FORUMula1.com - F1 Forum

[myownalias]

Team orders will always be part of what is essentially a team sport. They always have been, and they always will be. Quite often, they've been employed at the start of the season too.

This is nothing new, as depressing as it is...

My view is that if it's a team sport; do away with the drivers championship; if it's an individual sport, do away with the constructors championship; having a team and individual championships is two complete incompatible ideals. Have clear #1 and #2 drivers, driver #2 always supports and defers to driver #1; this 'we allow our drivers to race' is crazy in a team sport!

[darwin dali]

Team orders will always be part of what is essentially a team sport. They always have been, and they always will be. Quite often, they've been employed at the start of the season too.

This is nothing new, as depressing as it is...

My view is that if it's a team sport; do away with the drivers championship; if it's an individual sport, do away with the constructors championship; having a team and individual championships is two complete incompatible ideals. Have clear #1 and #2 drivers, driver #2 always supports and defers to driver #1; this 'we allow our drivers to race' is crazy in a team sport!

Ferrari/MS are the only ones who have been doing the team order business the right way: clear no. 1 driver with full support by the no. 2 driver from race one on. That's what Red Bull should be doing as well. However, they try to keep MW happy by telling him he's got equal status and they let him even win the odd race (or try to let him as in Malaysia). There was absolutely no reason to protect MW from lap 19 on by telling SV to remain patient after his complaint of MW being too slow in front of him. Get your act together Red Bull - either have a clear no. 1 and 2 driver status with team orders accordingly or let them race w/o team orders with equal status None of this half-arsed in-between crap.

[zurich_allan]

How can people say team orders should not exist!!! What if the mechanics don't put fuel in the car because they do not want to follow orders. Not bleed the brakes, only hand tighten the bolts I am sure Seb would complain then.

Seb is an employee, a very well paid employee. He should do as his employer requests.

To be fair, this is where it can get messy, because the problem is that he's not an employee. He's an independent contractor, which has very different legal implications in a huge variety of areas. Comparing the drivers with the mechanics etc. is not comparing apples with apples as the rights and obligations of each vary massively.

Conversely, this is where I get fed up of people b*tching and moaning about unequal treatment at times, because an independent contractor has a much greater bargaining power than a prospective employee as it's not just 'stock' contractual terms that are put into the contract, but properly tailored and individually drafted ones. I have every respect for a driver that is able to hold out for the best possible deal and to put himself into the best possible position within a team. Many greats have done this, including Lauda, Prost, Senna, Mansell, Schumacher and Alonso. Naturally, the nature of being an independent contractor means that drivers will have different rights and obligations, even to the other drivers in the team depending on what has been agreed within the contract.

Not saying anything really about the team orders debacle as such, but it is a relevant issue that everyone should realise and think about before discussing the 'correctness' or otherwise of 'equal' treatment of drivers within a team.

[What's Burning?]

OH, are you saying that if Vettel has in his contract that he must obey, and Webber doesn't that there could be a breach of contract and this could mean some serious monetary compensation for one of the parties involved? AS IF... anyone had that much foresight.

[scotty]

You know what? Horner is a terrible man manager. I don't care what anyone says, Red Bull are definitely not a well run team, in spite of their success.

You know how pretty much every race it's fairly hard to predict the winner out of 5 or 6 (maybe more sometimes) drivers, unlike just a couple of years ago where it was always maybe 2 or 3 only? Yeah, we can thank Pirelli for that huge improvement as fans of the sport. Pirelli haters GTFO

If for you the excitement of seeing the possible pool of winners grow, at the expense of watching a procession of 6~8 cars not even trying to pass one another because they're in fuel/tire conservation mode for 20% of the race is the pinnacle of motor racing, then you're a better man than I.

When was the last time you saw that happen in LMP cars?

Honestly, the last time i can recall a group of drivers merely sitting in the train and waiting for pitstops on a regular, race by race basis (ignoring somewhere like Monaco, which is a different kettle of fish) was before Pirelli turned up, in the grooved tyre era... but even then, i can think of races where the tyres fell apart and it created a factor in the race result. Monaco 2009 for one example, only the Brawns could keep the options alive, everyone else struggled in scenes that were actually much worse than we see with Pirelli now. France 2004 where Schumacher pitted 4 times as it was the best strategy, and it indeed won him the race. Prost made a career on being brilliantly kind to his car (which includes tyres). It is examples like that which make me feel that there are some rose tinted specs (if that is an apt term) on the go at times.

I just find it frustrating that people don't seem to see how open it is in this era, and what a good effect that has on watching the races. The drivers still go balls out in quali, so this ability for compromise and good management is merely a new dynamic in the races. I can kind of see the Pirelli detractors' points in some respects, i honestly can, but i do not believe that one lap speed is the be all and end all of a good racing car and it never should be. If it were, in F1, it'd be quite literally all about aerodynamics rather than a good mechanical base, something which Mercedes look like they're exploiting quite brilliantly so far in 2013.

In spite of all that, i'd rather be seeing the Pirelli's used alongside fuel stops rather than what we have. I think that would really allow some scope for teams to exploit strategy.

Re. your LMP point, tyre saving is actually a massive part of endurance racing, drivers will often try to double stint tyres to save time in the pits. Not really the same cause the stop times are longer, but the principle of driving with care being rewarded is not too far removed there.

[zurich_allan]

OH, are you saying that if Vettel has in his contract that he must obey, and Webber doesn't that there could be a breach of contract and this could mean some serious monetary compensation for one of the parties involved? AS IF... anyone had that much foresight.

I wouldn't even begin to second guess what types of clauses (not of the Santa variety ) they might have specifically negotiated within their contracts. But it's perfectly feasible to have a clause that states you must be allowed by the team to race without restriction unless there are unforeseen or extreme circumstances that demand otherwise. That would render any team order a 'gentleman's agreement' and not one that is a contractual obligation and thus subject to any 'punishment'. Indeed any subsequent punishment would actually be a prima facie breach of contract on the part of the team if that were to happen.

All hypothetical of course, as I say I wouldn't try to second guess specific clauses, but that's an example of what is possible.

[andrew]

You know what? Horner is a terrible man manager. I don't care what anyone says, Red Bull are definitely not a well run team, in spite of their success.

I've often thought the same. I tend to think of Jean Todt as being the finest team manager I can think of in F1 and Horner is no where near this. He's lucky if he's at Briatore's level. Red Bull make far to many duff strategy calls but I guess them winning both titles for the past 3 seasons makes up for this deficit, but there will come a time when it bites them on the arse in a big way.

[What's Burning?]

Fair enough argument but the two points that ring hollow to me are; one, that they're not actually going balls on during qualifying. Yeah we get one hot flying lap but how many times do we not even see them go out for a Q3 time in order to save tires? How many times to we see one banker on an old set and then one flying lap at the very end. It's just too calculated and leaves the fans with the short stick.

The second item is that's the point, I'd be more supporting of a car being able to double stint in F1 if they took care of the tires but for that you need tires that can be pushed in the first place to get a double stint distance out of them. We're right now in a no man's land where it's become all about the tires and the expense of everything else.

And just so we're clear, I'm not blaming Pirelli, I'm blaming the troll, whose idea this was, just like the idea of artificial rain.

[zurich_allan]

I like the Pirelli tyres, but personally what I would like to see to encourage REAL different strategy calls is:

- A much bigger difference between compounds, and not so many of them to choose from. So a super soft and an extreme hard, with significant performance different and longevity difference (what's the point if in a 65 lap race one compound lasts 8-12 laps whilst the other lasts 12-16?). So one compound that is 1 - 1.5 seconds a lap quicker, but lasts, say 10 laps, and one compound that is 1-1.5 seconds a lap slower but lasts, say 25 laps.

- Take away the rule that makes all drivers use both compounds. Let them use only super soft, or only extreme hard, or a combination if they choose.

- Retain the rule that they tyres used in quali must be used at the start of the race, but maintain it through the whole grid.

- Abolish the 'knock-out' parts of quali and just have one big 30 minute free for all with no blue flags unless a car is on an in or out lap. Drivers will have to find space themselves without the benefit of few cars being on track, and as drivers will be slowed by others, the grids would be much less predictable.

All of the above would, in my opinion, have a significantly positive impact on all races throughout the season.

[Jabberwocky]

So it is ok for a contractor to not do as he is told when contracted to a company?

[What's Burning?]

So it is ok for a contractor to not do as he is told when contracted to a company?

Absolutely, I mean what's the worse they can do, sue you for breach of contract?

[PartsaS]

Vettel was on strike in Malaysia! Viva la revolution...!

[zurich_allan]

So it is ok for a contractor to not do as he is told when contracted to a company?

I don't believe I said that. You have to bear in mind that there are different levels of contractors in different industries. For many contractors - let's say an electrician or a mechanic - there are dozens, hundreds or even thousands of alternative, and as such the contract on offer is still generally fairly standard making that contractor really just an employee in all but name.

For professional sports people, and drivers in particular, this is most definitely not the case. There aren't many triple world champions on the open market, or drivers that have taken so many pole and wins to choose from. So the bargaining position of each party to the contract has altered significantly in favour of the driver in this type of circumstance.

This is why Senna could get away with so much at McLaren, such as not taking part in testing etc. because he was often negotating his contract hard and not setting foot in the car until he had every guarantee that he wanted.

What I was saying - and I think it was pretty obvious because I concluded in this manner, was that no two drivers in a team like Red Bull, McLaren or Ferrari will ever be truly equal in terms of their rights and obligations.

[mnmracer]

How can people say team orders should not exist!!! What if the mechanics don't put fuel in the car because they do not want to follow orders. Not bleed the brakes, only hand tighten the bolts I am sure Seb would complain then.

Seb is an employee, a very well paid employee. He should do as his employer requests.

in your job what would happen if you disobeyed a direct order ?

In your job, what would happen if your lesser performing colleague disobeyed a direct order on three separate occasions, and you do it once?

[mnmracer]

So it is ok for a contractor to not do as he is told when contracted to a company?

Absolutely, I mean what's the worse they can do, sue you for breach of contract?

If you are a contractor, and you're building a house.
You're contractee tells you to do it this way, you don't, but in the end, the house (WDC in this case) is built according to specification anyway, or possibly only because you chose not to listen, would the contractee be more upset then if the contractor had listened and because of that, the house collapsed on itself because the given specifications made for a bad foundation?