions between team-mates, as a team order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Can you prove it was not team orders? The flipside of this arguement is just as valid.

---

This so reminds me of Tony Hancok's "Twelve Angry Men" :laugh:

[youtube]E6MsXBGHolQ[/youtube]

Quote:

---

"Take the case of Doubting Thomas, who was sent to Coventry for looking through a keyhole at Lady Godiva. Can anybody prove he was looking at her? Can anybody prove it was he who shouted out: "get your hair cut"? Of course not, this is sheer supposition! Does Magna Carta mean nothing to you? Did she die in vain? Brave Hungarian peasant girl who forced King John to sign the pledge at Runnymede and close the boozers at half past ten! Is all this to be forgotten?"

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Those who are against Schumi should be agreeable that when it is a team the slower driver in front must be a perfect gentleman and allow the quicker driver through.

.

---

I fully agree with this attitude, and the Saint aught to be congratulated for his saintly reasoning, God bless him. Massa should have moved over in a gentlemanly fashion to allow Vettel to pass.

The outcome of the meeting could be that Ferrari is further sanctioned .

But , the result of sanctioning would put the lunacy of these rules to the forefront .
There is a clear understanding that team orders exist .
There is a rule that bans them .

The words that came from Smedley were carefully phrased to omit any actual order , as per the requirement to mask any instruction that might be perceived as such , but due to "the way" it was delivered , it was seen as an order .

Ok , then , let's get on with picking stewards for the upcoming races .
We'll need , now , to include the requirement to be experts in linguistics , so that none of those guys intimates something illegal was going on by sliding that inflection around , willy-nilly .
And , let's not forget that a lot of those guys don't have english as a first language , so we'll need someone fluent with all the grid talkers .


The rule banning team orders is an insult to our collective intelligence .

We know they exist .
The FIA knows they exist .
The teams know they exist .

It is currently down to "the way" the order is given .

Smedley and Massa , in the end , may turn out to be heroes , as it may be that this situation is what is needed to bring the issue to the table at the WMSC hearing , to finally end this mess .
The best result from an inquiry would be to have the ban on team orders lifted , and return the pride to the dutiful number two .


Many laud Gilles as one of the best that the sport has ever seen , and never have I ever seen him slagged for being a number two .
Many , in fact , believe that it was Pironi's pass , when he was expected to play that role that triggered Gilles's death , distracted by the betrayal of his friend and team-mate .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Call me old fashioned but I like to see racing. Not every tussle ontrack results in one driver forcing the other either into a wall or onto the grass at high speed and Mclaren showed in Turkey that teammates can battle without unnecessary blocking. There have been instances in races where Button has been faster than Hamilton and vice versa and I am yet to see calls for one to let the other through. I could understand it if a teammate felt obliged to let the other through in the closing stages of the championship where he has no chance of staying in contention, but to see these kind of tactics at the half way stage is disappointing IMO.

The only contradiction here my friend is from your own post. First you say the idea of team orders is ridiculous, and then you say they were concerned there would be a collision between the two? So what was the outcome of this concern, suggesting to Felipe that Fernando was quicker, nudge, nudge, wink, wink?? They were found provisionally guilty of using team orders and fined $100,000. The hearing next month will decide if further action is needed. Whatever the outcome it will surely be interesting reading on here thats for sure. If the decision is overturned (doubtful) there will be gloating and the confidence in the FIA will be restored from certain fans, and if the points are docked there will be calls that its a conspiracy and the world is against Ferrari. Lets wait and see and in the mean time, I think I'll agree to disagree on this one. ;)

---

I think we all like racing - but the current drivers at Ferrari and Red Bull are not Jenson and Lewis and they do not have the very positive influence of someone like Martin Whitmarsh.

Definitely, anyone knowing Jense's attitude in racing realizes that while he is an aggressive driver he always considers the car first and THINKS. There were examples last season that resulted in criticism - misguided.

Someone like Jense is a positive influence on Hamilton who is much less experenced and takes more risks.

In the case of Ferrari and Red Bull I think team orders are essential because at least one driver in the team has shown an inability to respect his teammate.

And even at Mclaren if you recall after I think Turkey [?] when Lewis and Jense passed each other - it was a VERY new experience for Lewis. He is still getting used to the idea that his teammate is not someone that will not be totally fair and clean.

I predict that Jense and Lewis will have positive longer term influences on each other compared to the others and that they will become as potent a team as Lauda and Prost at Mclaren.

Whitmarsh has chosen extremely well. They are both capable of supporting each other to second world titles.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Bagwan

The outcome of the meeting could be that Ferrari is further sanctioned .

But , the result of sanctioning would put the lunacy of these rules to the forefront .
There is a clear understanding that team orders exist .
There is a rule that bans them .

The words that came from Smedley were carefully phrased to omit any actual order , as per the requirement to mask any instruction that might be perceived as such , but due to "the way" it was delivered , it was seen as an order .

Ok , then , let's get on with picking stewards for the upcoming races .
We'll need , now , to include the requirement to be experts in linguistics , so that none of those guys intimates something illegal was going on by sliding that inflection around , willy-nilly .
And , let's not forget that a lot of those guys don't have english as a first language , so we'll need someone fluent with all the grid talkers .


The rule banning team orders is an insult to our collective intelligence .

We know they exist .
The FIA knows they exist .
The teams know they exist .

It is currently down to "the way" the order is given .

Smedley and Massa , in the end , may turn out to be heroes , as it may be that this situation is what is needed to bring the issue to the table at the WMSC hearing , to finally end this mess .
The best result from an inquiry would be to have the ban on team orders lifted , and return the pride to the dutiful number two .


Many laud Gilles as one of the best that the sport has ever seen , and never have I ever seen him slagged for being a number two .
Many , in fact , believe that it was Pironi's pass , when he was expected to play that role that triggered Gilles's death , distracted by the betrayal of his friend and team-mate .

---

To blame Pironi for Gilles death is totally to misuderstand the situation and ridiculous. The problem is that Gilles was killed and it was so soon afterwards for the issue to be cleared.

The issue at Hockenheim is over and anything affecting that result is likely to start the FOTA vs FIA war all over again. Nobody wants that and Bernie as well as Todt will not permit it. It is not worth it and Ferrari were the only ones affected.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

I fully agree with this attitude, and the Saint aught to be congratulated for his saintly reasoning, God bless him. Massa should have moved over in a gentlemanly fashion to allow Vettel to pass.

---

... and add to that the fact the Schumacher was completely in the right to push Rubens to the concrete wall and you have the two faces of the argument, both stated by the same forum member! :laugh:

Oh yeah, and Heikki should have moved to avoid Webber running into the back of him also. The nerve of some drivers trying to make a pass easy!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

... and add to that the fact the Schumacher was completely in the right to push Rubens to the concrete wall and you have the two faces of the argument, both stated by the same forum member! :laugh:

Oh yeah, and Heikki should have moved to avoid Webber running into the back of him also. The nerve of some drivers trying to make a pass easy!

---

Schumi did not push Rubens to the concrete wall - he defended his position and moved away when Rubens did not back-off.

Rubens then lunged at Schumi who had to move as well - no crying from Schumi - but then Rubens is no Schumacher.

He is an excellent number TWO driver at BEST. Even at Brawn did he finish the championship in second place? No. He was beaten by Vettel.

It was Kovaleinen's moving around that confused Webber and triggered the accident. Kovaleinen is not a consistent driver. He does not hold his line well and it was this weakness commented on by Jenson Button in 2009 that led the Brit to say if Kovaleinen disciplined himself he could actually win races.

Its too late now because Kovaleinen had chances with top teams. If Lotus even gets a podium in the next FIVE years it is going to be amazing.

There really is no point for new teams to enter the sport because they are going to have to get used to being the teams that make up the numbers for YEARS to come.

Just look at Force India - it required a direct partnership with Mclaren for them to achive a podium. That is now gone and together with losing key personnel their prospects for 2011 are not great at all.

Whatever is left of Sutil's reputation - he is rather erratic - will further be tarnished in 2011 along Force India's.

But whichever way, they will survive and even Chandok may yet get that opportunity because Bernie wants an Indian team and an Indian driver to race in the first Indian Grand Prix.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by airshifter

... and add to that the fact the Schumacher was completely in the right to push Rubens to the concrete wall and you have the two faces of the argument, both stated by the same forum member! :laugh:

Oh yeah, and Heikki should have moved to avoid Webber running into the back of him also. The nerve of some drivers trying to make a pass easy!

---

Well, that's one of the benefits of being canonised by the Vatican.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Schumi did not push Rubens to the concrete wall - he defended his position and moved away when Rubens did not back-off.

Rubens then lunged at Schumi who had to move as well - no crying from Schumi - but then Rubens is no Schumacher.

.

---

Oh yea! I almost forgot - they also are priviledged to re-write history. ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Red Bull and Mclaren are just more exciting to watch from now on because they are fighting each other from within and are not playing support roles. :)

---

That is extraordinarily speculative and also not to the point. How many times has Fred been right behind Massa this season running 1, 2? The reality is Massa has been behind Fred in most races.
Just for the sake of argument let’s say this trend continues. Let us also assume that FM is still driving his fastest, and on the off chance Ferrari are still in the fight for the titles. What would be so unexciting about Alonso and Massa both putting a beat-down on the runners that they are (as a team trying to overtake)? The likelihood of Ferrari racing excitement suffering because one pilot has a distinct advantage (regardless of how he got it) is absurd.

Plus it will be interesting to see how hard the RB's and McL's fight each other in the races going forward
A very silly, biased and senseless point born out of tabloid frenzy only meant to insight "The Contras", also known as "The Anglo Mafia"!
From this point forward all team strategy will add an extra later of interest to the championship! :s ailor:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

I'm sure both Mclaren drivers learn alot from each other. I'm pretty sure Jenson is studying Lewis to find out why he is faster, and how Lewis has adapted his driving style over the past two season's to eradicate the myth that he is too hard on his tyres etc. Likewise Lewis is probably finding positives in Jenson's approach. I don't think Turkey was the first time Lewis experienced a teammate who was not totally clean and fair unless we all have very short memories. Lewis had none other than Fernando Alonso as his teammate in his debut season, and one striking incident which comes to mind is Spa 2007 when Alonso pushed him wide just after La Source. Canada of that year also saw a first corner duel between teammates which could have ended in tears.

Anyway, Ferrari IMO have chosen one driver to contest for this years championship and that happens to be their $68m investment. I do agree with one of your points St.D and that is the carefull management at Mclaren is not something Ferrari could adopt and something they have never mastered. They are a one car team in terms of fighting for the WDC, and I am not criticizing that method, its their choice. Red Bull and Mclaren are just more exciting to watch from now on because they are fighting each other from within and are not playing support roles. :)

---

Button is giving Hamilton a good run for his money :laugh: . What team orders do you need at McLaren when one driver is consistently slower than the other? And the Red Bull internal fight is quite clean and fair with all the "save fuel" BS and the wing story... and the sudden lack of pace of Webber in Hungary... Don't you find it interesting how all of a sudden Webber is HALF A SECOND slower than his team mate?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

Well, that's one of the benefits of being canonised by the Vatican.

---

If I were an Israeli with a screen name that is also the name of a turn at Monaco, I would find such comments very ignorant as Jews do not recognize the sanctity of Catholic historical figures. :bounce: :s mokin:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eu

Button is giving Hamilton a good run for his money :laugh: . What team orders do you need at McLaren when one driver is consistently slower than the other? And the Red Bull internal fight is quite clean and fair with all the "save fuel" BS and the wing story... and the sudden lack of pace of Webber in Hungary... Don't you find it interesting how all of a sudden Webber is HALF A SECOND slower than his team mate?

---

I suggest you take a long look at consistent RACE TIMES before making such a facile statment regarding Hamilton and Jense.

For such a supposedly quick driver a scant handful of points at this stage of the championship and an equal number of wins is definitely NOT what the Hamilton champions were crowing about prior to the start of the 2010 season.

As a RACE driver - I''ll take Jernse any day and the more uncertain and difficult the conditions - well, Jenson is in his element!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Valve Bounce

Oh yea! I almost forgot - they also are priviledged to re-write history. ;)

---

Actually - Schumi MADE history - those such as Pedi-Chanello follow in his wheel tracks.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Actually - Schumi MADE history - those such as Pedi-Chanello follow in his wheel tracks.

---

And I am sure you have the holiest of intents in your re-writing of his exploits.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

I suggest you take a long look at consistent RACE TIMES before making such a facile statment regarding Hamilton and Jense.

For such a supposedly quick driver a scant handful of points at this stage of the championship and an equal number of wins is definitely NOT what the Hamilton champions were crowing about prior to the start of the 2010 season.

As a RACE driver - I''ll take Jernse any day and the more uncertain and difficult the conditions - well, Jenson is in his element!

---

Ok, don't yell at me. You can have him. Two lucky wins in changing weather and he's the master of difficult conditions. I take a good look at race times and races results and tables and I see a driver that is regularly slower than his team mate.... let's not take a look in thier careers so far

When McLaren signed Button I thought McLaren were building a dream team there and I still do. A very young, fast and improving first driver to fight for the wdc and a perfect #2 driver to gather more points for the wcc. What's better than having a #2 driver that doesn't know it? Well, maybe a driver that is happy to be just a sidekick... but those are not so many

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Actually - Schumi MADE history - those such as Pedi-Chanello follow in his wheel tracks.

---

Rubens's nick name is actually "Rubinho" ?

I just thought I'd point that out for you .

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Can you prove it was not team orders? The flipside of this arguement is just as valid.

---

A ridiculous question, and one which shows a total lack of knowledge.

It is the accuser who must prove the accusation. Ferrari do not need to prove anything. That is a fundamental principle of justice.

There was no instruction, no order, that is all the proof an intelligent mind requires.

"Fernando is faster than you, do you understand this message" contains no instruction, no order.

There is my proof.

For about the thirtieth time, where is your proof? Please, no untruths...pure proof per favore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by pallone col bracciale

A ridiculous question...

---

Given that Ferrari have been found guilty, fined $100,000, and referred to the WMSC for breaching the rule relating to team orders and for bringing the sport into disrepute it is a perfectly reasonable question IMHO. The short answer is no, you cannot prove beyond question that it was not team orders.

That said, it cannot be proven beyond question that it was team orders!

The specific rule relating to team orders does not define either what a team order is, nor what form a team order can take, for it to be seen as breaching Article 39,1. It has been left for the FIA & their stewards to interpret the rule and clearly the stewards interpreted "Fernando. Is. Faster. Than You. Do. You. Understand. This. Message." as being a team order.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by henners88

Race times show that Jenson matches Lewis but not consistently. You are right I would have liked to have seen more wins from Lewis so far but its also pleasing when we look at the results and see that in the 9 races they have both finished, Lewis has soundly beaten Jenson 7 times. I also think you are deliberately choosing to ignore the technical advantage one team in particular has over the Mclaren up to this point, don't you think? ;)

If we really want to sound off the hooters and claim Jenson is better in the wet, we can ignore races like Fuji '07, Monaco '08, Silverstone '08, Spa '08 and that just makes your arguement even stronger. Laters. :p

---

Well after the last race I would say Jenson has much more experience.... running in the middle of the pack. If not for the two car failures for Lewis there would be a lot more points between the two drivers already.

On the up side, if it continues Lewis will already be able to say he has beaten two WDCs when put in the same cars.