Team Orders Ban

[Wrex]

One of the new rules in 2004 is the total ban on team orders. This came as no suprise after the Austrian Fiasco, and was further strengthened after Schumachers botched dead-heat ( ) at Indy.

Team orders though have been in F1 for as long as cars were involved. Personally speaking, I don't support the new ban. It was introduced after McLaren's little swap in Melbourne, and subsequently dropped when it became apparent it could'nt accurately be policed.

Come to think of it, I'm sure it was Austria again where Irvine developed a 'brake problem' that allowed Michael past.

There are many team orders other than what we viewed at the A1-Ring this year. Should they all be banned?

Driver 1 and 2 on different strategies. Team asks driver 1 to let driver 2 past as he has a lighter fuel load or has an extra stop to do (Ralf Montoya at Silverstone).

Driver 1 is slowing down due to mechanical difficulty or tyre wear. Should he put up a fight to his team-mate as he would to others?

Driver 1 is stuck behind another car and can't find a way past. The team believes Driver 2 has a better chance (Mika & DC Jerez 97)

The team has an almost certain 1-2 victory. They ask driver 2 to hold position (Hill & Ralf at Spa).

What about during the last few races of a championship. Even Williams & McLaren would initiate team orders to win a championship.

While I did'nt agree with Austria, the alternative to me seems worse. Regardless of the printed result, we all know Rubins won that race. He was sensational and had Michaels measure all weekend. So to hide a team order, a team will now 'manufacture' a problem, botch a pit-stop and most likely do it early in the race to cover themselves.

Had this happened, we would never have really known how good Rubins was that weekend. And worse, when a team (especially Ferrari) legitimately has a pit error or car failure, the conspiracy theorist will run rampant discrediting a victory that while fortunate was still well deserved.

As romantic the idea of 22 drivers all racing each other is, are we being realistic? Is it fair to ask a team and it's sponsors to spend millions without allowing them control to obtain the best results possible?

[DNQ]

Team orders won't go away, they just won't be as obvious as they were at the A1-Ring. If no one knows, there wont be the furore like last time, hence the FIA introducing this ruling. Just stops negative media attention, makes it look like they're doing something.

[Don K]

I think team orders have always existed in a more or less concealed. During the late nineties, the team orders at Willimams, McLaren and Ferrari were probably easiest to spot.

Drivers like Barrichello have tried to make them more visible during the last few years, for instance by deliberately delaying the implementation until the last round.

After Austria 2002 more people were upset about the visibility of the team orders, than about the team orders.

Now that team orders have been explicitely forbidden, we can expect them to be much harder to spot in the future.

[Liz]

There have always been laws against cheating on your school exams, but it has not stopped people who want to cheat, and a lot of them "get away with it" too. As you may know if you yourself believe cheating is justified because "Good Grades Will Get You Into University", the difficulty is that when you have cheated your way to the top, you have not cheated anyone but yourself. You have a list of "good grades" and you don't actually know anything. Once you get out in real life, you discover that nobody cares what grades you got, but they do care if you know what you are doing. And especially they care if you're sportsmanlike and if you cheat, steal and lie.

Of course, if you think honesty, integrity and sportsmanship are rubbish, and lining your pockets and fooling your "fans" is the only important thing -- go to it. If you're convinced cheating is honesty, no one will ever convince you otherwise.

[Yoong Montoya]

What would happen if Rubens is held up in the pits deliberately while ahead of Michael next year, allowing Michael through into the lead and the win, and the camera in the press conference picks up Michael saying "Sorry the team held you up in the pits Rubens." I'm not saying this will happen, or even that the A1 Ring track is jinxed, but you never know. All it needs is one slip of the tongue.

[avsfan733]

im sorry i have missed most of this conversation.... my internet connection was slowed via two way telemetry. Seriously though if the engineers can fix car from the pits i can guarentee u they can slow it down. That wouldn't really be team orders would it? More like team actions.

[Wrex]

I remember watching oil spill from Jacques debute drive in Melbourne and screaming conspiracy! At the time I was a big JV fan and the thought of him cleaning up hill on day one thrilled me.

And here's where our problem begins. How will we know a mistake from a team decision, or a problem from a team order?

Again I say, I did'nt like Austria, but at least to anyone watching, Rubins won the race and we all knew it. Now when his car loses power everyone will shout the house down, even if it's legitiment.

IMO, team orders should be reluctantly permitted (after a certain race) and made open to the public before the event. Todt (or whoever) should say we are putting our efforts into Michael at this point as he's the best chance for the championship.

Some of the other senarios should be reviewed also. Can you imagine Ralf and Hill coming together at Spa? Eddie would have had a heart attack.

[f1manoz]

Originally posted by Wrex

IMO, team orders should be reluctantly permitted (after a certain race) and made open to the public before the event. Todt (or whoever) should say we are putting our efforts into Michael at this point as he's the best chance for the championship.

I'll go with that. Team order only allowed before/after a certain event and they should ALWAYS be public knowledge - say Ferrari choose to use them at Monza, then before the race they should tell the media that 'we will ask Rubens to move over for TGF if such and such happens.'

[Wrex]

The real problem needs to be addressed.

Why is it with team orders introduced many times in the last decade was Austria so bad. To me it was because as the race went on (and so early in the season) we all thought (expected) Ferrari to let Rubins have his day in the sun.

In the examples listed in my original post, there was hardly a whimper, so some team orders seem to be OK with fans, as opposed to others.

[Kex]

They might as well have said "you can't do what Ferrari did in Austria ever again" instead of adding more grey by simply 'banning' team orders.

Fresh blood required on the decision-making panel.

[Peter Mallett]

Its been mentioned that team orders are "cheating" and yet this is a team sport. I can't see the connection between cheating and this subject. I can see the problem when it spoils the spectacle but I still can't see how it will be policed nor can I see anything fundamentally wrong in it.

However, personalities then come into play and the whole thing becomes emotive in the extreme. I'm working with someone who lost money on Australia '98. He definitely doesn't like team orders but then again he's a lawyer.

So, if its to stop Mickey-the-shoe's domination then it won't work. If its to stop the manipulation of the championship, it won't work and if its to make drivers race against each other.............. just look at the fuss at Monza and Indy over the Williams drivers.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Wrex

Why is it with team orders introduced many times in the last decade was Austria so bad.

Of the times that team orders have been used when the 2 team mates have been leading and second in the race (to my knowledge)

France '92, Patrese moved over for Mansell.....Patrese was behind on fuel, he wouldn't have made it to the end of the race had he continued "racing" Mansell.

Australia '96, Villeneuve moved over for Hill.... (NO conspiracy here WREX ) you could see but the state of Hill's car that Villeneuve was losing oil, wether or not he would have made it to the end of the race had he continued to "race" Hill will never be known, but the team obviously didn't think he would finish had the switch not occured.

Australia '98, Coulthard moved over for Hakkinen.... more a gentlemans agreement here as opposed to team orders, they were allowed to race each other to the first corner , i expect that Coulthard is still rueing that day.

Maylasia '99, Schumacher moved over for Irvine.... Irvine was in with a chance of the WDC against a driver From another team

Austria '02, Barrichello moved over for Schumacher.... Both cars had run faultlessly all race, were miles ahead of the competition, for once Barrichello had the legs of his team mate, he needed the points more than Schumacher as Schumacher had to all intents and purposes won the WDC.

That to me is why Austria '02 is different, i'm sure everyone will pick holes in my reasoning, but at least i had a go

[Wrex]

No arguments at all Mrv, and thats my point. IMO a total ban on team orders is silly, we just need a clarification of whats acceptable and whats not.

[Mr V]

Originally posted by Wrex
we just need a clarification of whats acceptable and whats not.

Agreed, but how do the FIA and the teams agree on what is and isn't acceptable? Would it need a unanimous decision from the teams to implement it? after all, if this is the case then it only takes one team to say they don't agree and Team orders won't be banned.

[Wrex]

I don't think so. Someone can correct me if I'm wrong (I probably am and someone will) but I think the FIA runs the rules of F1, and therefor the teams don't get a vote.

[Mr V]

You proberbly are right amd i'm wrong (no change there ) but i thought that all changes had to be agreed under the concorde agreement, which required everyones agreement (unless it's safety related!?)

[Valve Bounce]

Did it ever occur to you guys that exact tyre pressures are critical to a car's quick lap times? Now supposing the second set of tyres had incorrect pressure in just one tyre, wouldn't that affect the handling of the car? Wouldn't that make the car slower? Slow punctures are not new to F1 cars are they?

[JohnSSC]

I think Peter Mallett is spot on here. This topic inspires reams of advice about "sportsmanship" and "cheating." Look at any other "sport." What about a footbal club playing a weaker team. Do they play their stars when a win is almost assured, or rest them for the match against a top team tomorrow? Is that fair? Are the fans seeing the "best" team on the pitch? What about the lesser team? Should they be insulted because they are not good enough for someone else to put forth their best effort?

Any form of racing that involves more than one car per "team" will have "team orders" of some sort or another. It is unavoidable. Personally, if so many here are so suspicious of how he result of the racing may or may not be contrived by the teams, why are you even watching?

[Sato san]

Originally posted by mr v

That to me is why Austria '02 is different, i'm sure everyone will pick holes in my reasoning, but at least i had a go

i wont .....i agree totally that Austria 02 was miles different from things weve seen in many other races.....Austria 02 still makes my stomach sink , no wonder teams are finding it harder to get major sponsors.

[Tristan]

Quite.

But I still don't get what this rule MEANS. You can't "ban team orders". When are "team orders" "team orders"?? It's a big grey area. Let's see if it works.

PS: like it's going to stop Ferrari in 2003 anyway!! Williams have already said "we don't have a prayer". Here's hoping Ferrari chose to win with dignity this year, eh??

[TheGreatJuan]

This one is simple. The team orders that FIA intends to stop is the barbaric aplication of something that otherwise is the logic way to go. Schumacher and the bunch of lackeys behind him have abused, as usual, something that was accepted in the sport for years. Now FIA has to step in to prevent that bunch of spineless individuals ruin the sport we all love.

[JohnSSC]

Welcome to the forum, TheGreatJuan. I reckon we won't have to encourage you to state your opinions!! Hope you enjoy the forum and have a Merry Christmas.

[TheGreatJuan]

Thank you, thank you very much

[Valve Bounce]

Please, let's not have another SchM bash. This is Christmas.

[Sato san]

Originally posted by Tristan
Here's hoping Ferrari chose to win with dignity this year, eh??

yes , thats the only way it should be done ........and its a shame that after producing the most well engineered car on the grid weve seen in many years , they had to taint it all with some of the silly games weve seen this year .

here's to 2003 and a chance to see them come back and to the job propally .