GPWizard F1 Forum
F1 News & Discussions => General F1 Discussion => Topic started by: Willy on September 29, 2019, 07:26:52 PM
-
I am not sure what Ferarri was up to today but they didn't help either driver with their supposed previous agreement between drivers.
Seb gets a great start and starts to run away and then the team calls Leclerc to say Seb will let him by next laps!!
The radio call to Seb was not a surprise when he refused to pull over.
Seb had a better start..let them race.
I truly am thrilled to see someone of Leclerc's talent grow and develop into, what I believe, will be a future champion. But I don't agree with team orders about whoever gets to be ahead based upon an arrangement made beforehand.
Nice to Lewis was able to capitalize on Ferrari's misfortune today and increase his lead in the championship as he hasn't gotten many wins lately.
The win of the day for me was to hear Paul di Resta doing colour on Sky in place of Martin Brundle.
I see Paul as a worthy successor to Martin as I find Martin can be a bit pompous now and again.
Sochi is a rather boring track. I realize they are trying to get use out of a facility that has no real use now it has finished as an Olympic site.
-
From what I read Charles was supposed to tow Vettel
to avoid Lewis from using the slipstream.
-
Just thinking out loud, but it seems to me that team orders work differently between Ferrari and Mercedes. At Mercedes team orders just work. They are not always the correct decision, but the execution is generally flawless, even if it loses then the race. At Ferrari on the other hand team orders are always a mess and not thought through fully. Apparently no thought was given to what happens if Vettel through a combination of a great start and the tow from leclerc actually manages to leapfrog him...
Also, if my maths serves me correctly Vettel is now out of the running for the title.
-
A tenth of a lap every lap is not my definition of "running away" and is easily explained by the dirty air effect, especially if the following driver knows there's supposed to be a command coming (note: the Channel 4 broadcast never indicated whether Charles was told he needed to go faster in response to Seb's instruction to that effect).
Trying to predict how the first corner will go is a pretty daft order in the first place. But if Ferrari really needed to do it, they should have reversed it by pitstop undercut and told both drivers so. It's fairly reliable, difficult to game in a self-serving manner and doesn't depend on a driver working against their own instinct. I cannot imagine Mercedes attempting this... ...and there's a reason for that...
-
Daft is one word for it, completely insane are the words I would use. :sick:
Sure team orders are allowed but to have them proclaimed across the world in radio broadcasts on lap 2 or 3 of a GP is probably the craziest thing I've seen in F1 for many a year. I'd stick the team in front of a disciplinary panel for bringing F1 into disrepute.
I'm surprised there is not more outrage at Ferrari as a team and Charles himself, does no one remember the Shcumi/Barichello gifted race win incident at the A ring.
To me this as bad, very bad.
F1 teams spend 80%, perhaps more, of their time keeping everyone in the dark about what they are up to in the sport, yet they can comfortably allow a driver and a team to discuss race fixing - lets be honest that's what we are talking about- on the world feed on race day. :nono:
- Kinda spoils the magic of F1 don't you think? ::)
-
Daft is one word for it, completely insane are the words I would use. :sick:
Sure team orders are allowed but to have them proclaimed across the world in radio broadcasts on lap 2 or 3 of a GP is probably the craziest thing I've seen in F1 for many a year. I'd stick the team in front of a disciplinary panel for bringing F1 into disrepute.
I'm surprised there is not more outrage at Ferrari as a team and Charles himself, does no one remember the Shcumi/Barichello gifted race win incident at the A ring.
To me this as bad, very bad.
F1 teams spend 80%, perhaps more, of their time keeping everyone in the dark about what they are up to in the sport, yet they can comfortably allow a driver and a team to discuss race fixing - lets be honest that's what we are talking about- on the world feed on race day. :nono:
- Kinda spoils the magic of F1 don't you think? ::)
1) I agree, letting the teams decide who wins is tantamount to race fixing. HOWEVER, if you're going to gamble on the sport, you should be aware this is a possibility, so I see no real problem here.
2) It is a team sport, the idea of a number one and number two drivers has a very long history. Rarely are the drivers matched, and when they are, things rarely go well for the team, either on track disasters (2007), or a host of embarrassing incidents (which seem to almost always involve Vettel or Haas)
3) No one ever seems to bring up Australia in 1998 where Mika Hakkinen and David Coulthard started one-two for McLaren, and agreed whoever led the first corner would win the race. Hakkinen did lead in the first corner, but, and I forget why, fell quite a bit behind Coulthard. The McLarens were dominant, having lapped the entire field. Coulthard literally stopped on track so that Hakkinen could pass him for the lead.
I don't remember anyone complaining about that.
But it does show that some drivers take their agreements seriously.
-
They weren't race-fixing, because they weren't trying to decide the result. They were trying to get it so there wasn't a perverse incentive to qualify slower than one's team-mate in order to get a decisive advantage in the race (something both drivers are entirely capable of doing - and capable of handing victory on a plate to Mercedes on the Saturday). Once that was done, everyone would have been free to race and earn their positions.
This plan was probably hatched before qualifying, but such a hash was made of its planning that nobody seemed to know what they were doing in the race. And without the plan, it was hardly surprising that Leclerc was worrying about promises being broken, or at least bent. (I am working on the assumption that once Vettel took the lead, he realised the entire strategy was daft and elected to ignore it going forward).
I'm used to team orders. I'm even used to the occasional bit of actual match-fixing in support. I am not used to the level of strategic inepitude Ferrari have "treated" us to in 2019. But to some extent I've got used to it by now.
While Twitter's pretty calm about the whole thing, for the reasons given above... ...I can tell you Tumblr's been throwing a lot of anger at Vettel (for ignoring team orders when it suited him), Leclerc (for complaining on the radio about the situation), the strategists (for coming up with such a strategy) and Binotto (for agreeing to said strategy being attempted).
-
I think it was all summed up in Seb’s comment; “I would have passed him anyway” and who could argue. He hardly spent any in Lelerc’s slipstream, he just made a better start. The team should never discuss giving a place up - they always have ultimate control at the pit stops! Yet again I think Leclerc did himself a dis-service with the pathetic whinging. Normally a ‘neutral’ I was really backing Hamilton. He simply drove better than the others!
-
The teams (understandably) view F1 as a team sport. they are interested in the best result for the team, not an individual driver. I can understand this view even if I don't agree with it.
Now the FIA is making noises about dinging team principal Guenther Steiner for a radio call to K-Mag during the race. He told his driver about a "stupid idiot steward" who penalized the Dane for the way he rejoined the Sochi track after an incident. They are claiming that Steiner could somehow be penalized for breaching the International Sporting Code in relation to bringing the FIA into disrepute.
Two thoughts on that. First, "stupid idiot steward" was far more polite that what I was calling them at that moment. Second, it would not be possible for anyone to bring the FIA into disrepute. They've already been in disrepute since well into the last millennium. :P
-
The teams (understandably) view F1 as a team sport. they are interested in the best result for the team, not an individual driver. I can understand this view even if I don't agree with it.
Now the FIA is making noises about dinging team principal Guenther Steiner for a radio call to K-Mag during the race. He told his driver about a "stupid idiot steward" who penalized the Dane for the way he rejoined the Sochi track after an incident. They are claiming that Steiner could somehow be penalized for breaching the International Sporting Code in relation to bringing the FIA into disrepute.
Two thoughts on that. First, "stupid idiot steward" was far more polite that what I was calling them at that moment. Second, it would not be possible for anyone to bring the FIA into disrepute. They've already been in disrepute since well into the last millennium. :P
I sort of agree with the FIA on this. Most sports have rules that officials be treated civilly in public. In theory they are role models, and respect is still an admirable trait to model.
HOWEVER, I do think it's kind of stupid that there is no way for the teams and drivers to have a private discussion. A driver has a LOT going on, and to hear that they have a penalty they don't think they deserve is going to be a distraction. Having a coach tell you to forget about that idiot, in the heat of the moment, might be the safest course possible.
I know a lot of drivers/teams use the radio for passive aggressive reasons, but the point is help the drivers out, which is what Steiner was doing.
-
Wouldn't bother me at all if the FIA banned radios altogether.
-
Wouldn't bother me at all if the FIA banned radios altogether.
Kimi's radio messages are pure gold though - I'd miss them too much :D
-
Most sports have rules that officials be treated civilly in public.
Not at most of the football (American), baseball & hockey games I've ever been to. ;)
I refer you to the 1950 baseball movie Kill the Umpire. One of the best, and funniest, sports movies ever IMHO.
-
Most sports have rules that officials be treated civilly in public.
Not at most of the football (American), baseball & hockey games I've ever been to. ;)
I refer you to the 1950 baseball movie Kill the Umpire. One of the best, and funniest, sports movies ever IMHO.
Surely you've seen Sparky Anderson kicking dirt on an umpire, or Tony LaRusa tossing second base into the outfield.
Watching an umpire theatrically throw the manager out of a baseball game is usually the highlight of the game!
-
Most teams/drivers have something much simpler and much more respectful: a codeword ("Focus" is one I hear aimed at several drivers, and Ferrari uses "Punto"), code phrase ("Eyes forward" is the one Sam Bird uses about 10 times a Formula E race), or a basic instruction ("That was the past. Now race", "We're looking at it" or "We'll discuss it after the race" to name but three). In cases of serious injustice it may be prefaced with a short sympathy phrase ("We feel you" if it's Lewis, "Understood" for Racing Point, or maybe even a "Yeah, it sucks"). It's not that hard to avoid calling the steward names, and it's better for the driver's ability to refocus not to fall into that trap.
What's good for Netflix is not necessarily good for the team.