FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[TechniqueFreak]

Oh -kaaaaaaaaay.

I actually plowed through what has been said on this thread since I was last here. Some, um, slightly sensitive and combative souls in this forum. I have a few points to make but I want to make clear that I cast no aspersions on anyone's intelligence, character, opinions, right to speak them or (ahem) religion. Also, to my mind the headline from Hokkenheim was Hamiltons fantastic drive - the best I have seen for a while - the team order matter being merely a footnote.

The team order rules are a blight on F1. Its an unnatural state of affairs in a team sport. Everyone used to understand that teams would maximise their chances of winning the driver's championship. Most teams thought that this was best achieved by having a number one driver, and using the number two driver to help him in his drive to the title. Nobody used to think there was anything ignoble about that approach. In fact one of the most commonly acknowledged noble actions in the history of the sport was Stirling Moss handing his car over to his team leader, JM Fangio, to help him win the title. Fangio returned the nobility by letting Moss win a British GP. Pironi was villified for not following orders in Villeneuve's favour. Reutmann was villified for not moving over for Jones.

Then, for some reason, people started to complain that it wasn't right. Drivers should be allowed to fight their team mates for the title. Sport editorials sprung up to this effect, usually in the more populist publications. As I recall, the complaining started to get louder following Jerez 1997, when Williams and McLaren arranged things so that Villeneuve moved over for the two McLarens, and DC then moved over for Hakkinen. Hakkinen deserved his first victory the teams thought. Commentators complained about the manipulation.

The complaining got significantly louder when, in the very next race in Melbourne in 1998, DC moved over on the main straight for Hakkinen. McLaren radioed to DC that Hakkinen had stopped by mistake. Then they radioed again. DC got the message (and forever after wished he'd ignored it, but that's another story).

Then we had "Austria-gate". Ferrari openly pursued a number-one driver policy. Barichello knew that going in, it was in his contract, and obviously given subsequent events and statements by him, he didn't like it, but one can only assume he thought that it was better to be number two in a Ferrari than unfettered in a Stewart. So he signed up. When at the A1 ring it came about that Barichello was P1 and Schumacher P2, Ferrari tapped Rubens' shoulder. He didn't like it. "But I want to win! Not fair!" And so with childish, graceless petulance, he waits until the finishing straight on the final lap before moving over.

The complaining about team orders reached a crescendo, and now we have this silly team orders rule. A rule that is honoured in the breach. Teams break it when it suits them, but now they have to pretend they're not doing it.

The proposition put forward by some on this thread seems to be that when Ferrari asked Rubens or Irvine to move over for Schumacher (while being open about it and while it was perfectly legal) it was "disgusting", but that when McLaren asked Heikki to move over for Hamilton earlier this week (while lying about it and while it was illegal) it was "different" and the rational thing to do. The key point of difference cited is that when Ferrari did it for Schumacher, Rubens could well have won the title but for his contract, but that McLaren only did it because it was clear that Heikki has no chance of winning the title.

Well this seems a bit disingenuous to me. Schumacher was a much better driver than Barrichello. Ferrari made a rational choice in backing MS, and giving him number one status. And whether this strategy is implemented at the start middle or end of the season makes no difference to the goal to be achieved - maximising the team's chances of winning the title. A point is a point is a point, scored in the 1st race or the last. Some say "but Rubens never had a chance and maybe he could have won without the policy", but that is beside the point. If you wait to see which driver builds a lead before implementing it, by definition, each driver is taking points away from each other for the first half of the season. To maximise your chances, you best choose your number one at the start of the season and stick with him. That had to be Schumacher. Poor little Rubens may not have liked it but the schmuck went in with his eyes open and then spat the dummy.

If McLaren had've adopted a number one driver policy they'd have been champions last year. Ferrari look like hurting themselves by not doing it this year. And I think for purists, team tactics make for great watching. Cf Malaysia 1999, when Schumacher single handedly engineered a win for Irvine. The wilyness and intelligence of the tactics there were a thing to behold. I say "pure" because I like the dog-eat-dog, all out to win nature of Formula One. But I respect the different view that manipulation of that kind is unsightly, impure somehow, and should be discouraged. Don't agree but everyone has a right to their opinion. Though I think that if you have that opinion, you should be consistent in applying it.

And (yes one final word) congratulations again to McLaren and Hamilton for Hokkenheim - great engineering, great tactics, great driving - well done I look forward to some eloquent head-banging-walls in reply. Peace.

[Mikep99]

agree with all the above mate even this part:

And (yes one final word) congratulations again to McLaren and Hamilton for Hokkenheim - great engineering, great tactics, great driving - well done.

Only beef I have around here is the blatent double standards & hypocracy expressed by some people. All stemming from the misguided belief that McLaren is holier than Thou
Why because Ron says so, so it must be true

Everytime I read their bias opinions I feel like Clicky to see

[Mikep99]

Sorry don't know what happend there

[Mikep99]

Sorry don't know what happend there + 1

Yes I do I pressed quote instead of Edit
Sorry

[headless]

I think all the moaning whining and bitching at each other is 100% pointless.
Take me as an example - people find it hard to wind me up to my face.
But to annoy someone on the web - Come on you cant do that. How can somebody be offended over the internet. It just doesn't work.

I just don't want to waste my time reading your posts, I've read it all before, heard it all before, you don't contruct arguments, you don't look at both sides of the coin, it's just dribble.

If the above is the case ------ Why reply????

[bud]

:thumbup: agree with all the above mate even this part:

And (yes one final word) congratulations again to McLaren and Hamilton for Hokkenheim - great engineering, great tactics, great driving - well done.

Only beef I have around here is the blatent double standards & hypocracy expressed by some people. All stemming from the misguided belief that McLaren is holier than Thou
Why because Ron says so, so it must be true

Everytime I read their bias opinions I feel like Clicky to see

hypocracy look at it this way Mikey

1. Did McLaren tell Heikki to pull over because.
a. He was lapping slower than Lewis so rather than waste Lewis' time to not delay the inevitable and make his pass an easy one.
b. He was lapping faster and on his way to a win and the only way past for Lewis was for the team to step in and tell him to move out the way.


so which is it sparky is it A? or B?

[Mikep99]

:thumbup: agree with all the above mate even this part:

And (yes one final word) congratulations again to McLaren and Hamilton for Hokkenheim - great engineering, great tactics, great driving - well done.

Only beef I have around here is the blatent double standards & hypocracy expressed by some people. All stemming from the misguided belief that McLaren is holier than Thou
Why because Ron says so, so it must be true

Everytime I read their bias opinions I feel like Clicky to see

hypocracy look at it this way Mikey

1. Did McLaren tell Heikki to pull over because.
a. He was lapping slower than Lewis so rather than waste Lewis' time to not delay the inevitable and make his pass an easy one.
b. He was lapping faster and on his way to a win and the only way past for Lewis was for the team to step in and tell him to move out the way.


so which is it sparky is it A? or B?

It's H little pinky boy HYPOCRACY

Wiggle Wiggle

[bud]

thought so

[AKR]

:thumbup: agree with all the above mate even this part:

And (yes one final word) congratulations again to McLaren and Hamilton for Hokkenheim - great engineering, great tactics, great driving - well done.

Only beef I have around here is the blatent double standards & hypocracy expressed by some people. All stemming from the misguided belief that McLaren is holier than Thou
Why because Ron says so, so it must be true

Everytime I read their bias opinions I feel like Clicky to see

hypocracy look at it this way Mikey

1. Did McLaren tell Heikki to pull over because.
a. He was lapping slower than Lewis so rather than waste Lewis' time to not delay the inevitable and make his pass an easy one.
b. He was lapping faster and on his way to a win and the only way past for Lewis was for the team to step in and tell him to move out the way.


so which is it sparky is it A? or B?

It's H little pinky boy HYPOCRACY

Wiggle Wiggle

Mike weather it was a team order or not, it was quite logical for Lewis Hamilton to pass Heikki. Lewis Hamilton is in contention for the WDC title and Heikki simply is not. If it were Ferrari (Even now today long past the Schumacher era) they would of done the same in the same situation. Even after this rule change was made many years ago when you were not allowed team orders anymore, Ferrari still did it and made up bullcrap excuses to get away with it. I remember the Austrian GP of a few years back. I think it was in 1999. Ralf Schumacher was in a Jordan (It was a yellow car then so i think it was 1999). He was ahead of Michael Schumacher who was in 5th. Rubens Barrichello s in 3rd and the 2 McLarens were leading 1 and 2. Michael Schumacher ended up passing both his brother and team mate at the end quite easily to get 3rd behind the 2 McLarens. Michael's excuse was, first with his brother, that he was in a different team so he wouldn't of helped. I remember even the way he said it, his tone wasn't too convincing, and then the excuse about passing Rubens barrichello was that Ruben's brakes were having problems. All bullpoo if you tell me and all delibrate to let Michael Schumacher who was in contention of the WDC into as higher possible position. So in the case of this years German GP, if Ron Dennis did give the team order to Heikki and he lied and said it was because of pace, then good on him. In the end if he wants his driver to win the WDC, then he is going about it the right way.

[McLaren Fan]

...the excuse about passing Rubens barrichello was that Ruben's brakes were having problems...

Eddie Irvine apparently had a similar problem in 1998 (I think). Later on, the car was found to absolutely fine.

[Mikep99]

Mike weather it was a team order or not, it was quite logical for Lewis Hamilton to pass Heikki. Lewis Hamilton is in contention for the WDC title and Heikki simply is not. If it were Ferrari (Even now today long past the Schumacher era) they would of done the same in the same situation. Even after this rule change was made many years ago when you were not allowed team orders anymore, Ferrari still did it and made up bullcrap excuses to get away with it. I remember the Austrian GP of a few years back. I think it was in 1999. Ralf Schumacher was in a Jordan (It was a yellow car then so i think it was 1999). He was ahead of Michael Schumacher who was in 5th. Rubens Barrichello s in 3rd and the 2 McLarens were leading 1 and 2. Michael Schumacher ended up passing both his brother and team mate at the end quite easily to get 3rd behind the 2 McLarens. Michael's excuse was, first with his brother, that he was in a different team so he wouldn't of helped. I remember even the way he said it, his tone wasn't too convincing, and then the excuse about passing Rubens barrichello was that Ruben's brakes were having problems. All bullpoo if you tell me and all delibrate to let Michael Schumacher who was in contention of the WDC into as higher possible position. So in the case of this years German GP, if Ron Dennis did give the team order to Heikki and he lied and said it was because of pace, then good on him. In the end if he wants his driver to win the WDC, then he is going about it the right way.

ARK if you read a few of my other posts in this thread I think you should get the main point I am on about. I am not disputing any of what you are saying.

A clue it starts with H

[bud]

Mike weather it was a team order or not, it was quite logical for Lewis Hamilton to pass Heikki. Lewis Hamilton is in contention for the WDC title and Heikki simply is not. If it were Ferrari (Even now today long past the Schumacher era) they would of done the same in the same situation. Even after this rule change was made many years ago when you were not allowed team orders anymore, Ferrari still did it and made up bullcrap excuses to get away with it. I remember the Austrian GP of a few years back. I think it was in 1999. Ralf Schumacher was in a Jordan (It was a yellow car then so i think it was 1999). He was ahead of Michael Schumacher who was in 5th. Rubens Barrichello s in 3rd and the 2 McLarens were leading 1 and 2. Michael Schumacher ended up passing both his brother and team mate at the end quite easily to get 3rd behind the 2 McLarens. Michael's excuse was, first with his brother, that he was in a different team so he wouldn't of helped. I remember even the way he said it, his tone wasn't too convincing, and then the excuse about passing Rubens barrichello was that Ruben's brakes were having problems. All bullpoo if you tell me and all delibrate to let Michael Schumacher who was in contention of the WDC into as higher possible position. So in the case of this years German GP, if Ron Dennis did give the team order to Heikki and he lied and said it was because of pace, then good on him. In the end if he wants his driver to win the WDC, then he is going about it the right way.

ARK if you read a few of my other posts in this thread I think you should get the main point I am on about. I am not disputing any of what you are saying.

A clue it starts with H

sparky you still didnt answer my question

[Mikep99]

sparky you still didnt answer my question

Hey little pinky boy why would I bother, you already know what my answer is because I have covered it already

[bud]

sparky you still didnt answer my question

Hey little pinky boy why would I bother, you already know what my answer is because I have covered it already

is it A or B? its rather a simple choice cmon i know youre not that slow

[AKR]

Mike weather it was a team order or not, it was quite logical for Lewis Hamilton to pass Heikki. Lewis Hamilton is in contention for the WDC title and Heikki simply is not. If it were Ferrari (Even now today long past the Schumacher era) they would of done the same in the same situation. Even after this rule change was made many years ago when you were not allowed team orders anymore, Ferrari still did it and made up bullcrap excuses to get away with it. I remember the Austrian GP of a few years back. I think it was in 1999. Ralf Schumacher was in a Jordan (It was a yellow car then so i think it was 1999). He was ahead of Michael Schumacher who was in 5th. Rubens Barrichello s in 3rd and the 2 McLarens were leading 1 and 2. Michael Schumacher ended up passing both his brother and team mate at the end quite easily to get 3rd behind the 2 McLarens. Michael's excuse was, first with his brother, that he was in a different team so he wouldn't of helped. I remember even the way he said it, his tone wasn't too convincing, and then the excuse about passing Rubens barrichello was that Ruben's brakes were having problems. All bullpoo if you tell me and all delibrate to let Michael Schumacher who was in contention of the WDC into as higher possible position. So in the case of this years German GP, if Ron Dennis did give the team order to Heikki and he lied and said it was because of pace, then good on him. In the end if he wants his driver to win the WDC, then he is going about it the right way.

ARK if you read a few of my other posts in this thread I think you should get the main point I am on about. I am not disputing any of what you are saying.

A clue it starts with H

I know what your saying, Ron Dennis is a hyprocite. He accuses Ferrari of team orders (Which Ferrari always does) and then he goes and does it himself but denies it. Yes Ron Dennis is a hyprocrite in that sense but at least he is smart and knows what is best for his team. I watched the race (as did all of you) when I saw Lewis Hamilton catch Heikki I was thinking, although it would be nice for Heikki to hold him up, if he does then he and Ron Dennis are the biggest morons on the planet. They didn't so at least they weren't morons. Then after that Lewis Hamilton's pass on Massa got me cut (although I saw it coming) that I didn't sleep well afterwards nor talk much to anyone for 2 days.