FORUMula1.com

[What's Burning?]

Everyone seeks their share of glory, ideally through direct achievement, but most people share of glory is through indirect association.

[spankyham]

The drivers have a single goal, a part of which also benefits the constructor

I think you are mistakenly tarring all drivers with the same brush. And, for me, it's blatantly wrong.

I know I asked this thread to not mention teams or drivers, and, for the most part people have been courteous enough to oblige. I will however, with everyone's indulgence break my own request. To prove that your assertion is patently untrue and, that a drivers goals should be, and in most cases usually are, higher than the self-seeking egocentric portrayal you have ascribed.

The driver I will remind us of is not a current driver, but is one of my absolute heroes of F1.
He was never a WDC but, I'd place him on the highest pedestal as a driver.
Of course I refer to the great Stirling Moss. Who, by his own selfless act, handed victory to another driver (Portugal I believe) after he had been declared the race winner. Incidentally, if he had not acted the way he did, the result as first given made him the WDC. The driver to benefit from his act was Hawthorn and the team to benefit was Ferrari.

Your finishing quote is also inaccurate.

[IceManpjn]

I cant think of any other sport where team orders come into play. If the car behind is faster, why is it behind?

Erm..., faster cars are often behind. That's how overtaking happens. People don't normally get overtaken by slower cars, unless maybe it's a matter of a mechanical problem or just a brief blunder on someone's part. If you and I are racing and I'm in front of you, you aren't going to overtake me unless you're faster than me. If you watch a race and keep an eye on the gaps between cars, and you see the third-place guy shrinking the gap to the second-place guy, the guy in third is faster than the guy in second, regardless of the reason(s) why.

[bud]

Your finishing quote is also inaccurate.

Enzo's quote?

[SennaVille]

I think it should only be allowed say after 75% of the season, where one driver has a chance at a title where the other does not.

I don't like seeing it happen early in the season, what driver in his right mind would want to concede victories or a shot at the title before the half way mark? as Ayrton Senna once said if you're not racing to win what's the point of racing!

I think the Vettel/Webber situation illustrates this perfectly. Red Bull were all gung-ho for Vettel until...woops!

Team orders should be allowed only in the last few races, and only when one driver has a definite advantage over his team-mate. You'd almost HAVE to use them in those circumstances.

[spankyham]

I think it should only be allowed say after 75% of the season, where one driver has a chance at a title where the other does not.

I don't like seeing it happen early in the season, what driver in his right mind would want to concede victories or a shot at the title before the half way mark? as Ayrton Senna once said if you're not racing to win what's the point of racing!

I think the Vettel/Webber situation illustrates this perfectly. Red Bull were all gung-ho for Vettel until...woops!

Team orders should be allowed only in the last few races, and only when one driver has a definite advantage over his team-mate. You'd almost HAVE to use them in those circumstances.

So all the talk about, and comments on robbing the fans of racing are empty betrayals, or convenient arguments that you don't really believe in? Because you can't rob them early in the season to win, but you can rob them late in the season to win

[racechick]

I think it should only be allowed say after 75% of the season, where one driver has a chance at a title where the other does not.

I don't like seeing it happen early in the season, what driver in his right mind would want to concede victories or a shot at the title before the half way mark? as Ayrton Senna once said if you're not racing to win what's the point of racing!

I think the Vettel/Webber situation illustrates this perfectly. Red Bull were all gung-ho for Vettel until...woops!

Team orders should be allowed only in the last few races, and only when one driver has a definite advantage over his team-mate. You'd almost HAVE to use them in those circumstances.

So all the talk about, and comments on robbing the fans of racing are empty betrayals, or convenient arguments that you don't really believe in? Because you can't rob them early in the season to win, but you can rob them late in the season to win

Surely you cant seroiusly be missing this point??

[What's Burning?]

So all the talk about, and comments on robbing the fans of racing are empty betrayals, or convenient arguments that you don't really believe in? Because you can't rob them early in the season to win, but you can rob them late in the season to win

I enjoy drivers earning instead of robing. Regardless the color of the car.

[spankyham]

I think it should only be allowed say after 75% of the season, where one driver has a chance at a title where the other does not.

I don't like seeing it happen early in the season, what driver in his right mind would want to concede victories or a shot at the title before the half way mark? as Ayrton Senna once said if you're not racing to win what's the point of racing!

I think the Vettel/Webber situation illustrates this perfectly. Red Bull were all gung-ho for Vettel until...woops!

Team orders should be allowed only in the last few races, and only when one driver has a definite advantage over his team-mate. You'd almost HAVE to use them in those circumstances.

So all the talk about, and comments on robbing the fans of racing are empty betrayals, or convenient arguments that you don't really believe in? Because you can't rob them early in the season to win, but you can rob them late in the season to win

Surely you cant seroiusly be missing this point??

I'm not missing any point. The Anti-Team-Orders Side (ATOS), have been arguing for weeks that Team Orders "rob" the fans/spectators of seeing drivers racing each other. Now, it's being put forward that fans in Europe (first 75% of the season) are the ones that shouldn't be robbed, but fans in Asia, South America and the Middle East - will be robbed blind according to the standards of the ATOS.

[racechick]

I think it should only be allowed say after 75% of the season, where one driver has a chance at a title where the other does not.

I don't like seeing it happen early in the season, what driver in his right mind would want to concede victories or a shot at the title before the half way mark? as Ayrton Senna once said if you're not racing to win what's the point of racing!

I think the Vettel/Webber situation illustrates this perfectly. Red Bull were all gung-ho for Vettel until...woops!

Team orders should be allowed only in the last few races, and only when one driver has a definite advantage over his team-mate. You'd almost HAVE to use them in those circumstances.

So all the talk about, and comments on robbing the fans of racing are empty betrayals, or convenient arguments that you don't really believe in? Because you can't rob them early in the season to win, but you can rob them late in the season to win

Surely you cant seroiusly be missing this point??

I'm not missing any point. The Anti-Team-Orders Side (ATOS), have been arguing for weeks that Team Orders "rob" the fans/spectators of seeing drivers racing each other. Now, it's being put forward that fans in Europe (first 75% of the season) are the ones that shouldn't be robbed, but fans in Asia, South America and the Middle East - will be robbed blind according to the standards of the ATOS.

Yep, you are missing the point.

[spankyham]

I'm not missing any point. The Anti-Team-Orders Side (ATOS), have been arguing for weeks that Team Orders "rob" the fans/spectators of seeing drivers racing each other. Now, it's being put forward that fans in Europe (first 75% of the season) are the ones that shouldn't be robbed, but fans in Asia, South America and the Middle East - will be robbed blind according to the standards of the ATOS.

Yep, you are missing the point.

You really don't want to address this - do you....

[myownalias]

I'm not missing any point. The Anti-Team-Orders Side (ATOS), have been arguing for weeks that Team Orders "rob" the fans/spectators of seeing drivers racing each other. Now, it's being put forward that fans in Europe (first 75% of the season) are the ones that shouldn't be robbed, but fans in Asia, South America and the Middle East - will be robbed blind according to the standards of the ATOS.

My personal take is that team orders should be banned for 100% of the season, I want to see "racing drivers" race each other for the win or best position they can obtain. But we know that is never going to happen because the FiA's unwillingness to enforce the rule properly; I believe the rule is enforceable, the current rulebook needs to be rewritten to be more clear about what can and can not be done in any given situation; closing the loopholes. As for the 75% of the season idea, that's better than allowing uncontrolled team orders, I don't think that anyone is suggesting only flyaway tracks should be the ones to have team orders implemented, we ("The Fans") don't make the calendar, if the final 25% was in Europe I would be just as happy for team orders to be allowed if one driver is significantly ahead in the championship!

[racechick]

I'm not missing any point. The Anti-Team-Orders Side (ATOS), have been arguing for weeks that Team Orders "rob" the fans/spectators of seeing drivers racing each other. Now, it's being put forward that fans in Europe (first 75% of the season) are the ones that shouldn't be robbed, but fans in Asia, South America and the Middle East - will be robbed blind according to the standards of the ATOS.

Yep, you are missing the point.

You really don't want to address this - do you....

Its not that i dont want to address it, its been said time over, which is why i said you were missing the point. Myownalias' take is pretty close to mine.

[spankyham]

I'm not missing any point. The Anti-Team-Orders Side (ATOS), have been arguing for weeks that Team Orders "rob" the fans/spectators of seeing drivers racing each other. Now, it's being put forward that fans in Europe (first 75% of the season) are the ones that shouldn't be robbed, but fans in Asia, South America and the Middle East - will be robbed blind according to the standards of the ATOS.

Yep, you are missing the point.

You really don't want to address this - do you....

Its not that i dont want to address it, its been said time over, which is why i said you were missing the point. Myownalias' take is pretty close to mine.

So your not 100% against team orders. You want 25% team orders, when it suits.
Perhaps you also don't like horse races being fixed, but, it's ok if its one of the last races of the day and the jockey can't win best jockey of the year. You don't see the incredible hypocrisy in this?

[f1ea]

He's (Spanky) not mentioning the fly-away races as if the FIA should rob them because thy are fly-away, but rather because they fall after the 75% point which has been mentioned....