FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[vaptin]

Interestingly though, Jenson might have saved McLaren's bacon by either misunderstanding or ignoring the "save fuel" code. Lewis asked on the radio: "if I save fuel will Jenson try and pass me", his engineer replied: "no", had Jenson made no move, that transmission would've been clearer than: "Fernando is faster than you, can you confirm you understood that message".

Surely from a moral point of view, what McLaren tried to do was at least just as wrong. Possibly more so, as Ferrari could justify in terms of the WDC.

[racechick]

Interestingly though, Jenson might have saved McLaren's bacon by either misunderstanding or ignoring the "save fuel" code. Lewis asked on the radio: "if I save fuel will Jenson try and pass me", his engineer replied: "no", had Jenson made no move, that transmission would've been clearer than: "Fernando is faster than you, can you confirm you understood that message".

Surely from a moral point of view, what McLaren tried to do was at least just as wrong. Possibly more so, as Ferrari could justify in terms of the WDC.

Nope because they werent trying to change the race. If Lewis turned the wick up he would have steamed ahead again, as indeed he did when he took the place back.

[The Immortal Dragon]

Interestingly though, Jenson might have saved McLaren's bacon by either misunderstanding or ignoring the "save fuel" code. Lewis asked on the radio: "if I save fuel will Jenson try and pass me", his engineer replied: "no", had Jenson made no move, that transmission would've been clearer than: "Fernando is faster than you, can you confirm you understood that message".

Surely from a moral point of view, what McLaren tried to do was at least just as wrong. Possibly more so, as Ferrari could justify in terms of the WDC.

Nope because they werent trying to change the race. If Lewis turned the wick up he would have steamed ahead again, as indeed he did when he took the place back.

True, but that only makes it not worse.
It would have been just as wrong. It's the same concept, the same strategy. Don't you two race each other.

[vaptin]

Massa was being urged on some time before the order, he had his chance. That introduces doubt that all Ferrari were doing were making sure Alonso got in front cleanly.

Jensonb - lets say Massa was out of the WDC mathematically Alonso wasn't, he still had a outside chance, would you still disagree with the order and rather see them race?

I'm leaning more and more to the side of apathy on this. I want to see racing, but if a team and their drivers would take away that racing enjoyment from me, I have no reason whatsoever to support them.

I can take the rule or leave the rule, I simply want something CLEAR and ENFORCEABLE so I know which team to support, Red Bull ended in tragedy, but I respect them allowing their drivers to race more than I can respect Ferrari's hand manipulating anything with the color red on it.

It's Ferrari's right to do with their team and their drivers what they wish... they actually have a history of treating driver like property (meaning treating them like $hit) but it's their right to do it. There is such a stigma surrounding Ferrari that drivers are willing to become their property just so they can say they drover for the best.

I as a fan will always support teams that race for a victory instead of teams that manipulate for a race victory.

In various ways, all teams manipulate to get victories. It's whether you agree with them manipulating their own drivers on track thats the question, Redbull had no choice either way, their drivers were on equal points. McLaren don't need to, Lewis is already leading the WDC. It's been said all teams use team orders, and this rule will never stop them, code words etc will still be used, if Massa feigned making a mistake, the situation would've looked completely different.

Of course in terms of getting a clear rule in place, I think everyone agrees on making it so that the teams can use team orders, but only when they feel its necessary for the championship, stops it ruining the sport (since the teams get enough scope for breaching the rule to be considered not worth the risk when they want to use it illegally) through all this feigning nonsense.

[vaptin]

Interestingly though, Jenson might have saved McLaren's bacon by either misunderstanding or ignoring the "save fuel" code. Lewis asked on the radio: "if I save fuel will Jenson try and pass me", his engineer replied: "no", had Jenson made no move, that transmission would've been clearer than: "Fernando is faster than you, can you confirm you understood that message".

Surely from a moral point of view, what McLaren tried to do was at least just as wrong. Possibly more so, as Ferrari could justify in terms of the WDC.

Nope because they werent trying to change the race. If Lewis turned the wick up he would have steamed ahead again, as indeed he did when he took the place back.

They would've been interfering with the race result as they were stopping the possibility of Jenson winning, no?

[billindenver]

Interestingly though, Jenson might have saved McLaren's bacon by either misunderstanding or ignoring the "save fuel" code. Lewis asked on the radio: "if I save fuel will Jenson try and pass me", his engineer replied: "no", had Jenson made no move, that transmission would've been clearer than: "Fernando is faster than you, can you confirm you understood that message".

Surely from a moral point of view, what McLaren tried to do was at least just as wrong. Possibly more so, as Ferrari could justify in terms of the WDC.

Nope because they werent trying to change the race. If Lewis turned the wick up he would have steamed ahead again, as indeed he did when he took the place back.

They would've been interfering with the race result as they were stopping the possibility of Jenson winning, no?

Or Lewis making a mistake because he was being pushed. The team clearly, without question told the drivers to hold position. They then told Lewis over the radio that they had done so. The problem was, the message had not gotten to Button yet. Once he got it, he played the good boy and held position. How anyone can claim that he had enough gumption to put up a challenge, and then once both cars switched to a different fuel setting..he no longer had that gumption is beyond me. He was told to save fuel, but so was his team mate....so why all of a sudden was there no more challenge? They were both on the same fuel map. It was blatant team orders...which I don't have a problem with at all, but if these hypocrites going all emotional over Ferrari doing it really have a problem with team orders and not just blind hatred for red cars...they would have gone loco back then as well.

[What's Burning?]

I'm trying to dissect the event to think of why this issue has become such a hot topic.

1) Ferrari manipulated the outcome of the race (clear rule violation) no argument here.

2) Ferrari chose to manage the optimum race result instead of letting the drivers race. (a selfish act but certainly not illegal) it only hurts F1 only benefits Ferrari and Alonso. Even Ferrari fans are split here.

3) Ferrari took a win from their number two driver to give it to their number one driver. (much more complex here since this is all about sentiment and emotion) Massa is the one getting screwed here. Fans didn't get to see a potentially great moment of racing in the 2010 season.

Anyone have points to add?

So I think it's easier to argue the points separately instead of as a complete incident. It's clear the different aspects of the issue are what's leading to the varied opinions.

[What's Burning?]

Interestingly though, Jenson might have saved McLaren's bacon by either misunderstanding or ignoring the "save fuel" code. Lewis asked on the radio: "if I save fuel will Jenson try and pass me", his engineer replied: "no", had Jenson made no move, that transmission would've been clearer than: "Fernando is faster than you, can you confirm you understood that message".

Surely from a moral point of view, what McLaren tried to do was at least just as wrong. Possibly more so, as Ferrari could justify in terms of the WDC.

Nope because they werent trying to change the race. If Lewis turned the wick up he would have steamed ahead again, as indeed he did when he took the place back.

They would've been interfering with the race result as they were stopping the possibility of Jenson winning, no?

Or Lewis making a mistake because he was being pushed. The team clearly, without question told the drivers to hold position. They then told Lewis over the radio that they had done so. The problem was, the message had not gotten to Button yet. Once he got it, he played the good boy and held position. How anyone can claim that he had enough gumption to put up a challenge, and then once both cars switched to a different fuel setting..he no longer had that gumption is beyond me. He was told to save fuel, but so was his team mate....so why all of a sudden was there no more challenge? They were both on the same fuel map. It was blatant team orders...which I don't have a problem with at all, but if these hypocrites going all emotional over Ferrari doing it really have a problem with team orders and not just blind hatred for red cars...they would have gone loco back then as well.

Two critical differences... Ferrari (Massa) controlled their race from the beginning, McLaren's race fell on their lap, simply lucky to be here, don't rock the boat attitude. The second point is that they successfully sold the perception that if both cars then started to challenge one another, neither of the cars would have enough fuel to finish the race. It's all about perception so whether it was the same order or not, McLaren sold it, Ferrari didn't. It also helps that Button clearly didn't listen to the "order".

[vaptin]

I'll start with 3,

Australia - Alonso behind Massa, was clearly faster, wasn't happy at being behind him and potentially letting Alonso through would've enabled Alonso to work his way further up the field, Brundel thought Ferrari had to let Alonso go as he was holding Massa up, Ferrari stuck with it, Alonso doesn't get passed.

Number 1 and 2, wasn't ingrained, Massa had his chance to be the teams number 1 this year. Particularly considering some of the luck Alonso had, being at Ferrari for so long, Massa surely knew the way the team operated with choosing number 1 and 2 drivers.

2) - can benefit f1 from keeping the WDC more competitive, Alonso was reasonably close following the switch.

1), that article from the bbc indicated Ferrari's defence here, in the race they were encouraging Massa, Stefano seems to be saying the teams simply gave the drivers the information, the final decision was Massa's. The rule doesn't seem to say that suggesting the drivers switch places counts from my interpretation.

[f1ea]

It amazes me that F1 has basically only one rule designed to protect the interests of the fans watching, and yet there is a vocal minority demanding to get it overturned.

The vocal minority were indeed the media and fans who called for it to be implemented in the first place.

It may not be the most spectacular bit of racing.. but seriously, it is not a bit less pleasing than 2 teammates taking eachother out or losing their silly huge front wing because one of them wanted to have his ego satisfied.

I think that given the choice, 90% of people would rather they crashed than having to watch the leader deliberately slow down and let his teammate win. These are racing drivers in racing teams in a motor race. All this rule does is demand they, like, do that.

First of all, only because it was Red Bull. If it was Mclaren... you wouldnt find it terrible... as you didnt find it when they gave the SAVE FUEL order in Turkey. c'mon... that was a hold position call. Jenson could have raced Lewis like you stress. But yet, they and the team chose not to.

I wanted the MP4 to take eachother out battling for the lead... I was cheated of my action!

No they didnt because the guys still raced. If there were team orders(and I dont believe there were) then they were ignored or misunderstood. the fans wernt cheated, we saew some great racing.

Confusion #1: That Jenson ignored the call does not mean the order was not given.
Confusion #2: They still raced, until a point. How about afterwards?? where was my last laps of action? I demand a battle, and I was cheated. For 4 laps either Lewis or Jenson ran out of fuel, or they hit eachother or they could have made 3 more amazing passes. I was robbed!
Confusion #3: We saw some great racing. No, you saw a great result for your team and chose to not care how it came about. In fact, if you see Massa's reactions after Hockenheim, it was the equivalent of Lewis' pout after Turkey.

Here's a little game just for fun: imagine had Jenson continued racing even AFTER the save fuel message (the 2nd one, or the one after they passed and repassed) and passed Lewis... how big would that pout have been??? comparable to Massa's? hmmm guess we'll never know. We were robbed of that scene as well.

[vaptin]

Interestingly though, Jenson might have saved McLaren's bacon by either misunderstanding or ignoring the "save fuel" code. Lewis asked on the radio: "if I save fuel will Jenson try and pass me", his engineer replied: "no", had Jenson made no move, that transmission would've been clearer than: "Fernando is faster than you, can you confirm you understood that message".

Surely from a moral point of view, what McLaren tried to do was at least just as wrong. Possibly more so, as Ferrari could justify in terms of the WDC.

Nope because they werent trying to change the race. If Lewis turned the wick up he would have steamed ahead again, as indeed he did when he took the place back.

They would've been interfering with the race result as they were stopping the possibility of Jenson winning, no?

Or Lewis making a mistake because he was being pushed. The team clearly, without question told the drivers to hold position. They then told Lewis over the radio that they had done so. The problem was, the message had not gotten to Button yet. Once he got it, he played the good boy and held position. How anyone can claim that he had enough gumption to put up a challenge, and then once both cars switched to a different fuel setting..he no longer had that gumption is beyond me. He was told to save fuel, but so was his team mate....so why all of a sudden was there no more challenge? They were both on the same fuel map. It was blatant team orders...which I don't have a problem with at all, but if these hypocrites going all emotional over Ferrari doing it really have a problem with team orders and not just blind hatred for red cars...they would have gone loco back then as well.

Two critical differences... Ferrari (Massa) controlled their race from the beginning, McLaren's race fell on their lap, simply lucky to be here, don't rock the boat attitude. The second point is that they successfully sold the perception that if both cars then started to challenge one another, neither of the cars would have enough fuel to finish the race. It's all about perception so whether it was the same order or not, McLaren sold it, Ferrari didn't. It also helps that Button clearly didn't listen to the "order".

The save fuel doesn't cover Lewis being told Jenson won't pass him, Jenson managed to do both, and Lewis managed to take him back, maybe that would've introduced doubt for Mclaren to get away with it, but as for it being a team order - well yes.

Can't take your first difference, that's no defence under this rule.

[What's Burning?]

Confusion #1: That Jenson ignored the call does not mean the order was not given.

it was a perceived order and can't be proven, and the fact that it was ignored takes the wind out of the argument.

Confusion #2: They still raced, until a point. How about afterwards?? where was my last laps of action? I demand a battle, and I was cheated. For 4 laps either Lewis or Jenson ran out of fuel, or they hit eachother or they could have made 3 more amazing passes. I was robbed!

A little bit of something is better than a whole lot of nothing! I have my little bit of something.

Confusion #3: We saw some great racing. No, you saw a great result for your team and chose to not care how it came about. In fact, if you see Massa's reactions after Hockenheim, it was the equivalent of Lewis' pout after Turkey.

Yeah, because he felt as if he didn't earn that win... it was a complete gift horse. It's the expected result when you don't EARN something... Alonso was ECSTATIC when he got his gift.

Here's a little game just for fun: imagine had Jenson continued racing even AFTER the save fuel message and passed Lewis... how big would that pout have been??? comparable to Massa's? hmmm guess we'll never know. We were robbed of that scene as well.

In your game I would have enjoyed a lot of racing for the lead, two drivers slugging it out, regardless of the outcome, I'm a Lewis fan, but I want him to ABSOLUTELY EARN every podium finish, and fight for every point he gets.

In your little game, your drivers would have come in 5th and 6th after two gifts handed to them.

[racechick]

Interestingly though, Jenson might have saved McLaren's bacon by either misunderstanding or ignoring the "save fuel" code. Lewis asked on the radio: "if I save fuel will Jenson try and pass me", his engineer replied: "no", had Jenson made no move, that transmission would've been clearer than: "Fernando is faster than you, can you confirm you understood that message".

Surely from a moral point of view, what McLaren tried to do was at least just as wrong. Possibly more so, as Ferrari could justify in terms of the WDC.

Nope because they werent trying to change the race. If Lewis turned the wick up he would have steamed ahead again, as indeed he did when he took the place back.

True, but that only makes it not worse.
It would have been just as wrong. It's the same concept, the same strategy. Don't you two race each other.

I can understand what you're saying but I see it a bit differently. Both cars were asked to conserve fuel because it was critical both cars not only one(The confusion was in them not both getting the message). It was not an attempt to move Button ahead or keep Lewis there. They just both had to save fuel. Not a favouring of one driver at the expense of the other. This is what Ferrari did and its that I think that made the spectators so angry. Felipe 's such a nice guy to be mean to and that was his race.
What day is the actual hearing?

[vaptin]

It's tomorrow,

if it was just about saving fuel: "If I save fuel will Jenson try to pass me", the straight no suggests otherwise.

[racechick]

It's tomorrow,

if it was just about saving fuel: "If I save fuel will Jenson try to pass me", the straight no suggests otherwise.

Not if Lewis' engineer assumes the same message is being delivered by Jenson's engineer at the same time. And the comment from Lewis also shows that he has retention of the lead under his control.