Everett Ogilvie

It disgusts me.

(no spoiler here - if you can figure it out from the thread title then you are telepathic)

Zoxxo

With what amounted to just three corners to go in the race the team wanted to prevent any "desperate" moves that could cost them dearly in the points race. That's a far cry from declaring winners and losers with half the race to go. Car B was not going to pass car A in those final three corners without a high potential for grief. And all you have to do to understand the motivation for this is to watch what went on between those other two guys on the last corner.

I hate team orders as much as anyone but in this case it was a no-brainer that even I would have called for.

Z//

Everett Ogilvie

Team orders don't exist in any other current racing, at least that I have observed recently. The "team" may or may not be better off due to the orders given today, but driver B is PISSED, and as the announcers confirmed, with good reason. Typically some of the best racing one can see is teammates going at it (in other series) RISKING losing both cars to see who wins (what you call going conservative to avoid high potential for grief - no thanks). Cudos to owners who allow or even promote that.

rfn026

Team orders exist in every from of racing. It's just that in F1 they talk about it. You don't want driver's tearing up some very expensive cars just to prove who has the biggest one. Keep in mind that drivers are employees. They don't have to pay the bills.

I'm sure you've agreed with every single decision your company's owner has ever made.

Richard Newton
Facebook

Everett Ogilvie

I have NEVER seen Rick Hendrick, Joe Gibbs or Jack Roush give team orders. To the contrary, they encourage the best car/driver to win. I have never seen harder racing than Jeff Gordon vs. Jimmy Johnson or Kyle Busch vs. Joey Logano or Carl Edwards vs. Matt Kenseth. Poo Poo NASCAR all you want, they know what extreme close racing is. Same for IRL - Andretti, Ganassi and Penske teammates go at each other all the time.

SIK02SS

Jeff Gordon was ordered to push Martin to a win at Daytona the other week...different yes, but a team order that prevents Gordon from winning if he is pushing all race long none the less

Zoxxo

Precisely. Arguing about this is like baying at the moon. It is what it is. Either accept it or find some form of racing you like that doesn't do it. Good luck with that, btw. Anyone who thinks that team orders don't happen regularly in NASCAR and IndyCar is naive in the extreme. As was said before, they just don't talk about it.)

Formula One is a team sport. Period. It always has been. In the olden days driver B would often stop and give driver A his car(!) as ordered by the team.

The fan perception of this being a personal "driver vs. driver" sport is just that, a fan perception that's been built up by a press corps. that wants to focus on people rather than organizations. Even Varsha tries to ramp up the "controversy" when he says stuff like "...but the real story may be Red Bull...". It's really not, Bob. Only if you and the gang succeed in once again fanning the flames of "controversy" in order to generate page clicks.

The Constructor's title is what the teams really want and it's constructor's points that pay the bills at the end of the season. And *both* cars and drivers contribute to that point tally. The teams pay for the car design, personnel, support equipment, salaries, etc. But to think that they are doing all that as some sort of altrustic, patriotic exercise to further the interests of the driver(s) is silly on the face of it. In the big picture it is *not* about the drivers. That's just how a lot of folks wish things were.

Z//

Everett Ogilvie

Not ordered, he agreed that it was Mark's turn and if they found themselves in the right position he would stay the pusher. The big difference is he wanted to do that - "driver B" today wanted to pass driver A but was told not to.

Perfect REAL TIME example - the IRL race that just ended - the last 3 laps were a battle for the win between 3 Ganassi cars; Rahal, Franchitti, and Dixon. Dario passed his teammate Rahal with 2 to go and Dixon tried to get Dario till the end, he just couldn't. Chip did not give any team orders today.

drivinhard

I am fairly certain the voice transmissions we see on the broadcast are not live, but replayed after they are already transmitted. In this case, car B was knocking on car A's bumper over a lap before the finish (and I suspect the call came soon after that, but pretty sure it wasn't as late as 3 corners from the end, ie, when we saw it).

Zoxxo

I've never seen a murder. Does that mean it never happens?

No Problem.

They know what showmanship is. The fact that teammates "go at each other" does not at all mean that they aren't operating under team orders. Do you think there is a spoken admonition to the drivers to make sure that they don't take each other out? That "team order" guarantees a different form of racing between those two than occurs between either of those drivers and every other driver on the track. And there ya go.

Z//

Zoxxo

You're correct. The voice transmissions are delayed. But regardless, the rationale behind their decision still stands true.

Z//

sperkins

Bullcrap. There was over a lap left when he could have made the pass. He should have slowed down by 5 seconds or more just to prove that he was told he wasn't allowed make the pass, but that would have obviously gone against the phrase "maintain the gap".

Why was the winner the only one to give a post race interview?

Everett Ogilvie

There are plenty of us who saw it the same way and think it was crap. F1 has a reputation for Team Orders more than any series and this should not be a shock to anyone. It comes up as a hot topic and gripe every season, and it came up again today. If it was not a controversial deal today why did the announcers unanimously declare this would be the hottest topic of conversation all week? For me F1 is pretty boring racing anyway, and I am close to deciding not watching it anymore, especially when they do this crap. To anyone who feels compelled to defend F1 and convince me that F1 can do no wrong and is great racing - don't waste your time, you don't have a prayer (unless of course you can come up with some more junior high arguments similar to "never seen a murder, but that does that prove it does not happen"). There YA go.

Oh, by the way, I knew Dave Despain would talk about this tonight - he made it has last segment "Last Call' and he and Will Buxton discussed it. Will reminded us of last year when Ferrari gave some team orders during a race and after all the public and media criticism of the Team Orders, the Red Bull team principal gave a quote - "WE never tell our drivers how to race or not to race for the win, we would never do that". Uh huh.

BrianCunningham

They were going to take each other out.

Zoxxo

Coulda, shoulda, woulda.

Why would he need to "prove" what he was told? It was heard by everyone watching the race.

If you read the interviews you'll fnd that Car B ignored the orders and raced Car A anyway. He didn't make the pass.

Because the race was broadcast tape delayed (by 4 hours) on FOX. The FOX shows are always edited and shown delayed so as to fit the 2-hour time slot. Speed almost always shows the entire (English language) interview of all three. Fox almost always shows only the winner's speech unless they really need to fill.

Z//

Zoxxo

No, it should not be a shock to *anyone* since it's part and parcel of Formula One. Yet you seem to be shocked and dismayed by it yet again.

Pick one:

a. There are team orders but they are hidden from view so I never know

b. There are team orders and I know about it.

Those are the two choices since there is no way to police such a thing.

Because the topic is always beaten to death and because it was Red Bull. Such a prediction is a no-brainer. If it had been the Sauber drivers running in 9th and 10th no one would give a rat's *** (and we never would have heard the radio broadcast anyway.)

That's certainly not me. There's a TON of #### that F1 does that drives me nuts. This instance of team orders isn't one of them. Ferrari last year *did* bug me. "Hold station" is qualitatively different from "Let your teammate take over the lead of the race." But I understood it then, too.

Clearly. I'll just say it one more time, it is what it is. It's a part of F1 and it always has been. You can dislike it all you want but it is going to happen again, so keep the Xanax handy on race days.

Read here what Horner had to say about it.
http://adamcooperf1.com/

Junior High? Hmm. Your exact words were:
How in the world does that prove that it hasn't/doesn't/won't take place. Just because you don't know about it that doesn't mean it doesn't exist. See option 'a' above.

That was yesterday. Now that the FIA has stricken the "no team orders" rule from the book (got that?), all bets are off.

//

Rednels

I agree 100%. Don't get me wrong, when they make a guy stand down with half a race to go its complete BS, but in today's case, given their points standings it was absolutely the right call from the teams standpoint.

Sometimes a driver has to take one for the team. Its no different in any other sport. When the drivers are paying the bills for the cars and equipment then they can decide to take that risk for little or no gain.

Think about it, is it worth risking both cars finish 2nd and 3rd, to let a driver have a chance to make a pass in 1 lap so he can get 2nd instead of 3rd??? Please explain to me how that is a good decision......

Everett Ogilvie

To quote myself - I said I was disgusted by it, as opposed to being "shocked and dismayed" as you theorize. It is my choice and you don't need to try to convince me otherwise. It would appear that a great deal of the public agrees with me as it is always a hot topic. You are right about one thing - it is what it is, and further - it will always be a hot topic. No matter how much you dislike that fact you won't be able to defend F1 enough to stop it from being a hot topic. Perhaps if your replies had come across a little less condescending we could have a good discussion, but I don't like your style (a little too cutsie and condescending for me). I will say it one more time just for you - F1 has a reputation for Team Orders and "the public" does not like it. My choice is to not like it and you can't change that no matter how many of your opinions you post.

drivinhard

Because when you are racing for 2nd, you're racing for 1st place until the guy leading the race doesn't break/crash and crosses the start/finish line.

And every point, is every point. You never know what's going to happen in the 2nd half of the season.

Everett Ogilvie

The consensus of the "experts" discussing it last night on Wind Tunnel (and in numerous articles already out on the subject) was that indeed it would have been worth it, to pad Weber's margin over 3rd place in the points. One can take that for what it is worth - you can say they are not experts, or disagree with them even if you think they are experts or whatever. My take on the subject is that I like Weber and his team always shafts him for the Chosen One (Vettel) and because Team Orders disgust me anyway, I really take exception to it when they shaft Weber yet again like they did yesterday. There is one guy out there closer to this subject than anyone on the planet, and he agrees with me.