593 replies to this topic

[Raincoat]

I don't think anything can beat Rubens moving over for Schumi at the Austrian GP at the finishing line. It still makes my blood boil

[Victor_RO]

People handing their cars over to their team-mates mid-race in the 1950s. It's a perfect example of how sporting standards change.

[Xaus]

People handing their cars over to their team-mates mid-race in the 1950s. It's a perfect example of how sporting standards change.

That makes you angry? From everything I've read from Moss they did it with a smile and a pat on the back. There didn't seem to be any animosity to it. Like he said during an ITV interview they were all good friends back then, eating, shopping, chasing the same girls etc. etc...

[Phoenixx]

I also remember Spa 1998, when Ralf Schumacher wasn´t allowed to pass the leader Damon Hill.

[Fortymark]

Crashgate is the worst ever, nothing even comes close.

[Xaus]

Crashgate is the worst ever, nothing even comes close.

I'm not really sure that counts as "team orders" and more of a conspiracy by a small number of indivduals within an organization.

[ensign14]

I also remember Spa 1998, when Ralf Schumacher wasn´t allowed to pass the leader Damon Hill.

Ah yes, the Ralf Schumacher who would have been half-a-minute back at the finish had it not been for the show car. Interesting to see Ralf throw a strop because he was not allowed to challenge for a completely undeserved victory.

Austria is probably the "worst", but the stupidest has to be Ferrari at wherever it was (France?) in 1999 that ultimately cost them the drivers' world title.

[WebBerK]

Renault [Briatore/Symonds/Alonso] and Piquet, the demolition man.

[Muz Bee]

In the age of F1 for the masses gifting the win (or place) to your team mate is seen as the second worst sin. What made the Austrian example so bad was the way Rubens left it to the finish. This created a shock effect with the crowd and live audience and also damaged Rubens' position in the team (whether that is fair or not). Rubens was required to quietly let Michael catch and pass him and pass it off as "tyre degradation" or whatever but with public perspective of him being a poor performer (a little unfair) he decided to put on a public display that he could beat MS fair and square (but wasn't allowed to) - at least that's the way I see the background to it.

I think if memory serves me correctly that a "no team orders" was instigated - a dangerous and effectively unenforceable rule in the age of Mosley bile. We need to understand that F1 is both a team and individual sport. There will be times when team comes before individual. The way I see it should go is this;

Both drivers start the season theoretically on even terms and are free to pursue their best performance and result for themselves. As the season goes on if one driver is out of contention for the WDC he must agree to support the best result for his team mate but not by blatant impeding of other competitors (within reason). Any other team orders should not be employed. Red Bull IMHO played this up the middle with the ebb and flow of their two drivers.

To decry any form of team orders is naive but a number two driver must be given the opportunities of any other driver. Some of the reactions in recent years about team orders has been hysterical given the history of GP racing.

[Raincoat]

Crashgate is the worst ever, nothing even comes close.

That was genius At Least NP took one for the team- unlike Schumi stealing his team mates win even though coming 2nd would have made no difference to the WDC or WCC title. He still stole RB's win. When people ask RB how many GP's he has won, he would have two versions. I cant wait for his book to come out. It would be fun to reading about how Schumi asked for the team to tell RB to move over.

[Fortymark]

I'm not really sure that counts as "team orders" and more of a conspiracy by a small number of indivduals within an organization.

Yeah, maybe you´re right about that.

[BullHead]

You can be sure that in a non - official, non talked about way, in fact in a very subtle and more appropiate way, team orders are indeed still employed.

[ivanalesi]

I think JV at Jerez, he could have won and then DC overtook him and suddenly DC slowed down for Mika to "dive" on his inside!
Apart from this, the worst ever must be Mercedes at A1 2002 for DTM. It was just so ugly, right after the F1 A1 fiasco and so badly done... It was the worst mess, I lost all respect towards Haug and Mercedes after it. They ordered one driver to slow down for another to win, but forgot to mention to another of their driver who was in between!
Obviously there have been quite a few in the past, like driver changes during the race, but back then it was accepted as normal and that's why I think Mercedes were the worst, by far.

[MikeTekRacing]

Indianapolis 2002

[potmotr]

Canada 2008

[THE "driverider"]

Canada 2008

Ah yes

A lot WTCC and DTM in the last few years.

Plus the 125cc mess up Mika Kallio and Gabor Talmasci.

Felipe Massa letting Kimi Raikkonen to win the title, it would have been better if their was more of a challenge but that's business in F1 and he deserved the championship.

I always wondered why Didier Pironi should have disobey orders and pass Gilles Villeneuve at Imola 1982, he should have been allowed to challenge.

P.SRuns Barrichelli was handed at win at Indy in 2002 by Schumi, so the record books will be correct technically and make up for Austria.

Edited by THE "driverider", 17 January 2010 - 21:26.

[Atreiu]

Austria 2002 really annoyed me.
It was absolutely unecessary and a very poor call.
I still wonder what the hell were they thinking.

[ensign14]

Ah yes

A lot WTCC and DTM in the last few years.

Plus the 125cc mess up Mika Kallio and Gabor Talmasci.

There have been many that were a lot worse than F1. Ford's team orders au Mans in 1966 bordered on the criminal, as did what Mauri Rose did to Bill Holland in 1947.

[Risil]

It's a testament to Schumacher's unlikeablilty that he made what was a sporting commonplace seem so utterly amoral and illegal.

1947 Indy 500 and the 1966 Le Mans 24 Hours were by far the most ugly examples of 'team orders', though.

Edit: DAMN. ONE MINUTE.

Edited by Risil, 17 January 2010 - 21:34.

[Showty]

Austria 2002 really annoyed me.
It was absolutely unecessary and a very poor call.
I still wonder what the hell were they thinking.

The most annoying thing was Jean Todt ordered Rubens to let Schumi pass in the last lap!!

Not only the 1-2 outcome Ferrari wanted was not really needed for Michael to win the WDC, it made it worst that they decided to do in the worst possible way, they just thought they were untouchable so they could do whatever they want and everybody will smile, that´s the only explanation i can find.

[bl-f1]

Does Nelsinho's deliberate crash count as team orders? If so, then that's the one that gets my vote.

[Tenmantaylor]

Austria 02 was the worst blatant racing team orders IMO, that really f***ed me off. But the depth of collusion involved in Singapore 08 was arguably worse. I suppose in the end it was karma for Ferrari. Crashgate cost them the title.

[Willow Rosenberg]

Canada 2008

Not interfering with your teammates strategy is surely an example of good team orders.

[ensign14]

1947 Indy 500 and the 1966 Le Mans 24 Hours were by far the most ugly examples of 'team orders', though.

Edit: DAMN. ONE MINUTE.

That was spooky.

[MikeTekRacing]

Crashgate cost them the title.

funny, if massa says this he's seen as a whinner

[MikeTekRacing]

Not interfering with your teammates strategy is surely an example of good team orders.

there is no such thing as good or bad team orders
interfering with your teammates strategy can win you the race. if you don't try it, it's just as bad as non-combat

[Nuvol]

Canada 2008

I thought you were serious man.
Cry me a river

[stevvy1986]

Austria 2002 obviously. Would also say USA 2002 but that wasn't team orders, that was just Schumi's doing basically. Those saying Spa 98 with Ralf I'd say are totally wrong. That was common sense basically (Hill well clear of him before the SC, the 2 of them well clear of the rest by the end, no point risking passing in conditions like that having seen what happened with DC and MS when 1 moved over to let the other pass, and Ralf didn't deserve it anyway). Austria 2002 though definitely, especially as it wasn't needed at all, as they had by far the fastest car that season, and Schumi was already 20 odd points clear of Montoya I think.

[Johnrambo]

I think JV at Jerez, he could have won and then DC overtook him and suddenly DC slowed down for Mika to "dive" on his inside!

Not even close to Fontana holding up Villeneuve in a Ferrari powered Sauber in that same race.

[Anssi]

Felipe Massa letting Kimi Raikkonen to win the title, it would have been better if their was more of a challenge but that's business in F1 and he deserved the championship.

Ah, yes. And may I remind you that in Turkey Ferrari told them to freeze positions - they were running 1st and 2nd comfortably and Kimi was not allowed to challenge Felipe for the win. Kimi, obviously frustrated by that decision, dropped back a few seconds to make the fastest lap of the race, out of boredom and frustration... also perhaps to show he could go much much faster (yeah I know does not prove Felipe could not do the same as well).

So, which one of these team orders were good or bad? Both bad or both good? Both were team orders - Kimi was not allowed to challenge Felipe for the win in Turkey and Felipe was not allowed to challenge Kimi for the win in Brazil.

Kimi was ahead of Felipe by 1 point before the race in Turkey. After Turkey he was 1 point behind. Considering the tall order they had to win the Championship, a "good" team order a-la style Todt with Schumacher would have been to instruct Felipe to let Kimi win in Turkey. That was not done and I am sure Kimi had enough of a challenge to win the WDC

Edited by Anssi, 17 January 2010 - 22:30.

[Sausage]

Crashgate was actually one of the best team orders ever, almost kept it hidden for 1 year

In F1 Rubens was the most blatant and most anoying for the whole podiumantics that came with it. These kind of finishes have been seen more than once in DTM though, it became a farcial series because of that stuff sadly.

edit: btw, not sure about freezing positions being so bad, can understand it somewhat. Also the FIA seems to think it´s legal considering the Monaco 2007 result stood

Edited by Sausage, 17 January 2010 - 22:29.

[Anssi]

In other news, it has been made clear that this year in the WRC Ford's Jari-Matti Latvala is now only a support driver to Mikko Hirvonen. Had they used a team order to let Hirvonen win that one rally in 2009 instead of Latvala, Hirvonen would have been the 2009 WRC World Champion instead of Loeb. At Citroen they execute team orders shamelessly and benefit Loeb a lot by doing that. This year Ford apparently will do the same.

There Latvala himself says it: http://www.mtv3.fi/u...2010/01/1035376 so now he is officially a #2 driver and the only goal of the team in the Drivers Championship is to win the Championship for Hirvonen. Essentially the same strategy that Citroen has used to benefit Loeb.

Edited by Anssi, 17 January 2010 - 22:55.

[Anssi]

edit: btw, not sure about freezing positions being so bad, can understand it somewhat. Also the FIA seems to think it´s legal considering the Monaco 2007 result stood

Well, yeah, funny that. Fix the result of the race in Turkey by not letting Kimi try to pass Felipe: perfectly fine.

Fix the result of the race in Brazil by executing a delicately drafted pit-stopping plan to let Kimi ahead of Felipe and let him win the race. This seems to be wrong according to many people who regularly bring it up at on-line discussion forums. The same bunch of people of course say nothing about the team order that was used in Turkey, perhaps because that would ruin their argumentation, so they choose the hypocrite way.

In both cases a driver was not allowed to challenge for the win. According to the FIA rules in both cases rules were broken, strictly reading. Of course in both cases we have no 'hard' evidence that team orders were executed - so perhaps the FIA could not have punished them even if they had wanted to. But we have the words of the drivers which strongly hinted in both cases that team orders were used.

In fact the whole ban on team orders might be a farce and the rule should be dropped to get rid of this ridiculous hypocrisy where you have one team order which does not let a driver to challenge for the win, even though he clearly could do so, be okay, when another similar case where team orders are used to prevent a driver to challenge for the win is not okay (according to some observers - see above for an example).

If we want to be 'fair' and to have 'integrity', we should say both of those cases were wrong. Kimi should have been let to challenge for the win in Turkey, he clearly could do so. And Felipe should have been let to challenge for the win in Brazil, he clearly could do so. In both cases the team order was equally wrong if we want to apply an objective standard. To get rid of this problem we could say in both cases the team orders were okay. Or have the teams run only 1 car, which I definitely do not want to see.

Edited by Anssi, 17 January 2010 - 22:52.

[Seanspeed]

I dont think Austria 2002 was the 'worst' at all. The way it was done seemed a little too blatant for most people's likings obviously, and people's hate for Ferrari didn't help either, but as a whole, it wasn't that horrible. Team orders still happen to this day and just because they 'hide' it better doesn't make it any less worse, if you ask me.

I'd say Singapore 2008 was easily the worst that I know of. How somebody could argue that asking a driver to purposefully crash at a street circuit isn't worse than just letting another driver by is beyond me.

[Anssi]

Also, I can add Brazil 2008 when Kimi was instructed to hold position behind Massa and Alonso. Here as well the driver had no problem with speed and could have challenged for the win but was denied that chance by his team. I am sure the list of these kinds of examples is long even in the years when this "team order" ban has been in effect. It is a hypocrite rule and should be taken off the rulebook.

[jcbc3]

In other news, it has been made clear that this year in the WRC Ford's Jari-Matti Latvala is now only a support driver to Mikko Hirvonen. Had they used a team order to let Hirvonen win that one rally in 2009 instead of Latvala, Hirvonen would have been the 2009 WRC World Champion instead of Loeb. At Citroen they execute team orders shamelessly and benefit Loeb a lot by doing that. This year Ford apparently will do the same.

There Latvala himself says it: http://www.mtv3.fi/u...2010/01/1035376 so now he is officially a #2 driver and the only goal of the team is to win the Championship for Hirvonen. Essentially the same strategy that Citroen has used to benefit Loeb.

Ford has been doing it as early as Citroen. Try to keep up instead of following agendas. Earlier discussion of the same subject.

[GiancarloF1]

Brazil 2007 was the worst, because it resulted the worst WDC ever in F1 history.

[Seanspeed]

Brazil 2007 was the worst, because it resulted the worst WDC ever in F1 history.

Blizzard? Is that you?

[GiancarloF1]

Blizzard? Is that you?

No. Who's blizzard?

[Anssi]

Ford has been doing it as early as Citroen. Try to keep up instead of following agendas. Earlier discussion of the same subject.

Following agendas? What the hell? Hello to you.

[Seanspeed]

No. Who's blizzard?

You sure? Cuz I capitalized 'Blizzard' even though his screenname *was* actually 'blizzard'.

Sorry, just seems quite a coincidence given that this guy was a Fisi fan who desparately hated Kimi and bashed him at every opportunity and talked about how his WDC was the worst ever(which is ridiculous, given that he won 5 races on merit, more than any other driver that season).

[Mackey]

Renault [Briatore/Symonds/Alonso] and Piquet, the demolition man.

Fixed for you ;)

[jcbc3]

Fixed for you ;)

You are right. Alonso didn't know. Because Max said so!

[Anssi]

I've always given credit to everyone who has won a F1 WDC in the time I have been watching F1 since 1990-1991 (I think I started to watch mid-way in 1990). I could say a negative thing or two about them, and have, but I have never said a Champion did not deserve to win and chances are high never will. Those who do so in these discussions are better left ignored I think - their reasoning for such an opinion is likely to stem from emotions instead of logical reasoning.

Edited by Anssi, 17 January 2010 - 23:15.

[jcbc3]

I've always given credit to everyone who has won a F1 WDC in the time I have been watching F1 since 1991. I could say a negative thing or two about them, and have, but I have never said a Champion did not deserve to win and chances are high never will.

On this we can agree.

[johnmhinds]

Indianapolis 2002

How is that the worst example?
Schumacher was giving the Austria 2002 win back to Barrichello so that the whole 2002 Ferrari team orders fiasco was cancelled out.

Singapore 2008 is by far the worst, I don't any other driver has ever crashed on purpose so that his team mate could win the race in that way.

Edited by johnmhinds, 17 January 2010 - 23:14.

[MARDRU]

F1 - Austria 2002
Motorsport- Schumacher/Mercedes DTM 1990 (decided the championship) Way worse than Austria 2002

[GiancarloF1]

You sure? Cuz I capitalized 'Blizzard' even though his screenname *was* actually 'blizzard'.

Sorry, just seems quite a coincidence given that this guy was a Fisi fan who desparately hated Kimi and bashed him at every opportunity and talked about how his WDC was the worst ever(which is ridiculous, given that he won 5 races on merit, more than any other driver that season).

Sharing an opinion about a jokey WDC is not a coincidence. Neither being a fan of Fisi.

But it seems as soon as I write something negative about the beloved Raikkonen, I get a personal related post, usually with an other nickname.

Anyway, Raikkonen didn't win 5 races on merit. He won 3 races on merit, one with Hamilton's DNF, and one with Massa's bad pitstop. And no other WDCs have been won on teamorders. Not even Satan Schumacher won WDCs with teamorders.

[Anssi]

In 2007 Turkey Ferrari used a team order to prevent Kimi from challenging for the win when Felipe was leading. Kimi very clearly had the speed to pose a serious threat to Felipe's win. See, that's how your logic goes down the toilet. Flush! Good night.

Edited by Anssi, 17 January 2010 - 23:20.

[GiancarloF1]

In 2007 Turkey Ferrari used a team order to prevent Kimi from challenging for the win when Felipe was leading. Kimi very clearly had the speed to pose a serious threat to Felipe's win. See, that's how your logic goes down the toilet. Flush! Good night.

Haha, nice one. What about Belgium, when everything happened in the opposite way?