Should The Fia Ban Team Orders

Valve Bounce · 28 Jun 2002, 01:02 (Ref:323202)

This is a simple poll to determine whether members of Ten-Tenths favour the banning of team orders in F1. The route to go would be for the FIA to formulate and implement stringent rules to ban all forms of team orders. This poll is not intended for discussing how this can be controlled - only to determine whether you favour the total banning of team orders. Therefore it's a simple straight YES or NO vote
The results of this poll is intended for referal to the FIA.

Valve[img]http://www.**************************/smilies/bouncy.gif[/img]

TimN88 · 28 Jun 2002, 01:39 (Ref:323215)

Team orders are a big part of all forms of racing. I know its big in NASCAR.

FastJoel31 · 28 Jun 2002, 02:08 (Ref:323227)

No.

Let the teams do what they want to do, they will pay eventually.

freud · 28 Jun 2002, 02:12 (Ref:323228)

YES!!

If it were upto to me, I would ban team orders starting from silverstone. They are just ridiculous, completely unfair and their removal would do formula one a world of good.

BAN ASAP!!

Rambo · 28 Jun 2002, 02:18 (Ref:323231)

It is an always would be impossible to police. It always has been part of motor racing.

Get over it.

Mr V · 28 Jun 2002, 02:26 (Ref:323236)

It's not impossible to police if each team has a designated person monitoring the radio conversations, the only thing impossible to police is if a teams prepared to go as far as cutting a drivers engine via remote control!

Rambo · 28 Jun 2002, 02:40 (Ref:323244)

Do me a favour. They can agree before hand - if X is winning, he'll move over for Y by just easing his laptimes a bit. Can blame tryes, traffic, pretend to fluff a braking point - you don't need to say it on the radio. Not to mention any number of things they could do via pitstops.

BBKing · 28 Jun 2002, 02:43 (Ref:323248)

Just think about this.

In 2000 DC finished 2 races in front of Mika (Silverstone and France). If McLaren would have implemented slavery, like Ferrari does, Mika and Schumacher would have arrived in Suzuka tied with 88 points (Not Schumacher in front by 8 points). From that point on the championship would have been decided in the last race. Considering Schumacher's history to crack under preasure (Jerez 97, Suzuka 98) Mika had a better chance to win the title in spite of having a car that was not as good as the Ferrari. Not even the illegal TC, better known as "legal" engine mapping would have saved Schumacher from being defeated.

That of course gives Mika much more credit because he actually won his titles. He was not gifted to him. For that reason FIA should ban team orders. Ferrari is the only team that makes a bad use of it.

freud · 28 Jun 2002, 02:48 (Ref:323251)

Rambo, Think.

The scenario you describe above is 'Race fixing'. Say for example that a law banning team orders is enforced. If a team decides to fix a race, it will be an illegal decision by the team. The team will try as hard as possible to hide it, but if the FIA catches it somehow, the penalty would be very severe, including banning of the team from taking part in f1. The concept is very similar to 'horse racing'.

Technically & legally a team should never be allowed to 'fix' a race. Laws must exist. Whether a team follow them or not is the responsibilty of FIA.

BBKing · 28 Jun 2002, 02:52 (Ref:323253)

Ferrari would not have a clause in their driver's contract stating that they should obey them. Therefore Barrichello and Schumacher (yeah right) would be able to ignore them.

Rambo · 28 Jun 2002, 02:53 (Ref:323255)

Traction control was illegal, but, alas, as everyone whined about it, it was legalised in CART and F1 - but plenty of people were doing it before hand.

And horse racing is fixed all the time! Good grief, don't you know they deliberately run horses that are underfit and undertrained to get their handicap down and odds up? Then the horse is really raced, whereupon a sizeable bet is placed making vast amounts of money. Very few are actually caught - that's how the system works!

If you think F1 teams couldn't get away with it, I think you're being rather naive.

freud · 28 Jun 2002, 02:58 (Ref:323258)

Race fixing can never be completely eradicated. However by implementing correct laws, FIA can certainly reduce its magnitude. Another point BBKing mentioned that the drivers wouldnt have such clauses in their contracts which makes them lap dogs. Laws must exist and then its FIA job to see that the laws are properly obeyed by each team.

mac · 28 Jun 2002, 03:19 (Ref:323274)

It could simply never be done.

Wrex · 28 Jun 2002, 03:28 (Ref:323277)

Sure, and while we are at it, lets ban Murder, robbery, ah to hell with it, lets ban all crime.

Valve, no offence, but its a stupid poll. How can you answer the question without knowing how it is to be controlled.

Of course people will vote yes, but would they still vote yes if the way of policing it was to let the FIA take each race result under advisement until a hearing at the end of the season.

Decide if it can be done, then decide if we want to do it.

freud · 28 Jun 2002, 03:41 (Ref:323284)

mac and Wrex, Isnt it similar to saying "Match fixing can never be completely eradicated from Cricket. Lets not make laws which ban players from match fixing".

Here's what Max Mosely is saying:

http://www.itvf1.com/news/news_story/11454

"If a team does something to win, and does not break any specific rules, you have to acknowledge their right to do that. The issue of team orders is a very complex question, but what happened in Austria was undoubtedly bad from a sporting point of view.

"Therefore, we are setting up a working group and we will also open up a website and invite members of the public to come forward with their suggestions. We want them to concentrate on telling us what they think can be done and how we can it put it right.

"We all know what it is wrong, and recognise that what is happening is undesirable. But at the moment, none of us can think of a solution to the problem. What we have to establish is whether there should be a new rule on team orders, how do you enforce it, and what should the penalty be for any breach? We have our laws but we can change them if we have a democratic vote on it."

Wrex · 28 Jun 2002, 03:50 (Ref:323286)

Freud, I love the idea of never having team orders, I just can't (like others) see its feasibility.

If they come with something to make it possible, I'll vote for it with both hands.

Valve Bounce · 28 Jun 2002, 03:59 (Ref:323287)

Quote:

Originally posted by Wrex
Sure, and while we are at it, lets ban Murder, robbery, ah to hell with it, lets ban all crime.

Valve, no offence, but its a stupid poll. How can you answer the question without knowing how it is to be controlled.

Of course people will vote yes, but would they still vote yes if the way of policing it was to let the FIA take each race result under advisement until a hearing at the end of the season.

Decide if it can be done, then decide if we want to do it.

First of all WREX, there are more NO votes than YES votes.
Secondly, this is to find out what the fans here really want. If they want team orders to remain, then it becomes a non issue how it could have been controlled. I am taking things one step at a time. Of course there are ways to control team orders, and I have elaborated this on my other thread. But thanks for posting here just the same - always glad to have your views.

Valve[img]http://www.**************************/smilies/bouncy.gif[/img]

28 Jun 2002, 04:08 (Ref:323290)

The problem with the FIA getting the public's views is that a lot of the public will only see the situation from their point of view, that is, that F1 is a product that they consume and their entertainment is the most important thing.

I think, if anyone should be asked, it is the teams and drivers, not the viewing public.

Valve Bounce · 28 Jun 2002, 04:13 (Ref:323291)

Quote:

Originally posted by Aussiefan
The problem with the FIA getting the public's views is that a lot of the public will only see the situation from their point of view, that is, that F1 is a product that they consume and their entertainment is the most important thing.

I think, if anyone should be asked, it is the teams and drivers, not the viewing public.

Very intresting point. Why don't we ask the horse owners, trainers and jockeys whether horse racing should be fixed.
Oh!! I forgot the bookies.

Yeah!! them too.

Valve[img]http://www.**************************/smilies/bouncy.gif[/img]

Jukebox · 28 Jun 2002, 04:24 (Ref:323293)

I just don't care if they ban or not...not gonna make any difference. These thing ain't easy to detect so i'm not voting.

freud · 28 Jun 2002, 04:25 (Ref:323294)

Quote:

Originally posted by Wrex
Freud, I love the idea of never having team orders, I just can't (like others) see its feasibility.

If they come with something to make it possible, I'll vote for it with both hands.

Yes! "If they come up with something to make it possible"... I believe if there is a genuine 'will', they 'will'. Its not 'impossible'.

R · 28 Jun 2002, 06:48 (Ref:323338)

I voted "no", because at crucial moments, I'm all for it. Picture this scenario:

Last race in Suzuka. Montoya is leading Schumacher in the championship by 4 points. Barrichello is leading the race, Schumacher is in second place and Montoya is in third. If the positions stay as they are, Montoya will win the WDC by 2 points. If TGF wins the race, he wins the WDC by 2 points. In a situation like this, I would support team orders being issued. I would not like it, but I would understand it. That's the difference from Austria. With TGF's big lead, and Rubens' storming race, it was an unnecessary and cruel thing to do, at such an early point in the season, and the way in which they did it. But in the championship deciders towards the end, when you see what you need to do, I'm in favour for it. Banning it completely would be ridiculous, team orders have always been a part of F1.

ttc · 28 Jun 2002, 07:20 (Ref:323351)

R, I hate to bring this up, but you're being hyprocrite.

If it's "understandable" to you at the last race, then it should be "understandable" even if it's the first.

Both scenario are for the same purpose. To WIN. Whether it is necessary to make such a call at any stage is the team's decision. You can choose not to like their decision, but to say that it's not the same is false. They BOTH serves the same purpose (have I mentioned that yet?

)

Jukebox · 28 Jun 2002, 07:29 (Ref:323354)

ttc....you are a Ferrari yourself, what is your stand about the team orders by Ferrari at Austria?

**Adam43** · 28 Jun 2002, 07:52 (Ref:323359)

The problem as I see it is, or see part of it anyway: please take these as just musings on the subject, and the examples I give are not what I am trying to discuss - they are just examples. Whether you agree with them or not is not the point, I feel, because the conclusion about the definition of a good/bad team order is the same.

Anyway, the meat of the post:

Generally we like some team orders and not others. Or perhaps we have a realistic view on team orders and also a idealistic view on the lack of team orders. We know it is a team sport and in some ways it can add to the 'sport', but on the hand we like the drivers to compete on a individual
basis because this defines sport better.

So what we want is a half way house and this seems impossible. What is also impossible is to ban orders completely. Teams can easily get round this and 'hide' it. If they start hiding the team orders then this is even worse
and even more unfair. For example Rubens wouldn't get an recognition when he beats Michael. In this respect Ferrari were very honest and open about it.

So this leaves us with one alternative. Allow all team orders (which, to be fair, is the situation we have now). It's a bit like traction control. Disgraceful, but it has to be.

Asking Rubens to move over was quite wrong (not illegal) in my opinion, however it is achieved. And this is an example of a bad team order. Some good team orders: Collins giving his car to Fangio. He chose to do this, because he felt Fangio was the man. Helping your team mate win the championship (after you can't win it). Best example of this, I feel, was 1986 and Keke. Despite it being his last GP ever he said, "I will help Prost win because it would be a joke if anyone else won it". DC giving Mika the win in Melbourne. He chose to do it because Mika had beat him that day, but was behind due to no fault of his own. Life isn't fair, but on that day DC made motor racing fair.

OK, so maybe we can say team orders or putting the team (or teammate) first is good when the other driver chooses to do it himself?

But, Rubens is clearly prepared to do this for Ferrari and Michael. Although I do think Ferrari surprised him a bit by asking in Austria. He was doing it because he loves the team, gets paid to, is on some sort of promise?????

So I think this could be it. The difference between a good team order and a bad team order is the motivation behind it.

The trouble is how can this be included in a rule book?

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Team Orders and Team Tactics	Led ZeppF1	Formula One	19	25 Sep 2003 04:09
Team orders, again !!!	Speed	Formula One	18	30 Jul 2002 19:19
Team Orders	wodonnell	Formula One	13	13 May 2002 12:50
Team Orders	davebreen	Formula One	25	13 May 2002 10:37
Team Orders?	Liz	ChampCar World Series	3	12 Sep 2000 00:57

View Poll Results: SHOULD THE FIA BAN TEAM ORDERS
YES	18	48.65%
NO	19	51.35%
Voters: 37. You may not vote on this poll