Team orders at Ferrari

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

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? :p

---

Indeed - Luca's recent comments on the web site are digging a nice hole, showing up the comments made by certain team members immediately after the race that it was not a team order.

Everyone who has claimed that the no team orders rule is stoopid is correct. It is a stoopid rule in the way it is written.

The rule needs to be either removed, or something better put in place to ensure that, while teammates still both have mathemetical chances at the title, the team cannot influence the result. If evidence can be shown that the driver alone used his discretion, then so be it.

The rule as it stands was put in place to stop the blatant race manipulation that we saw on Sunday and in 2002 at both Indy and Austria.

The fact that Ferrari have done it again, is what has got up so many peoples noses.

A race should be a race. Let the better driver win by proving he is the better driver.

Alonso could have passed Massa, if he had remained behind Massa in the fast corner, and then drafted by up to the braking point at the next corner.

But, he clearly lacks either racecraft or the mental ability to be patient for the right moment.

Now, when teammates work together for the team because one no longer has a mathematical chance for the WDC, then history has shown that the rulemakers will make exceptions. And as intelligent people, the viewer can understand the process and the rationale.

But the events of Hockenhein 2010 were shameful. They did not need to be, and that is the point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Dave Brockman

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.

---

Just like Alonso was being held by a driver that was only x on the wdc table. I know you know this but I'm going to say it anyway: despite having a wcc teams care more about one of their driver getting the wdc.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by eu

Just like Alonso was being held by a driver that was only x on the wdc table. I know you know this but I'm going to say it anyway: despite having a wcc teams care more about one of their driver getting the wdc.

---

Well, mathematically both drivers had a chance at winning the WDC. It's not as if Alonso was 100 points ahead, and it was impossible for Massa to win the championship.

Say what you will about Mclaren, they did allow Button to make that risky move at turn 1 at Turkey, and then Hamilton to make that bonkers move a corner or two later. Red Bull also sat and saw their two drivers crash into each other and throw the race away. All Alonso did was have a big whinge to uncle Stefano after Massa blocked him, and Ferrari gave him his toy some 30 odd laps later. Blecch, hardly a racer. :down:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by SGWilko

Alonso could have passed Massa, if he had remained behind Massa in the fast corner, and then drafted by up to the braking point at the next corner.

But, he clearly lacks either racecraft or the mental ability to be patient for the right moment.

---

Or...he knew the call would come and he would be given the win.

I do wonder if there might be something in Massa & Alonso's contracts which said the team would put their efforts behind whoever was leading the championship at a certain point in the season. Perhaps that point was around the European/British GP's.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ArrowsFA1

Or...he knew the call would come and he would be given the win.

---

Interesting.

<unfounded conjecture> It would certainly make sense of Alonso's "this is ridiculous" radio call when he was following Massa, if he was expecting the Brazillian to jump out of the way. It could also explain the tone of Rob Smedley's message, if he was annoyed at having to remind Felipe-baby of his contractural obligations in front of the whole world.</unfounded conjecture>

Nurburgring 07 brought him up worthiness of experience. He only knew that Massa is a defensive driver. Team didn't call Alonso to get pass Massa or anything. In this critical point in the standing points all drivers are supposed to put aside their own interest to support whomever has bigger possibility challenging title. In many races Alonso let faster drivers to get pass him. Besides leading in points, the fact Alonso drove faster, there is no reason to call something into question whether or not he won the race on his own strength... ;)

Good news - Bernie supporting the elimination of team orders.

I'd say it is the beginning of the end of that stupid rule and Ferrari's proper actions on Sunday will have triggered it.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

Alonso was quicker - Smedley radioed Massa that he had almost 3 seconds over Alonso and that he had to push and keep that lead.

Massa failed and Alonso caught up.

Ferrari saw not only what happened to Red Bull recently but more so that each time Alonso HAS PASSED Massa on track it results in damage - such as the coming-together at Silverstone.

It was a wise and correct decision.

If people don't like this part of f1 then maybe they should watch soemthing else. ALL forms of motor racing employ team orders in one form or another, its always been that way and it is the proper way.

---

Incorrect. Massa was matching Alonso lap for lap. On sevral occassions Massa lost time badly during the race with traffic, with the one backmarker allowing Alonso to try and make a pass at Turns 6 & 7. I have the race on tape and watched it again last night. Massa had faster average lap times than Alonso up to the point that Alonso was let past.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 555-04Q2

Incorrect. Massa was matching Alonso lap for lap. On sevral occassions Massa lost time badly during the race with traffic, with the one backmarker allowing Alonso to try and make a pass at Turns 6 & 7. I have the race on tape and watched it again last night. Massa had faster average lap times than Alonso up to the point that Alonso was let past.

---

He was losing time - Alonso also had to move through traffic.

Massa's lead went from 3 seconds to gearbox close - that is SLOWER and Alonso passed him.

No matter how you wish to spin it - it is not possible for someone to be quicker AND be caught.

Just look and you will also see that Alonso's quickest lap on lap 66 and Massa's also on lap 66 was quicker than Massa.

But this is a technical matter - the point is moot in my view.

Even if Alonso was 10 seconds behind Massa - it is Ferrari's right and the proper traditon of motor racing always, that the number 2 driver [Massa] move aside for the number 1 driver [Alonso] at a team's instruction.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint Devote

I'd say it is the beginning of the end of that stupid rule and Ferrari's proper actions on Sunday will have triggered it.

---

If the team orders rule had not been in place on Sunday would F1 fans have been any happier with what Massa was told to do?

I suspect this might be the beginning of the end for article 39.1 of the F1 sporting regulations, but the rule was introduced for a reason.

How does F1 balance the wish of the teams to run their teams as they see fit with the public's wish not to see manipulated or staged results?