Austria: last year VS this year

[Raoul Duke]

I was browsing through some old threads here at ten-tenths and came across this one http://tentenths.com/forum/showthread.php?threadid=9873 Wich contained among others, a very interesting quote posted by........me.

Originally posted by Raoul Duke
Well, I do feel bad for Rubens. But quite honestly, he should have
expected this to hapen, because Ferrari always favour Micheal over
the other driver. They wil do anything and everything to help MS
win the title, I can't say that I agree with that philosophy, but
that's simply the way they do it.

It's up to the FIA to decide whether or not such tactics should be
allowed. And as long as they do allow it, then Ferrari are simply
doing their job as best they can(the way they see fit). You can't
blame them for that.

That was, indeed, posted last year after the Austrian GP when Rubens moved over to let Michael through to 2nd place. And as much as it may surprise some people here, I feel no reason to change my mind about those comments, for a feel there are a few difference between what happend last year and this year.

1. It was for 2nd place and not the victory, so allready there is a maijor diffence.

2. Unlike this year, Rubens was not faster then Michael, and only inherited the 2nd place due to the incident between Michael and JPM at the start.

3. The championship was much tighter back then with Coulthard threatening Michael for the lead in the WC.

Whilst I certainly do feel that team orders, in any way, shape or form, are wrong and should not be alowed, I still maintain that last year's incident was more acceptable then this year for the reasons I've stated above.

What are everyone's feelings regarding this?.

[f1manoz]

We have to restate our arguments AGAIN!!

[Raoul Duke]

No, I'm asking you to state what you feel are the differences, if any, between last year and this year. I am aware of mosr peoples feelings about what happened on sunday, but I am curious to know how they think it compares to last year.

[Number Juan]

history does repeat itself!!!

its funny too see that the FIA are doing something about Austria...for Rubens stepping up onto the top step of the podium!!!

[f1manoz]

There is plenty of differences:

1. Rubens had to actually give up a win, which he thoroughly deserved while TGF was a beaten man, which showed on the podium and throughout the press conference

2. Basically this years championship is a foregone conclusion. There was no need for team orders.

Basically Sundays race showed everything that is wrong with team orders. And it was also a fixed race from the start.

[Adam43]

I think the only difference is that this time it was more important. It was for a win and also Rubens deserved the win. This is why it gets more attention.

As for whether it is right or wrong. Both situations (because they are the same!) are allowed in the rules, but I don't like either of them. Both were done for the same reason (to maximise Michael's championship chances).

Both of them caused Ferrari and to a lesser extent Schumacher (by association) to drop considerably in my estimation.

[Spudgun]

What happened last year I can understand. David was threatening Michael and as Raoul has said, Michael had been in an incident, was faster than Rubens and it wasn't for the win.

I do believe in team orders if the reason for letting a team mate past is because he is faster. It's common sense that you are getting the team nowhere if you make him sit behind the slower car and not maximising the 'package' (I apologise the Ronspeak, but I couldn't resist it).

If there are cars in front to catch, the faster car should be able to go for it without the additional hassle of having to force your way past a slower team mate. Likewise, if you're being caught from behind.

I feel team orders for the above situations are justified. Otherwise, there would be no point in having teams. In these situations it's all about the magic word called teamwork and what is best for the team. All teams have done this in the past and some are using these instances to try and defend Ferrari.

What happened on Sunday was nothing like that. Rubens was not slower than Michael. No one was catching them. There was no one to catch in front. There was no real championship threat. Ferrari were in the strongest possible position as a team, there was no need to issue team orders.

It has been shown in the past and now that team mates are the fiercest rivals because they have equal equipment. Yes, there has always been No. 1 and No. 2 drivers in certain F1 teams for years. At Williams in the late eighties, Mansell was technically No. 2 to Piquet, but they still had great duels purely for the fact that Frank Williams let them battle on the condition they ddn't take each other off.

But what Ferrari have done is taken driver statuses to the extreme, and in my opinion, gone against the spirit of competition. I relish the battles between team mates. Prost/Senna Mansell/Piquet, wheel to wheel where only the driver makes the differences. All Ferrari are interested in is statisticss, $$$ and records. The whole team was originally built on passion for racing and that passion died with Enzo..

[Mr V]

i think the question we should be asking ourselves is why does rubens feel so different about it? last year he was visably upset about giving away a 2nd place finish, whereas this year he seemed quite "happy" about giving away a victory!