JUST FOR THE RECORD: History of Recent Team Orders

[SennaMan]

hahhahaha - there is a better way to manipulate Championship hopes as some of these illustrate!


[courtesy of Bleacher Report.com]

http://bleacherreport.com/tb/b555n

PAST TEAM ORDERS INCIDENTS
 
Jerez 1997: McLaren order David Coulthard to let Mika Hakkinen past to win

Australia 1998: McLaren order Coulthard to let Hakkinen past to win

Belgium 1998: Jordan order Ralf Schumacher not to race Damon Hill for the lead

Austria 2002: Ferrari order Rubens Barrichello to let Michael Schumacher past to win

Monaco 2007: McLaren order Lewis Hamilton not to challenge Fernando Alonso for the race win

Brazil 2007: Ferrari manipulate Felipe Massa's pit stop to put Kimi Raikkonen into the lead so he can win the world title

Germany 2008: Heikki Kovalainen lets McLaren team-mate Hamilton through so he can win the race following an error in team tactics

Singapore 2008: Renault order Nelson Piquet to crash to cause a safety car period that helps Alonso win

China 2008: Raikkonen hands Massa second place behind Hamilton so he is in a better championship position heading into the final race

[Jericoke]

Some are team orders, and some are drivers genuinely doing what is best for their teammate.

There is no way there were team orders for David Coulthard to stop on track in the very first race of 1998 to let Hakkinen though.  The drivers had agreed that whoever lead after the first corner would win the race.  Coulthard didn't want to go behind his teammate's back after Mika had some trouble.

I think he enjoyed being able to stop dead on the track, and remain two laps ahead of Schumacher and Villeneuve.

Obviously such a situation would be banned now, and yet I doubt the order came from Ron Dennis.

[SennaMan]

Some are team orders, and some are drivers genuinely doing what is best for their teammate.

There is no way there were team orders for David Coulthard to stop on track in the very first race of 1998 to let Hakkinen though.  The drivers had agreed that whoever lead after the first corner would win the race.  Coulthard didn't want to go behind his teammate's back after Mika had some trouble.

I think he enjoyed being able to stop dead on the track, and remain two laps ahead of Schumacher and Villeneuve.

Obviously such a situation would be banned now, and yet I doubt the order came from Ron Dennis.

thanks Jeri, you are right about the McLAREN Australian 1998 GP but the point remains; the teams find other subtle ways to maipulate race results.

....and for once I agree with bernie and eddy JORDAN; the rules banning team orders should be revoked and the teams allowed to race how they seem fit

they always have anyway!  

[Jericoke]

hahhahaha - there is a better way to manipulate Championship hopes as some of these illustrate!


[courtesy of Bleacher Report.com]

http://bleacherreport.com/tb/b555n

PAST TEAM ORDERS INCIDENTS
 
Jerez 1997: McLaren order David Coulthard to let Mika Hakkinen past to win

Australia 1998: McLaren order Coulthard to let Hakkinen past to win

Belgium 1998: Jordan order Ralf Schumacher not to race Damon Hill for the lead

Austria 2002: Ferrari order Rubens Barrichello to let Michael Schumacher past to win

Monaco 2007: McLaren order Lewis Hamilton not to challenge Fernando Alonso for the race win

Brazil 2007: Ferrari manipulate Felipe Massa's pit stop to put Kimi Raikkonen into the lead so he can win the world title

Germany 2008: Heikki Kovalainen lets McLaren team-mate Hamilton through so he can win the race following an error in team tactics

Singapore 2008: Renault order Nelson Piquet to crash to cause a safety car period that helps Alonso win

China 2008: Raikkonen hands Massa second place behind Hamilton so he is in a better championship position heading into the final race

Actually, you're probably missing my favourite team order of all time:

Malaysia 1999 when Eddie Irvine is let through by... Michael Schumacher.

[SennaMan]

Actually, you're probably missing my favourite team order of all time:

Malaysia 1999 when Eddie Irvine is let through by... Michael Schumacher.

yes, that was amazing Jeri!

Thanks for pointing that one out.

It happened because eddie had a chance to win the WDC - MS had missed some races after breaking his leg in a crash during the British GP at Silverstone and subsequently could not win the WDC.

[John S]

All of the examples of allowing teamates to pass since 2002 were done because the other teamate had no possible chance in the WDC, although technically these fall foul of the 'no team orders' rule such incidents were never the target of the rule.

The 'no team orders' rule, I believe, was introduced to stop any team openly favouring one driver over his teamate in the WDC, unless one of them has no mathematical chance in the title; but more importantly to prevent public percepton of unfair race fixing following the 2002 Ferrari incident.

I agree that better clarification or definition of the rule may be a good idea, but in principal a rule must be there to protect the integrity of individual competition in the drivers championship and to ensure races appear to be races, and not fixes, to the spectators.

The hold station, along with some botched pit stops, are also team orders but are far harder to make stick in the stewards room as deliberate changes to the race result, so they usually go by the board.


 

[lkjohnson1950]

Well said John. A number of these incidents occurred before the no team orders rule was put in place. As I said, If they want to repeal the rule, I'll stop getting up at 4 AM to watch and stick to NASCAR where team mates Jeff Gordon and Jimmie Johnson will bump each other out of the way to win, and Kyle Busch wouldn't move over for his Grandmother. Besides, you only need to watch the start and the finish of those races, what comes in between is generally boring.

Lonny

[Dare]

How about Fisichella and Alonso at Indy in 2006 I
believe.Alonso's car had slowed and Fisichella almost
ran up Alonso's rearin.Fisi made a half hearted pass and
the next thing heard was Alonso moaning on the radio/

Ask Ali,Gato,an Judy

[SennaMan]

in our natural desire to support our favourites, I think we tend to forget and overlook the drivers are part of a TEAM  and, although they drive alone in the cars, they do represent hundreds of team support personnel who are there to help them win - and the sponsors who fund them. The commercial implications of having to secure and keep sponsors satisfied about their often tens of millions of invested dollars has to be kept in mind as well.

...by regulation, their cars have to be painted in the same liverie as is the requirement to be dressed in the same outfits etc. In other words they are a part of a complex entity dedicated to get them winning and I join a growing list of people in saying the TEAM's interests come first as in cycling;  football; cricket, and most other team sports.

Accordingly, as long as they do not ride roughshod over any driver I think the teams should be left alone to run their affairs and I suggest the present  rules about team orders be modified if not expunged completely.

...and before anyone gets offended let me remind you ample precedence has been set already in F1, as in the 1950's, when drivers like juan FANGIO would take over another team member's car when his failed - and the races were still exciting spectacles.

...as always, just my opinion.

[lkjohnson1950]

If modern F1 is to continue to appeal to the casual fan, they have to at least give the appearance of competition. If the teams are allowed to get on the radio, where the whole world can hear them, and order the race to their liking, millions will tune out. Who wants to watch a race where the winner is preordained? Personally, not me. Something not many people have mentioned is: what about betting. Gambling is a huge business worldwide. Do you think bookmakers will continue to offer odds on a sport that is fixed? Finally, racing has changed enormously since the '50s. Ever growing TV coverage has emphasized the driver as the focus of their reporting. If certain drivers are allowed to win only if they cannot hand it to a teammate, TV ratings will surely suffer. I believe Ferrari needs a good, hard smack up side the head, and I hope the WMSC has the balls to give it to them.

Lonny

[Jericoke]

in our natural desire to support our favourites, I think we tend to forget and overlook the drivers are part of a TEAM  and, although they drive alone in the cars, they do represent hundreds of team support personnel who are there to help them win - and the sponsors who fund them. The commercial implications of having to secure and keep sponsors satisfied about their often tens of millions of invested dollars has to be kept in mind as well.

F1 teams have not always had two cars on track.  That's a recent invention of Bernie.

As for sponsors, could you imagine if the sponsors of Man U decided which players were on the field, rather than the coaches and managers?  So why is that acceptable in F1?

...by regulation, their cars have to be painted in the same liverie as is the requirement to be dressed in the same outfits etc. In other words they are a part of a complex entity dedicated to get them winning and I join a growing list of people in saying the TEAM's interests come first as in cycling;  football; cricket, and most other team sports.

If any football, cricket, or other sports team lost on purpose, it would be an outrage, and yet it's just fine for an F1 driver to do it?  As for cycling, they literaly work in a team, because of physics.  Ideally F1 cars would be designed for team work.  NASCAR has this nailed down, and one of the most interesting parts of the sport is creating a sort of temporary alliance, a group of 5 cars is faster than a smaller group, you get together with 4 guys for 20 laps, and you're going to have a chance to win!

F1's 'team work' is limited to two options:  holding up the other guys, or letting your teammate pass.  Very few people would consider either option to be 'sporting'.  If the drivers aren't 'sporting' it's not sport, and if it's not sport, what are we watching?

Accordingly, as long as they do not ride roughshod over any driver I think the teams should be left alone to run their affairs and I suggest the present  rules about team orders be modified if not expunged completely.

Honestly, I'm okay with team orders, if the rules allow it.  I've been watching the sport long enough that I get it.  The risk isn't losing fans who get it, but rather more casual fans who wonder why Massa can be winning, and just give it up.  If I only watch my local race, I don't care about the WCC, or even the WDC, I just want to watch someone win.  If people give up on winning, I'll give up on watching.

...and before anyone gets offended let me remind you ample precedence has been set already in F1, as in the 1950's, when drivers like juan FANGIO would take over another team member's car when his failed - and the races were still exciting spectacles.

And Fangio's safetey equipment consisted of goggles, t-shirt and a cigar.  The sport is going to change over time, and something that people accepted one day will not be accepted another.

It's not up to F1 to tell fans what they want to watch... it's up to F1 to give the fans what they to watch.

...as always, just my opinion.

If would be so DULL here if we all agreed.

Keep 'em coming!

[Warmwater]

SennaMan is right (IMHO).
Comments about "race fixing" are a little off the mark, while one team may manipulate the finishing order of their two cars, it does not "fix" the race itself. As far as betting is concerned, the betters and odds-makers should be able to figure out which car is favored by each team, in fact it would make the gambling even more interesting.

[lkjohnson1950]

I think the payout for Sunday's race by the bookies changed significantly after the "pass" for the lead, and I doubt the bookies were too happy about it.

Lonny

[cosworth151]

Dictating who wins and who doesn't is the very definition of race fixing.

Do we talk about Lotus's great win at Monaco in 61? No, we talk about Moss. Have you ever heard anyone speak with awe about Maserati's epic victory at the Nurburgring in 57? No, it's Fangio's win. Of course, they didn't even have a Constructor Championship then.

[lkjohnson1950]

And the talk about the German GP won't be about the great drives of Massa and Alonso bringing Ferrari back to the front of the field. It will be about the team orders of Ferrari spoiling the race. And listening to Ferrari management, they don't get it and are totally unrepentant. They need a lesson.

Lonny