Team orders ban dropped from next season...

[pino]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/88645

[Zico]

Overdue Imo, it was an unrealistic and unenforcable rule.

[MrMetro]

Overdue Imo, it was an unrealistic and unenforcable rule.

Indeed

[ArrowsFA1]

Mmmmmm... :dozey:

Why do the FIA feel the need to add this:
The FIA said, however, that there would still be a rule to allow it to punish teams if it considers they had brought the sport into disrepute with their actions.

Team orders are now allowed. The article forbidding team orders (39.1) has been deleted from the rule book.

If a team use team orders now, how can that be seen as bringing the sport into disrepute :confused: :crazy:

[maximilian]

Mmmmmm... :dozey:

Why do the FIA feel the need to add this:

Team orders are now allowed. The article forbidding team orders (39.1) has been deleted from the rule book.

If a team use team orders now, how can that be seen as bringing the sport into disrepute :confused: :crazy:
That's just a catch-all allowing them to penalize teams other than Ferrari, if needed. :rolleyes:

The rule WAS enforceable, the FIA just chose not to really enforce it :p :

[I am evil Homer]

To avoid scenes like Austria i'd imagine where one car is obviously much faster and far ahead and lets the team mate through. Though how they draw the line on that is, as ever with the FIA, as clear as mud.

[Tazio]

:dozey:

Why do the FIA feel the need to add this:

Team orders are now allowed. The article forbidding team orders (39.1) has been deleted from the rule book.

If a team use team orders now, how can that be seen as bringing the sport into disrepute :confused: :crazy: Because the FIA seem to have a problem with disambigous rules? :crazy: ;)

[steveaki13]

I think its about time they scrapped the rule. be interesting to see if much changes.

[Bagwan]

Well , holey cow , they did it !

Thank you for revoking this silly rule , Mr. Todt . Thank you .

[ioan]

:down:
Well, Todt isn't just invisible as FIA president, he's downright in-existent.

Hate him or not Max had enough spine to dish out penalties to those who broke the rules, Todt will rather remove the rules than enforce them. :\

I guess this is because the cheaters lost even though they used team orders, now they can use them each and every race, let's see if RedBull can still beat them by playing fairly. :s

[nigelred5]

Good end to a stupid rule IMHO. This year proved that either/neither choice has the potential to yield unintended results.

[Koz]

Mmmmmm... :dozey:

Why do the FIA feel the need to add this:

Team orders are now allowed. The article forbidding team orders (39.1) has been deleted from the rule book.

If a team use team orders now, how can that be seen as bringing the sport into disrepute :confused: :crazy:

To avoid the crap that Flavio and Nelsinho pulled.

[Tazio]

To avoid the crap that Flavio, Nelsinho, and "the big bad boo man pulled". :eek: :eek:

Edited for accuracy :rolleyes: ;)

[Cooper_S]

The rule WAS enforceable, the FIA just chose not to really enforce it :p :

Slight correction, the rule was enforcable ONLY on a team being stupid enough to make it obvious, 99% of the time teams are far more subtle and without any proof (laywers tend to like little stuff like that) the FIA are powerless to act.

Good call rom the FIA... I wonder how Horner will play it next season now.

[Zico]

The FIA also said on Friday that all team radio communications will be made available to broadcasters from the 2012 season. Great for us, bad for the teams! And for PR as well, every petulant remark by every driver will be available to the media. Should make for some interesting debates on here.

I can imagine incidents like Alonso's outburst at Petrov being converted into ringtones globally :D

[markabilly]

I thought team orders were already permitted last season, one just had to pay a $100k fee to use them blantantly and nothing if they did them with a proper secret code......

Next year sounds like it will be really boring, with fewer and fewer controversies


opps no humor allowed in f1 forum....my apologies

[mstillhere]

Slight correction, the rule was enforcable ONLY on a team being stupid enough to make it obvious, 99% of the time teams are far more subtle and without any proof (laywers tend to like little stuff like that) the FIA are powerless to act.

Good call rom the FIA... I wonder how Horner will play it next season now.

Bravo

[maximilian]

Slight correction, the rule was enforcable ONLY on a team being stupid enough to make it obvious
True, so at least when it WAS obvious they SHOULD have taken more severe measures instead of just selling points.

[Cooper_S]

Team orders only work (as in undetected) when the two drivers co-operate,

If in the future a driver should choose point blank to disobey his team he risks being sacked from the team, but how many other teams would hire that driver knowing he will not take orders. It could be a career ending stand.

In the case of Webber that is less a problem given he is coming to the end of his F1 career but younger drivers need to consider carefully their actions in such a situation.

[ioan]

Good call rom the FIA... I wonder how Horner will play it next season now.

Just like he did this season, and I hope they win again.

[ioan]

If in the future a driver should choose point blank to disobey his team he risks being sacked from the team, but how many other teams would hire that driver knowing he will not take orders. It could be a career ending stand.

And the FIA should have a rule against the team abusing their employees (drivers) just like in real life there are laws that do not allow this.

I guess if something like what you described happens than the driver will have to take his team to court and the team and the sport will lose face big time.

What pile of crap the FIA are producing right now, it's incredible.

[anthonyvop]

And the FIA should have a rule against the team abusing their employees (drivers) just like in real life there are laws that do not allow this.

I guess if something like what you described happens than the driver will have to take his team to court and the team and the sport will lose face big time.

What pile of crap the FIA are producing right now, it's incredible.

If an employee of mine disobeyed a direct instruction they a fired. You can have a rule that says I can't but rest assured I can find another legitimate reason to can them.

Any driver who is known to go against his team or make known what is private information can kiss their career good-bye. Just ask how Piquet jr. is doing looking for sponsors for a ride buy in the NASCAR truck series.

[driveace]

So now when a driver signs for a team,he will understand that he is signing as a number2 driver,and his only CHANCE of winning is if the teams NUMBER1 driver,has retired,or has mechanical problems,that move him out of contention.
Or are we saying that half way through the season,the teams driver leading on points will be the "favoured driver",so in effect the driver on lower points will be expected to accept the role as back up driver ?
Because Vettel was rarely ahead of Webber,throughout the last season,and how many predicted that he would be 2010 world champion?

[ioan]

If an employee of mine disobeyed a direct instruction they a fired. You can have a rule that says I can't but rest assured I can find another legitimate reason to can them.

Any driver who is known to go against his team or make known what is private information can kiss their career good-bye. Just ask how Piquet jr. is doing looking for sponsors for a ride buy in the NASCAR truck series.

Laws are laws and have to be respected.

Don't worry for Piquet he's got enough money to buy a seat if he wants it, and now with Renault paying him and his father an undisclosed amount they are even richer.

I prefer a Piquet who exposed his team for the cheats they were to an Alonso cheater who blackmails his team for no. 1 status.

[Big Ben]

Laws are laws and have to be respected.

Don't worry for Piquet he's got enough money to buy a seat if he wants it, and now with Renault paying him and his father an undisclosed amount they are even richer.

I prefer a Piquet who exposed his team for the cheats they were to an Alonso cheater who blackmails his team for no. 1 status.

Your righteousness is so inspiring. I´m still worried you might be hurting yourself while reading and writing on this forum. I hope you are ok.

[ioan]

Your righteousness is so inspiring. I´m still worried you might be hurting yourself while reading and writing on this forum. I hope you are ok.

I appreciate your kindness! I've never been better! :p

[ioan]

Who would have thought it?



"Finally, we have said goodbye to this pointless hypocrisy," he said during an event at the Bologna Motor Show. "For us, Formula 1 is a team sport and we have always maintained that viewpoint and it should be treated as such."

Domenicali is confident that the new interpretation of the rules will ensure fair competition.

"The regulations already include points that prevent certain situations being managed in an extreme manner," he said. "The decision taken yesterday is very important."

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/88666

Fair for whom?!

[Bagwan]

Fair for all , Ioan , my friend .

We've always had team orders , and the hypocricy to which he refers is all about the veiling , not about whether or not they are used .

At some point every team puts more in one driver's basket than the other .
This might occur over the course of the race , or the course of the season .

Some say that it should be an advantage given only after one of the two is mathematically out of the competition .
And , from the general public's view , it seems the only fair way to compete .

But , in the real world , it is hard to find two people with the same skills , able to work together , and compete as well .

We saw this year , teams adopting various different methods of managing drivers .
There was outrage over Ferrari favouring Fernando , and there was outrage at Red Bull favouring Vettel .
Neither team emerged unscathed under public scutiny , but , because the Bull railed against the very idea for the rest of the year , they came up rosier at the end .
This is despite the fact that it was one driver's obvious fear that a team so against team orders would relegate him to a number two position that drove him to keep the serious secret of a broken bone from his team .

My opinion , as an employer , is that you really have to be inside the situation before you can understand why they choose who they choose to lead the team .
The one who cleans the toilet must be lead to understand that it is essential to the business that the loo be clean and perfectly operational for the restaurant to operate .

It used to be an honourable position to be a number two .
The shoe tried to show that in Austria , by pushing Rubens to the top step , and , ironically , the FIA punished them for exactly that , not for making Rubens pull over for Michael , which was what the public hated .


You see , there are , and always have been team orders in F1 .

With them allowed officially , we are still afforded the luxury of being able to criticize when and if they are used , so I don't really get why folks would get upset about them being legal .
Teams will still face the fan scrutiny , and that also is a lot more "real world" , as they vote with dollars , and sponsors see this .

It does nobody any good to have the FIA in court deciding whether the term "purple monkey toaster orange" is a team order or not .
Let the public decide on that one .

[Hondo]

Slight correction, the rule was enforcable ONLY on a team being stupid enough to make it obvious, 99% of the time teams are far more subtle and without any proof (laywers tend to like little stuff like that) the FIA are powerless to act.

Good call rom the FIA... I wonder how Horner will play it next season now.

Nothing has changed for the good. Now everything is back under the ambiguous 151c, wherein the FIA can interpret and act as it wishes. The FIA is not a court of law and what a lawyer can prove or disprove is irrelevant to the wishes of the FIA. Most of the decisions the FIA makes wouldn't stand in a court of law, based upon the facts presented. Disrepute is in the eyes of the beholder.

I still say if a team is required to field 2 or more cars in any one event then the finishing order of those cars is the team's business. If a driver doesn't want to sign as a support or #2 driver, then don't. Go do something else for a living.

[F1boat]

Very good decision by the FIA. Team orders always existed and as Stefano said, this is just the end of the hipocrisy. And about people talking how this will affect the championship, well, it is too early guys. Next year the battle can be (at least in theory) between McLaren and Mercedes GP and not between Ferrari and RBR.

[pino]

Who would have thought it?



http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/88666

Fair for whom?!


That you would ask this now...and not when Ferrari used team orders in favour of your beloved Michael Schumacher ?

[SGWilko]

It used to be an honourable position to be a number two .
The shoe tried to show that in Austria , by pushing Rubens to the top step

Turn it in!

Shoe only shoved his lacky up on top becuase of the crowds' reaction to Ferrari throwing the race - a race, and indeed race weekend, that Rubens dominated.

There was no honour in what happened in Austria in 2002 vis a vis Ferrari I am afraid.

[airshifter]

Turn it in!

Shoe only shoved his lacky up on top becuase of the crowds' reaction to Ferrari throwing the race - a race, and indeed race weekend, that Rubens dominated.

There was no honour in what happened in Austria in 2002 vis a vis Ferrari I am afraid.

I'd have to agree, though I can see Bagwans points. This was an extreme example of bending results that made this rule come about.

Really the still need to remove the grey area. As it is now the teams will still have to come up with coded messages or something to alter results, or face the possibility of "bring the sport into disrespute"


If they want to avoid that they should simply allow orders or any type, and change the title to reflect a team drivers title rather than an individual title. We all know that many WDCs were the result of team efforts anyway.

[Bagwan]

Turn it in!

Shoe only shoved his lacky up on top becuase of the crowds' reaction to Ferrari throwing the race - a race, and indeed race weekend, that Rubens dominated.

There was no honour in what happened in Austria in 2002 vis a vis Ferrari I am afraid.

It was a cruel defeat for Rubens , Wilco , and truely he deserved the top step that day .
But , he wasn't defeated by Michael , rather , by his team , who had decided they would not risk another loss to a broken leg Salo/Irvine combo .

For sure , it was a reaction to the crowd , and the situation .
But , what more could Michael have done ?


Whether you hail or loath Ferrari for it's part in the situation aside , do you see Rubens as a fool for obeying at all , a whiner for not doing so until the final straight , or a team-player for giving up his position for the good of the team ?
Is he just a victim , or was there any honour in your eyes for what he did ?

[Bagwan]

I'd have to agree, though I can see Bagwans points. This was an extreme example of bending results that made this rule come about.

Really the still need to remove the grey area. As it is now the teams will still have to come up with coded messages or something to alter results, or face the possibility of "bring the sport into disrespute"


If they want to avoid that they should simply allow orders or any type, and change the title to reflect a team drivers title rather than an individual title. We all know that many WDCs were the result of team efforts anyway.

I think the extreme bending that will result in the "disrepute" charge will be reserved more for a Flavio/Piquet incident .
As for the time element end(ie -when in the championship it is deemed ok), the public is the judge .

It is as it was .
And , if we all know anyway , why change it ?

[Bagwan]

I remember being outraged at the time, but not with Schumacher personally. He seemed visibly embarrassed and his gesture on the podium was well intended. I know people took their frustrations out on Ruben's but I can understand why someone would be rather naffed off that their hard work and dominance over a weekend was to have its credit given to another driver. Mclaren did a similar thing a couple of years before and I remember being incredably annoyed also.

F1 is a team sport but I don't wish to watch a GP with the expectation that teammates are going to let each other through at any minute. It takes the excitement and achievement out of it for me, but thats just my opinion. :)

Yes , both were very embarassed by the team .
And , the accolades given for the team player were lost in the outrage at the move .
I remember expecting the move , and also the outrage that ensued .

[SGWilko]

It was a cruel defeat for Rubens , Wilco , and truely he deserved the top step that day .
But , he wasn't defeated by Michael , rather , by his team , who had decided they would not risk another loss to a broken leg Salo/Irvine combo .

For sure , it was a reaction to the crowd , and the situation .
But , what more could Michael have done ?


Whether you hail or loath Ferrari for it's part in the situation aside , do you see Rubens as a fool for obeying at all , a whiner for not doing so until the final straight , or a team-player for giving up his position for the good of the team ?
Is he just a victim , or was there any honour in your eyes for what he did ?

I see Rubens fecked over by his team. Much has been made by Brawn that Rubens' contract did not expressly say he was a number two bagwon. And yet, we all know that Rubens job was threatened if he did not move over.

If you think that is honourable, it explains your stance on employment law to a tee......

[mstillhere]

Fair for all , Ioan , my friend .

We've always had team orders , and the hypocricy to which he refers is all about the veiling , not about whether or not they are used .

At some point every team puts more in one driver's basket than the other .
This might occur over the course of the race , or the course of the season .

Some say that it should be an advantage given only after one of the two is mathematically out of the competition .
And , from the general public's view , it seems the only fair way to compete .

But , in the real world , it is hard to find two people with the same skills , able to work together , and compete as well .

We saw this year , teams adopting various different methods of managing drivers .
There was outrage over Ferrari favouring Fernando , and there was outrage at Red Bull favouring Vettel .
Neither team emerged unscathed under public scutiny , but , because the Bull railed against the very idea for the rest of the year , they came up rosier at the end .
This is despite the fact that it was one driver's obvious fear that a team so against team orders would relegate him to a number two position that drove him to keep the serious secret of a broken bone from his team .

My opinion , as an employer , is that you really have to be inside the situation before you can understand why they choose who they choose to lead the team .
The one who cleans the toilet must be lead to understand that it is essential to the business that the loo be clean and perfectly operational for the restaurant to operate .

It used to be an honourable position to be a number two .
The shoe tried to show that in Austria , by pushing Rubens to the top step , and , ironically , the FIA punished them for exactly that , not for making Rubens pull over for Michael , which was what the public hated .


You see , there are , and always have been team orders in F1 .

With them allowed officially , we are still afforded the luxury of being able to criticize when and if they are used , so I don't really get why folks would get upset about them being legal .
Teams will still face the fan scrutiny , and that also is a lot more "real world" , as they vote with dollars , and sponsors see this .

It does nobody any good to have the FIA in court deciding whether the term "purple monkey toaster orange" is a team order or not .
Let the public decide on that one .

That's in case any member needed a visual supporting the fact that every team has team orders, veiled or not:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aHd8n1D4wkM

[555-04Q2]

The first decent rule change for years. Now our favourite team sport can be run as a team sport again.

[Bagwan]

I see Rubens fecked over by his team. Much has been made by Brawn that Rubens' contract did not expressly say he was a number two bagwon. And yet, we all know that Rubens job was threatened if he did not move over.

If you think that is honourable, it explains your stance on employment law to a tee......

So , he's a rich victim then ?

I'd say he got a job today because he showed his employers in the end that he'd (albeit reluctantly at the time) take a bullet for the team if they asked .
So , yes , there is honour and reward for toeing the line .

My employees get a fat Christmas bonus .
And , they understand that the toilet is essential to running the business , and that everyone takes thier turn at washing it , even me .

[SGWilko]

So , he's a rich victim then ?

I'd say he got a job today because he showed his employers in the end that he'd (albeit reluctantly at the time) take a bullet for the team if they asked .
So , yes , there is honour and reward for toeing the line .

My employees get a fat Christmas bonus .
And , they understand that the toilet is essential to running the business , and that everyone takes thier turn at washing it , even me .

Rich victim? He was paid according to the agreed price at contract signing - y'know, the contract that Ross told us all about at the time? The one that did not stipulate he had to move over. Needless to say his job was threatened.

Classy.

Cleaners clean. Waiters and waitresses work the 'Front of House', Chef's do the food etc. I assume you are not running a mobile Kebab van where one guy does it all.......

[555-04Q2]

Rich victim? He was paid according to the agreed price at contract signing - y'know, the contract that Ross told us all about at the time? The one that did not stipulate he had to move over. Needless to say his job was threatened.

Classy.

Cleaners clean. Waiters and waitresses work the 'Front of House', Chef's do the food etc. I assume you are not running a mobile Kebab van where one guy does it all.......

I own my own company. I am the boss. But I still carry boxes when required, clean the sink if I notice it is a bit dirty, make a cup of coffee for myself as well as any of my employees if they want when I am making, answer the phone if the secretary is taking a p!ss break etc etc etc.

There is a difference to doing a job and hiding behind a job description. We all have two hands, two feet, a brain etc. Don't be lazy, use them when required.

[SGWilko]

I own my own company. I am the boss. But I still carry boxes when required, clean the sink if I notice it is a bit dirty, make a cup of coffee for myself as well as any of my employees if they want when I am making, answer the phone if the secretary is taking a p!ss break etc etc etc.

There is a difference to doing a job and hiding behind a job description. We all have two hands, two feet, a brain etc. Don't be lazy, use them when required.

I see what you are saying, but you understand you can't sack a waitress because she won't clean the toilet.

Your employees have rights......

Not gonna sack yourself now are you?

[555-04Q2]

I see what you are saying, but you understand you can't sack a waitress because she won't clean the toilet.

Your employees have rights......

Not gonna sack yourself now are you?

I wish I could fire myself !!!

My employees have the following right: I pay you, you do as you are instructed. If I can clean the crapper so can they. If they don't like it, there is the door, see you in labour court. I expect my staff to do whatever is required of them and in return they are well paid, have incentive schemes and their year end bonus. I employ people who are driven and want to work, not job title seekers.

[SGWilko]

I wish I could fire myself !!!

My employees have the following right: I pay you, you do as you are instructed. If I can clean the crapper so can they. If they don't like it, there is the door, see you in labour court. I expect my staff to do whatever is required of them and in return they are well paid, have incentive schemes and their year end bonus. I employ people who are driven and want to worker, not job title seekers.

Now, so long as you are not handling food for public consumption, I doubt you'd run into much trouble, but if you put your employees who do handle food in any position that could result in cross contamination, you can fall foul of some pretty heavy laws.

Hence the need for clear job descriptions in such lines of work.

I am sure the majority of greasy spoons here in the UK are not rigorous in this respect, but all food handlers should be - it's the law.... :)

[555-04Q2]

Now, so long as you are not handling food for public consumption, I doubt you'd run into much trouble, but if you put your employees who do handle food in any position that could result in cross contamination, you can fall foul of some pretty heavy laws.

Hence the need for clear job descriptions in such lines of work.

I am sure the majority of greasy spoons here in the UK are not rigorous in this respect, but all food handlers should be - it's the law.... :)

Thats what gloves are for ;) :p :

[wedge]

Good riddance

A stupid rule in the first place

But even better, Todt didn't impose his personal philosophy into proceedings :up:

[Cooper_S]

I wish Rubens had refused to yield

[555-04Q2]

Good riddance

A stupid rule in the first place

But even better, Todt didn't impose his personal philosophy into proceedings :up:

:up: agree :up:

[SGWilko]

Thats what gloves are for ;) :p :

:p

[Cooper_S]

I truly wish that Rubens had refused to yield in Austria 2002, Schumacher would still have won the WDC, and we would not have wasted years debating the right and wrongs of that race in an endless circular argument....

Ferrari did not act illegally that day (and anyone looking for morals in F1 is on a fools errand) but in hindsight acted unwisely, created the situation where this stupid rule was created... Ironically it was Ferrari's actions in Germany this year that lead to the rule being dropped,

Red Bull have already said it will have no impact on how they race in 2011, Those teams that still employed orders undetected will probably keep using them undetected and Ferrari will do as they see fit.

I expect to see very little change in the way teams operate in 2011 as a result of this.

[SGWilko]

I truly wish that Rubens had refused to yield in Austria 2002, Schumacher would still have won the WDC, and we would not have wasted years debating the right and wrongs of that race in an endless circular argument....

Ferrari did not act illegally that day (and anyone looking for morals in F1 is on a fools errand) but in hindsight acted unwisely, created the situation where this stupid rule was created... Ironically it was Ferrari's actions in Germany this year that lead to the rule being dropped,

Red Bull have already said it will have no impact on how they race in 2011, Those teams that still employed orders undetected will probably keep using them undetected and Ferrari will do as they see fit.

I expect to see very little change in the way teams operate in 2011 as a result of this.

:up: But at least the viewer/fan can now be entitled to appreciate teams, participating in a team sport, employing team orders for the good of the team.

However, I would still prefer it if such orders that physically affect where cars finish relative to each other were not employed until it is clear that one driver has a much more obvious shot at the title than the other.

As you point out, Ferrari were within their rights in Austria in 2002, but I think the crowd on that day made it very clear that it was neither necessary nor sporting.

[Cooper_S]

How early or lat do you impose such orders...

2002 round 6 was with hindsight very early but Rubens had have dire results in the first 5 races.... no doubt forcing Ferrari's hand, we now know that was premature and Schumacher and Ferrari never needed to make that call but on the day they felt they did.

Then take 2010, Red Bull could have been almost justified in getting Vettel to back Webber in the last 4 races, most of the season was passed Mark was coming under attack from Alonso, it would seem logical... yet Red Bull held off and Vettel won.

Had they backed Webber and won, very few would still thing Vettel had any real chance.

I do not envy the teams having to make the call.

[SGWilko]

How early or lat do you impose such orders...

2002 round 6 was with hindsight very early but Rubens had have dire results in the first 5 races.... no doubt forcing Ferrari's hand, we now know that was premature and Schumacher and Ferrari never needed to make that call but on the day they felt they did.

Then take 2010, Red Bull could have been almost justified in getting Vettel to back Webber in the last 4 races, most of the season was passed Mark was coming under attack from Alonso, it would seem logical... yet Red Bull held off and Vettel won.

Had they backed Webber and won, very few would still thing Vettel had any real chance.

I do not envy the teams having to make the call.

Yes, but.............

..........aside from the unfortunate Silverstone saga, Red Bull were against the team orders idea. I assume they will continue in that vein.....

[V12]

Good. Vague and unenforceable rules don't have a place in any sport. It's as bad as the stupid Premier League football rule about having to play your "strongest 11" every week (define that?)

The die-hards who realise team orders have been around since year dot won't care, and the floating fans who may get insulted by team orders, well at least they aren't being patronised anymore like they were by Ferrari in Germany ("Fernando is faster than you" etc.)

Hopefully the teams won't do anything stupid like in Austria 2002 but it's their business.

Plus this year's finale showed the benefit of backing two drivers until one is completely out of it. If Alonso hadn't felt he needed to cover a second Red Bull, maybe RB wouldn't have won it (with either driver)? So it's not as cut and dried as 1986 and 2007 made it appear to be.

[Bagwan]

Rich victim? He was paid according to the agreed price at contract signing - y'know, the contract that Ross told us all about at the time? The one that did not stipulate he had to move over. Needless to say his job was threatened.

Classy.

Cleaners clean. Waiters and waitresses work the 'Front of House', Chef's do the food etc. I assume you are not running a mobile Kebab van where one guy does it all.......

Around here , even a "mobile kebab van" , if we had those , would have it's handlers required to take a three day course in food handling .
It is human bodily function that people must use a toilet now and again , and , in fact , it is required that I give my employees time to do so .
Part of the course entails the teaching of proper hand washing proceedure , and this same proceedure is required , whether after cleaning or merely using the toilet .

All of my employees do it all . They are cleaners , chefs , and waiters , all at the same time .
Incidentally , I should add that all the rest were happy to see "toilet girl's" back , and all are very happy to work for me .

It sounds all very dramatic to say that his job was threatened , but if you are employed to do a job , and don't , why wouldn't it ?
Surely he wouldn't deny he worked for a team when he got up on that infamous day .

He made a choice to do the bidding of his team , and collected his pay .

And , like his fellow Brazilian , Massa , expressed his dismay at having to be merely support for another man's title hunt .
That is what I found distasteful about both affairs .

Both of these guys decided to collect thier pay whilst dropping thier team in the muck .

If either had made the move less blatant , at least there would have some honour in it , but both made a scene of it , killing any chance of that .

We saw both ways of attacking the championship this year , or at least that's what we are lead to believe , in Ferrari and Red Bull .
Ferrari backed one man from early on , as has been the way for many a year .
And , Red Bull , despite calls of "not bad for a number two" from one side of the garage , has folks believing they ran , giving equal status for each driver to the end .

And , it was close in the end .

Which strategy is better , the one that was blatant or the one that was suspected ?

[SGWilko]

If either had made the move less blatant , at least there would have some honour in it , but both made a scene of it , killing any chance of that .

And how was Rubens to achieve that, I wonder, given that he was streets ahead of his teammate? Whatever he did it would have been one for the 'dept of the bleeding obvious'.

[schmenke]

As a team sport, the rule was contradictory to begin with.
Finally, a sensible decision by the FIA.

[Bagwan]

And how was Rubens to achieve that, I wonder, given that he was streets ahead of his teammate? Whatever he did it would have been one for the 'dept of the bleeding obvious'.

He left it until the final lap to make it one for that department .

I would have thought that was bleeding obvious .
He fought the idea for multiple laps .

There are a multitude of ways to slow a car and not make it obvious .
We were worried about my gearbox .
We were worried about my fuel load .
I had dirt on my visor .
I thought I had a tire going down .

[ioan]

That you would ask this now...and not when Ferrari used team orders in favour of your beloved Michael Schumacher ?

The point is that the rules were changed again because of Ferrari, after Ferrari were beaten fair and square, and after they spit in the face of the fans in Germany.

I always knew you hated MS, but that isn't the point now.
I don't remember MS squealing for the team to enforce orders on his teammates.
I do remember him however gifting numerous wins to Irvine and Rubens, call me up when Santander's teflon baby achieves such maturity. :D
Oh, and good luck supporting cheating whiners, you will need it.

[ioan]

Germany 2010 was equally as bad as Austria 2002 and is in no way different whatsoever IMO. One incident was legal but caused so much outrage that the rule was changed, and the other was illegal and highlighted the fact that the FIA are going to struggle to police a no team orders situation.but they also know the appropiate method now. Well hopefully.. :p :)

So first you say they are not different at all and than you go ahead and point out the differences. Very 'interesting'.

[Easy Drifter]

We are back to being sensible. Team orders have always been with F1 and before that in the 20's and 30's in GP racing.
The banning was unrealistic but until Ferrari became obvious this year it was done with more finese. Running low on fuel, tire going down, engine too hot etc. or 'botched' pit stop with some poor mechanic taking the heat for team orders.
The FIA and Jean are just correcting a rule that should never have been brought into play.

[Big Ben]

So first you say they are not different at all and than you go ahead and point out the differences. Very 'interesting'.

Is that why you don´t explain why it was good in 2002 and it's going to be bad in 2011? Come on, give it a try.

[Big Ben]

The point is that the rules were changed again because of Ferrari, after Ferrari were beaten fair and square, and after they spit in the face of the fans in Germany.

I always knew you hated MS, but that isn't the point now.
I don't remember MS squealing for the team to enforce orders on his teammates.
I do remember him however gifting numerous wins to Irvine and Rubens, call me up when Santander's teflon baby achieves such maturity. :D
Oh, and good luck supporting cheating whiners, you will need it.

So that's how you back it up? The reason why you had no problem with it in 2002 is your opinion that Pino hates MS? The rules is no good because FA is not such a generous man as MS is? Perhaps we should wait and see when some pointless win comes in FA's way... maybe him too will hand out some meaningless wins in a fight already won? it´s less probable since nowadays drivers have to fight much harder for the titles and noone wins titles midway through the season but maybe next year Ferrari will tell FM to move from FA's way in Australia and FA will offer he's place in the most obvious way in Brasil so that anyone would no it was him who let FM win and you´ll see FA's pure soul just as well as you MS'

[ioan]

it´s less probable since nowadays drivers have to fight much harder for the titles and noone wins titles midway through the season but maybe next year Ferrari will tell FM to move from FA's way in Australia and FA will offer he's place in the most obvious way in Brasil so that anyone would no it was him who let FM win and you´ll see FA's pure soul just as well as you MS'

Poor excuse, and totally based on fiction.

What about MS being totally embarrassed on podium in Austria 2002 vs Alonso being all smiles and happiness in Germany 2010?

There you have the difference between a man and a cry baby.
Have fun defending the master of fist shaking next season! :D

[ioan]

I wouldn't even begin to try and satisfy someone like you ioan.

Luckily, as I am 100% against being satisfied by men. :laugh:

[Cooper_S]

Where Ferrari went wrong in 2002 was panicking themselves, Rubens had a disastrous first few races and dominant as defending champion Schumacher was Ferrari still had vivid memories of the decades of no championships... and so someone (Todt/Brawn?) took the decision to give Schumacher as big a cushion as possible...

Where Rubens went wrong was he forced the issue, his team told him to swap positions in plenty of time he himself chose to argue... personally I would have had more respect for Rubens had he either capitulated straight away or crossed the line first… what he did was stupid.

Where Schumacher went wrong was to try and apiece the crowd once Ferrari's error of judgement became apparent... to this day what Ferrari did in the race was totally legal but their subsequent podium antics earned them the $1m fine.


Fast forward to Germany 2010... where Ferrari went wrong was to let a driver dictate to them, that is something that never happened before in their history.

As a long established Schumacher supporter I had quite gotten used to following the fortunes of Ferrari even after he retired, however with their actions in Germany I finally realised I could happily end my association...

Untill Vettel is signed for them in 2015

[ioan]

Yes, green creatures that live under bridges are probably more to your taste.

Didn't see any around here. I wonder why! :p

[mstillhere]

I find it incredible how the Ferrari bashers after having spent counteless hours and thousands and thousands of words after the Germany GP incident involving Alonso and Massa start the bashing again, apparently in a different thread, talking about the same exact things posted months ago. Do you actually ever stop and think: "did not I say these things already?".
If this isn't senility I don't know what it is.

[pino]

The point is that the rules were changed again because of Ferrari, after Ferrari were beaten fair and square, and after they spit in the face of the fans in Germany.

I always knew you hated MS, but that isn't the point now.
I don't remember MS squealing for the team to enforce orders on his teammates.
I do remember him however gifting numerous wins to Irvine and Rubens, call me up when Santander's teflon baby achieves such maturity. :D
Oh, and good luck supporting cheating whiners, you will need it.

Aren't you ashamed of yourself for posting such hypocrisy ? For years and years you've fought for Ferrari and defended their team order against everyone in this forum until the morning you got up from your bed and decided to support somebodyelse...and started to bash Ferrari :crazy:

And yes I hate Michael and always did, that's why I've only bought a single jacket and a single jersey with his name on it, I 've got a big poster of him and have added a couple of his Ferrari in my model-collection...yes I hate him ! :rolleyes:


For someone like yourself to criticize Alonso and Ferrari for something you were very happy with whilst Michael was there just screams hypocrisy.

:up:

[F1boat]

Aren't you ashamed of yourself for posting such hypocrisy ? For years and years you've fought for Ferrari and defended their team order against everyone in this forum until the morning you got up from your bed and decided to support somebodyelse...and started to bash Ferrari :crazy:

And yes I hate Michael and always did, that's why I've only bought a single jacket and a single jersey with his name on it, I 've got a big poster of him and have added a couple of his Ferrari in my model-collection...yes I hate him ! :rolleyes:
:up:

I have a friend who was a big fan of Michael and now dislikes Fernando, but he never ever bashed him in such way and he stills respects Ferrari and the decisions of the team, even if he supports Lewis. I guess that it's a matter of honour.
And BTW, many years I was against Ferrari and when Michael left, in his final year, I understood what tremendous driver he was and how much I will miss him. And I also understood how great Ferrari is and that the only reason I was so frustrated in 2002 (Austria) was because of bias and the clumsy way in which the order was done. And now, even if I like several drivers and have respect for many teams, I feel Ferrari as the best and special.

[Big Ben]

Poor excuse, and totally based on fiction.

What about MS being totally embarrassed on podium in Austria 2002 vs Alonso being all smiles and happiness in Germany 2010?

There you have the difference between a man and a cry baby.
Have fun defending the master of fist shaking next season! :D

nevertheless, it's based on a true story. You should change that signature. "Trolling. All I say are insults and random statements. I won't back them up since even I can't put that kind of spin on things to make them sound logical. I love MS."

[ioan]

Aren't you ashamed of yourself for posting such hypocrisy ?

Woah, hold on there you model of 'behavior'.
While I did substantiate my position in my previous post you are doing nothing else than attacking me, which BTW is against of the rules of this forum that you should be the first to obey to.


And yes I hate Michael and always did, that's why I've only bought a single jacket and a single jersey with his name on it, I 've got a big poster of him and have added a couple of his Ferrari in my model-collection...yes I hate him ! :rolleyes:


Strange you buy stuff with his name on but you hate the man, very strange indeed. :rolleyes:

While I do not have a huge poster of him and didn't buy jackets with his name on it I respect him for what he represented for me as the driver who performed Ferrari's come back. And I didn't ever support him before 1996, quite the opposite. And one of my hobbies is to build scale models of all the cars that MS drove in F1, just because I think he is a special driver.

And while I have managed to like MS due to his performances for Ferrari, I couldn't get any of that re Alonso, I wonder why?! (that was a rhetorical question BTW)

[BDunnell]

Aren't you ashamed of yourself for posting such hypocrisy ? For years and years you've fought for Ferrari and defended their team order against everyone in this forum until the morning you got up from your bed and decided to support somebodyelse...and started to bash Ferrari :crazy:

This is precisely why I think ioan should be forced to divert all his attentions to the Chit Chat forum, where, by contrast with much of what he posts about F1, he is sensible, intelligent, well-reasoned and generally very good to debate with.

[ioan]

This is precisely why I think ioan should be forced to divert all his attentions to the Chit Chat forum, where, by contrast with much of what he posts about F1, he is sensible, intelligent, well-reasoned and generally very good to debate with.

I think it is mostly due to having intelligent discussion partners over there and not having to stoop down several levels like sometimes around here.

[Big Ben]

I think it is mostly due to having intelligent discussion partners over there and not having to stoop down several levels like sometimes around here.

I´ve stooped enough. There's no point being the lowest

[Tazio]

(that was a rhetorical question BTW)
Well I'll be ding danged! What a coincidence!
It euphemistically bears a striking resemblance to what is commonly referred to in internet forum parlance as:

flame   /fleɪm/ Show Spelled [fleym] Show IPA noun, verb,flamed, flam·ing.
Computer Slang. to send an angry, critical, or disparaging electronic message. :down:

[mstillhere]

You don't strike me as a person who has ever grasped the concept of debating. With any sport where you find teams and people who are against each other in competition, you'll also find fans who support them. Naturally you're going to get fans who are critical of other teams/drivers. You mention the Ferrari bashers yet I've witnessed you bash Mclaren and Lewis Hamilton with no sense of irony whatsoever. I suggest you argue your point based on the facts you know relating to the sport, and put forward you thoughts about "team orders" rather than other posters. :)

You are right. I never grasped the "subtle" concept of debating. However I am able to differenciate debating from debating ad nauseam. The first one is where people post their opinions about whatever the topic is and then they move on. The second one is where some people repeat months later at the first chance they get the same things they had said months if not years earlier (debating ad nauseam).

I know this thread is a response to the FIA rule change about team orders but I wonder when people would stop in going around in circles with their posts and start using their own heads and say "hum...I already said what I had to say about this topic. Why would I start all over again?". I might not be a big debater, and that might be because I have the habit to say what's in my mind and then I move on onto something different, new. Here some people seem to be drawn in a never ending vortex where topics get fried, and refried and thel flipped and fried, and refried.

I have no idea if when you say I have been "bashing" McLAren and Lewis is when I said I did not like LH passed the SC this year but would that be bashing? Did you ever count how many times Ferrari and their pilots have been attacked? If you were to rpint all of them you could easily put together an encyclopedia.
AreThere is no comparison. I posted what I had to say about it, I debated with a couple of posts and it was it. The same with the VW posts etc. and I can garrantee you that I am not going to repeat myself again. I never tried to convince people that I am right and they are wrong. I always respectfully post what I have to say about something and.........that's it. I move on.

[SGWilko]

Its a British based forum, so you're never going to find an equal balance of opinions. Secondly you only have to go a few pages into your post history to see some negative reference to Mclaren or Hamilton. Regarding team orders and Ferrari in Germany, I'm also a member of the Scuderia forum and they didn't exactly get an easy ride from their own fans on there either. Lets just agree to disagree on this one.

Yeah! And did I tell about Austria 2002....?

[Cooper_S]

Its a British based forum, so you're never going to find an equal balance of opinions...

Why they should be mutually exclusive I do not know but from long experience on such forums that statement is born out daily.

[odykas]

If you cannot enforce a rule then it's better to delete the rule...

[pino]

If you cannot enforce a rule then it's better to delete the rule...

Welcome back ody...we missed you ;)

[Mia 01]

I very much like RBR. (not Marko so much)

[Lalo]

Too bad team orders are back. 2010 was a great season all the way 'till the end, and the fact that team orders were not allowed has a lot of credit for that (both RBR, both McLaren and Alonso fighting for the crown).

Anyway, team orders did appear in a fashion way with Ferrari telling Massa "Alonso is faster than you" LOL

[N. Jones]

Mmmmmm... :dozey:

Why do the FIA feel the need to add this:

Team orders are now allowed. The article forbidding team orders (39.1) has been deleted from the rule book.

If a team use team orders now, how can that be seen as bringing the sport into disrepute :confused: :crazy:

This is just to cover themselves if a driver clearly slows down to let his teammate by.

This way they can punish a team for being too obvious. Sounds redundant if you ask me. Either ban team orders or enforce them; you can't have it both ways!