From Benson's well written article on BBC:
"But some do believe that if teams are to employ them [team orders], they should do so in a way that is more subtle than Ferrari managed at Hockenheim - so they do not upset those parts of the audience who do not understand a) that team orders have been part of grand prix racing since it started more than 100 years ago; and b) that a rule banning them is unenforcable.
There is, though, an important philosophical question here for F1 - one that goes to the root of how it will conduct itself in the future, on all issues, not just this one.
Does it want to be a sport that deceives its public, or one that is open with it? Because for as long as it has a rule banning team orders, it will always be the first.
As far as the watching public is concerned, which is worse? To know that a driver has let his team-mate past to win in the interests of his title chances? Or to believe you have watched a race when in fact you have not?
Arguing to keep the rule but letting teams go on covertly breaking it is effectively saying you don't mind being lied to as long as you don't know about it. And that doesn't alter the fact that, even if teams do it covertly, they have still broken the rules.
And don't be under the misconception that only Ferrari are guilty of employing team orders.
As David Coulthard said after the German race: "Every team in this pit lane gives team orders and anyone who says they don't is lying."
[...]
Todt is now the FIA president and - aware of the possible conflict of interest, and of the fact that some would say he was favouring Ferrari - he did not take part in Wednesday's hearing, handing the reins to his deputy, Graham Stoker.
The decision was - as with other matters in this controversy - more to do with perception than reality.
It looked good, but it was unnecessary. Firstly, because Todt and Ferrari did not part on good terms, so he had no reason to want to help them out. But also because, as one of the more astute political operators in F1, it is hardly beyond Todt's wit to tell Stoker what he wanted to happen, should that have been his desire.
As it turned out, clearly Todt and the FIA were able to look at this important decision with the dispassionate approach it required.
So far, Todt has been a very different FIA president from Mosley, whose 18 years at the top of motorsport ended last year when he was effectively forced out by the F1 teams, who had grown tired of what they had come to see as his autocratic and arbitrary governance.
Todt, by contrast, has taken a low-key, conciliatory, inclusive approach. As the first major F1 disciplinary hearing of his tenure, Wednesday's events were being watched with interest to see whether that continued. Now, it seems clear that will be the hallmark of the Todt presidency.
Mosley, incidentally, made his position in this matter clear a couple of weeks ago, when he told the German newspaper Die Welt that he thought the Ferrari drivers should be docked their points.
If Todt had wanted to send a message that his is a new, independent regime, he could not have made it clearer.
He - and the FIA - should be applauded for recognising the rule banning team orders was not only unenforceable, but also a betrayal of the history of the sport. And for having the courage to do the right thing. "
End of.
No more
please. Can't wait for the team order rule to be officially repealed.
