FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[myownalias]

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!

Maybe I should revise my last statement; I would tolerate team orders after 75% of the season had passed if one driver was out of the championship race as that is better than allowing team orders all season long. I don't like team orders, never have and never will, I tune in to watch Formula 1 Motor Racing, not synchronised driving. I want to see every man for themselves, driving to the driver and car limits, no saving fuel, make all teams have enough fuel onboard to make it to the chequered flag, also remove the stupid mandatory pit stop for tyres, which kinda undermines the whole point of banning refuelling. That's what I really want to happen but that's unlikely so I'd settle for a 75% season distance rule, but that's also unlikely to happen and you'll have certain teams swapping positions as they feel fit in the first half of the season, driver #2 is leading the race and driver #1 is following behind, we know that #1 will be given preference, where's the excitement of that? That was the issue I had with the Schumacher domination in the early 00s, the only driver that could challenge Schumacher, his team mate was not allowed to because of Schumacher's clear #1 status!

[spankyham]

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!

Maybe I should revise my last statement; I would tolerate team orders after 75% of the season had passed if one driver was out of the championship race as that is better than allowing team orders all season long. I don't like team orders, never have and never will, I tune in to watch Formula 1 Motor Racing, not synchronised driving. I want to see every man for themselves, driving to the driver and car limits, no saving fuel, make all teams have enough fuel onboard to make it to the chequered flag, also remove the stupid mandatory pit stop for tyres, which kinda undermines the whole point of banning refuelling. That's what I really want to happen but that's unlikely so I'd settle for a 75% season distance rule, but that's also unlikely to happen and you'll have certain teams swapping positions as they feel fit in the first half of the season, driver #2 is leading the race and driver #1 is following behind, we know that #1 will be given preference, where's the excitement of that? That was the issue I had with the Schumacher domination in the early 00s, the only driver that could challenge Schumacher, his team mate was not allowed to because of Schumacher's clear #1 status!

I really can't get past the hypocrisy of believing team orders are bad, but then accepting them on a part-time basis.
I believe in team Orders so, for me, the solution is just get rid of the rule.
For you, I guess they need to get rid of the teams.

[vaptin]

It's not necessarily hypocrisy, (well, not to my brain now in uni mode), on the small scale level their bad as they it involves a lessoning of the direct spectacle of team mates fighting it out - Redbulls in Turkey might have been idiotic but it sure was spectacular. On the larger level it helps the teams be more competitive for the championship. (I don't mean small or large in moral/value terms,).

[racechick]

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!

Maybe I should revise my last statement; I would tolerate team orders after 75% of the season had passed if one driver was out of the championship race as that is better than allowing team orders all season long. I don't like team orders, never have and never will, I tune in to watch Formula 1 Motor Racing, not synchronised driving. I want to see every man for themselves, driving to the driver and car limits, no saving fuel, make all teams have enough fuel onboard to make it to the chequered flag, also remove the stupid mandatory pit stop for tyres, which kinda undermines the whole point of banning refuelling. That's what I really want to happen but that's unlikely so I'd settle for a 75% season distance rule, but that's also unlikely to happen and you'll have certain teams swapping positions as they feel fit in the first half of the season, driver #2 is leading the race and driver #1 is following behind, we know that #1 will be given preference, where's the excitement of that? That was the issue I had with the Schumacher domination in the early 00s, the only driver that could challenge Schumacher, his team mate was not allowed to because of Schumacher's clear #1 status!

I really can't get past the hypocrisy of believing team orders are bad, but then accepting them on a part-time basis.
I believe in team Orders so, for me, the solution is just get rid of the rule.
For you, I guess they need to get rid of the teams.

Its not hypocrisy, this is what i mean about you missing the point. Team orders SO LONG AS they are not deployed at the expense of a driver who could still fight for the championship. Whats so difficult to grasp about that?

[spankyham]

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!

Maybe I should revise my last statement; I would tolerate team orders after 75% of the season had passed if one driver was out of the championship race as that is better than allowing team orders all season long. I don't like team orders, never have and never will, I tune in to watch Formula 1 Motor Racing, not synchronised driving. I want to see every man for themselves, driving to the driver and car limits, no saving fuel, make all teams have enough fuel onboard to make it to the chequered flag, also remove the stupid mandatory pit stop for tyres, which kinda undermines the whole point of banning refuelling. That's what I really want to happen but that's unlikely so I'd settle for a 75% season distance rule, but that's also unlikely to happen and you'll have certain teams swapping positions as they feel fit in the first half of the season, driver #2 is leading the race and driver #1 is following behind, we know that #1 will be given preference, where's the excitement of that? That was the issue I had with the Schumacher domination in the early 00s, the only driver that could challenge Schumacher, his team mate was not allowed to because of Schumacher's clear #1 status!

I really can't get past the hypocrisy of believing team orders are bad, but then accepting them on a part-time basis.
I believe in team Orders so, for me, the solution is just get rid of the rule.
For you, I guess they need to get rid of the teams.

Its not hypocrisy, this is what i mean about you missing the point. Team orders SO LONG AS they are not deployed at the expense of a driver who could still fight for the championship. Whats so difficult to grasp about that?

So stealing a $50 out of a million dollar stack is ok then?

If you believe Team Orders are bad and rob fans of a spectacle then, it doesn't matter to that fan if someone can win an end of year award or not, he is still being robbed of the spectacle - and that is the hypocrisy

[vaptin]

I think they're different arguments, when does being robbed of the spectacle have to take a back-seat to the WDC fight? Your still being robbed of the spectacle, but as the circumstances have changed, its a different ball game.

[racechick]

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!

Maybe I should revise my last statement; I would tolerate team orders after 75% of the season had passed if one driver was out of the championship race as that is better than allowing team orders all season long. I don't like team orders, never have and never will, I tune in to watch Formula 1 Motor Racing, not synchronised driving. I want to see every man for themselves, driving to the driver and car limits, no saving fuel, make all teams have enough fuel onboard to make it to the chequered flag, also remove the stupid mandatory pit stop for tyres, which kinda undermines the whole point of banning refuelling. That's what I really want to happen but that's unlikely so I'd settle for a 75% season distance rule, but that's also unlikely to happen and you'll have certain teams swapping positions as they feel fit in the first half of the season, driver #2 is leading the race and driver #1 is following behind, we know that #1 will be given preference, where's the excitement of that? That was the issue I had with the Schumacher domination in the early 00s, the only driver that could challenge Schumacher, his team mate was not allowed to because of Schumacher's clear #1 status!

I really can't get past the hypocrisy of believing team orders are bad, but then accepting them on a part-time basis.
I believe in team Orders so, for me, the solution is just get rid of the rule.
For you, I guess they need to get rid of the teams.

Its not hypocrisy, this is what i mean about you missing the point. Team orders SO LONG AS they are not deployed at the expense of a driver who could still fight for the championship. Whats so difficult to grasp about that?

So stealing a $50 out of a million dollar stack is ok then?

If you believe Team Orders are bad and rob fans of a spectacle then, it doesn't matter to that fan if someone can win an end of year award or not, he is still being robbed of the spectacle - and that is the hypocrisy

I believe they're bad primarily because they unfairly disadvantage one driver. Yes robbing the fans of racing is an aspect of it but in the latter part of the eason the spectacle of the individual races becomes less important than the run for the wire by the title contenders.

[racechick]

I think they're different arguments, when does being robbed of the spectacle have to take a back-seat to the WDC fight? Your still being robbed of the spectacle, but as the circumstances have changed, its a different ball game.

yes

[What's Burning?]

Spanky, you seem to have an affinity for not only stating your opinions as if they were facts but then you go out of your way chastising someone else's opinion as fact.

Learn to separate the two and you'll lower your blood pressure, and enjoy life a bit more. Some people are argumentative or combative or condescending and it may all be a persona you've created here for your entertainment, that's fine. But it gets old when you continuously go out of your way to simply stir the pot.

You put decent thought into some of your posts, and you've shown that you're a knowledgeable F1 fan based on some of the input on certain topics, but just learn to quit while you're ahead, state your point, give your facts, give your opinions, (keep them separate) but don 't be so damned adversarial about the slightest thing that you disagree with. Take a deep breath and move on.

You're not going to change mindsets on either side of the fence. If you can't comprehend someone's opinion, they're allowed it, just like you force feed everyone else yours. No need to call someone a hypocrite when you're living in a glass house.

[spankyham]

I believe they're bad primarily because they unfairly disadvantage one driver. Yes robbing the fans of racing is an aspect of it but in the latter part of the eason the spectacle of the individual races becomes less important than the run for the wire by the title contenders.

I think they're different arguments, when does being robbed of the spectacle have to take a back-seat to the WDC fight? Your still being robbed of the spectacle, but as the circumstances have changed, its a different ball game.

yes

So the fight for WDC takes precedent over the requirement for drivers to compete at each race
BUT
That's only a little bit true, about 25%
AND
Only if one driver has no chance is someone's opinion

You just keep adding to the hypocrisy, and then trying to justify it with more convolutions and twists and turns. Good luck trying to sort all that out into rules. Perhaps we can have a judging panel to decide when team orders can be allowed, and then we can have another judging panel to decide which drivers really have a chance.
Oh, and what about if team-X has one of its drivers with no chance, but their rivals team-Y has both of it's drivers with a chance, so X can and Y can't? Or, hang on, there were 21 races at the start of the season and were up to lap 17 of the 17th race, and, driver B in team X is in 11 place, a lap down - but he has a mathematical chance of ..............

[vaptin]

Your basically arguing for the 01 rule there, which I think we should revert to.

[myownalias]

Maybe I should revise my last statement; I would tolerate team orders after 75% of the season had passed if one driver was out of the championship race as that is better than allowing team orders all season long. I don't like team orders, never have and never will, I tune in to watch Formula 1 Motor Racing, not synchronised driving. I want to see every man for themselves, driving to the driver and car limits, no saving fuel, make all teams have enough fuel onboard to make it to the chequered flag, also remove the stupid mandatory pit stop for tyres, which kinda undermines the whole point of banning refuelling. That's what I really want to happen but that's unlikely so I'd settle for a 75% season distance rule, but that's also unlikely to happen and you'll have certain teams swapping positions as they feel fit in the first half of the season, driver #2 is leading the race and driver #1 is following behind, we know that #1 will be given preference, where's the excitement of that? That was the issue I had with the Schumacher domination in the early 00s, the only driver that could challenge Schumacher, his team mate was not allowed to because of Schumacher's clear #1 status!

I really can't get past the hypocrisy of believing team orders are bad, but then accepting them on a part-time basis.

If you read my above quoted post; you'll see that I said having a partial team order ban is better than allowing unilateral team orders, I would prefer to have a complete team orders ban and any team employing team orders should be excluded from the race. That's what I really want to see, every driver for himself, I believe the constructors championship should be secondary to the drivers championship; this would provide better racing and entertainment all round. In reality we all know that the current team orders ban will be repealed before the start of next season, hopefully it will revert to the pre-2003 rules on team orders but I am willing to say that team orders will be unilaterally allowed with a gentleman's agreement within FOTA, which ultimately means nothing in the real world!

[racechick]

I believe they're bad primarily because they unfairly disadvantage one driver. Yes robbing the fans of racing is an aspect of it but in the latter part of the eason the spectacle of the individual races becomes less important than the run for the wire by the title contenders.

You just keep adding to the hypocrisy,

No. I just keep trying to make you understand the difference.

[SennaVille]

I believe they're bad primarily because they unfairly disadvantage one driver. Yes robbing the fans of racing is an aspect of it but in the latter part of the eason the spectacle of the individual races becomes less important than the run for the wire by the title contenders.

You just keep adding to the hypocrisy,

No. I just keep trying to make you understand the difference.

I think it's time to throw in the towel, agree to disagree *deep breaths*

racechick is right though ....ducks, runs!

[darwin dali]

Team orders are not a pretty sight, especially for the public at large. However, just look at cycling with its plethora of water carriers: nobody moans about team orders or favoritism there because most all spectators know that this is the way it's done, from the get go I might add, none of that 75% nonsense.