Jump to content


Photo
* * * * - 2 votes

Team Orders - Surprised by Attitude Change


  • Please log in to reply
157 replies to this topic

#151 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 11 April 2013 - 23:03

As far as F1 being a team sport above all, there are differing opinions on this. Some people believe that the drivers are just employees of corporations and, as such, F1 could function with any drivers. To make a point, would you rather watch a series with Ferrari, RBR, McLAren, etc. cars driven by Domenicalli, Horner and Whitmarsh or one with Lola chassis and Chevy engines driven by SV, LH, FA and KR?


Well the former would be much funnier, I'm sure you'd agree, but of course if you like to see cars driven on the edge as I do, you'd have to opt for the proper drivers. But Lola chassis and Chevy engines sounds a lot to me like Indycar, which is also a team sport even though, unlike in F1, the teams are not constructors. They're still teams and some equip their drivers to get a result a lot better than others. And they could and presumably sometimes do give out team orders, either openly or clandestinely (I don't know for sure since I don't get ESPN so can't watch Indycar here in the UK).

Up until last year there was a single seater series with spec Williams chassis and no teams, meaning that not only were the cars identical, but the playing field was absolutely level. Engineers and mechanics were provided by the championship, and drivers were assigned a different race engineer at each event, sharing his attention and focus 50:50 with another driver. It was massively cheaper than F1, GP2 and FR3.5 and also quite a bit cheaper than things like British or Euro F3 or GP3, with car performance levels superior to F3 or GP3.

In terms of identifying raw talent and pace in a driver it was the fairest competition of any series on the single seater ladder, made all the fairer by its relative low cost and therefore its accessibility. And in theory, for that reason, those who don't think motorsport is or should be a team sport should have flocked to watch it; it was on TV throughout Europe and globally via the F2 website. But it died on its ass because nobody did watch it, and in the end drivers decided that competing and winning on equal terms, thereby proving they were quicker than their rivals, was not as useful to their careers as going to one of the other single seater series I mentioned and demonstrating their ability to function effectively as part of a team. In other words, teams in GP2 and F1 are looking for team players; people who can build a relationship with a particular race engineer and a group of mechanics to work on a car's setup (and, by implication, car development, although drivers don't tend to get that opportunity outside F1), not just over a weekend but over a season or two. Not necessaily the guy who wins when everybody just turns up and competes on equal terms without having the opportunity to do the team working behind the scenes, because that guy might not be the one who is still doing the winning when you get to F1 and the amount of work that has to be done outside the car, together with the team, to prepare for each session increases.

So, yeah, I'd say motor racing is fundamentally a team sport and always will be as long as you have teams in the top category of every branch of the sport; F1, WEC, WTCC, WRC - if the top categories are all arranged around teams competing with each other then obviously the national or junior categories will have to follow that concept or else die like F2 did, and so that's going to be the nature of the sport. And yet as far as I'm aware F1 fans are the only group that either don't like or refuse to understand this basic structural feature of their sport.

Advertisement

#152 RealRacing

RealRacing
  • Member

  • 1,752 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 11 April 2013 - 23:24

Up until last year there was a single seater series with spec Williams chassis and no teams, meaning that not only were the cars identical, but the playing field was absolutely level. Engineers and mechanics were provided by the championship, and drivers were assigned a different race engineer at each event, sharing his attention and focus 50:50 with another driver. It was massively cheaper than F1, GP2 and FR3.5 and also quite a bit cheaper than things like British or Euro F3 or GP3, with car performance levels superior to F3 or GP3. In terms of identifying raw talent and pace in a driver it was the fairest competition of any series on the single seater ladder, made all the fairer by its relative low cost and therefore its accessibility. And in theory, for that reason, those who don't think motorsport is or should be a team sport should have flocked to watch it; it was on TV throughout Europe and globally via the F2 website. But it died on its ass because nobody did watch it, and in the end drivers decided that competing and winning on equal terms, thereby proving they were quicker than their rivals, was not as useful to their careers as going to one of the other single seater series I mentioned and demonstrating their ability to function effectively as part of a team. In other words, teams in GP2 and F1 are looking for team players; people who can build a relationship with a particular race engineer and a group of mechanics to work on a car's setup (and, by implication, car development, although drivers don't tend to get that opportunity outside F1), not just over a weekend but over a season or two. Not necessaily the guy who wins when everybody just turns up and competes on equal terms without having the opportunity to do the team working behind the scenes, because that guy might not be the one who is still doing the winning when you get to F1 and the amount of work that has to be done outside the car, together with the team, to prepare for each session increases.

In other words, teams in GP2 and F1 are looking for team players; people who can build a relationship with a particular race engineer and a group of mechanics to work on a car's setup (and, by implication, car development, although drivers don't tend to get that opportunity outside F1), not just over a weekend but over a season or two. Not necessaily the guy who wins when everybody just turns up and competes on equal terms without having the opportunity to do the team working behind the scenes, because that guy might not be the one who is still doing the winning when you get to F1 and the amount of work that has to be done outside the car, together with the team, to prepare for each session increases.

So, yeah, I'd say motor racing is fundamentally a team sport and always will be as long as you have teams in the top category of every branch of the sport; F1, WEC, WTCC, WRC - if the top categories are all arranged around teams competing with each other then obviously the national or junior categories will have to follow that concept or else die like F2 did, and so that's going to be the nature of the sport. And yet as far as I'm aware F1 fans are the only group that either don't like or refuse to understand this basic structural feature of their sport.


Would have loved to see that one. However, there may have been many different factors for the series failure. In other words, the failure to be commercially successful does not necessarily mean that it did fail because it wasn't a team sport. And it doesn't follow that motor racing is or should be fundamentally a team sport either.

Going back to the original topic, as said in my previous posts, you can keep F1 a team sport and still avoid the use of TOs that damage the competition. So, if there was the will to do it, F1 could still be a team sport with fairly enforced rules limiting TOs and improving the fans' experience.

#153 ardbeg

ardbeg
  • Member

  • 1,029 posts
  • Joined: March 13

Posted 11 April 2013 - 23:34

it was on TV throughout Europe and globally via the F2 website. But it died on its ass because nobody did watch it

I've never heard of it. Maybe they forgot to hire a marketing department? I would have watched it.

There is many non-equal series that have died on it's ass also, so that was not necessarily the part that made it fail.

#154 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 12 April 2013 - 07:54

I've never heard of it. Maybe they forgot to hire a marketing department? I would have watched it.

There is many non-equal series that have died on it's ass also, so that was not necessarily the part that made it fail.


True, and I don't deny it was also poorly promoted and, often, badly scheduled to clash with other televised motorsport. But it failed to get enough entries to be viable for 2013 and Jonathan Palmer, the series boss, specifically identified the teamless, or as he called it the "single team" structure, as the reason.

"As the FIA intended, F2 has always provided outstanding value and equality for its competitors," Palmer said in a statement.

"However, it has become progressively clear that the single operating team concept that enables these benefits has compromises that have, overall, reduced its appeal to drivers."


http://www.autosport...t.php/id/104751

#155 RealRacing

RealRacing
  • Member

  • 1,752 posts
  • Joined: February 12

Posted 12 April 2013 - 11:31

True, and I don't deny it was also poorly promoted and, often, badly scheduled to clash with other televised motorsport. But it failed to get enough entries to be viable for 2013 and Jonathan Palmer, the series boss, specifically identified the teamless, or as he called it the "single team" structure, as the reason.

"As the FIA intended, F2 has always provided outstanding value and equality for its competitors," Palmer said in a statement.

"However, it has become progressively clear that the single operating team concept that enables these benefits has compromises that have, overall, reduced its appeal to drivers."


http://www.autosport...t.php/id/104751


That's his opinion. And he's the series boss so he's probably not going to blame the marketing for example...


#156 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 12 April 2013 - 12:08

That's his opinion. And he's the series boss so he's probably not going to blame the marketing for example...


Of course, I agree completely, although blaming the concept is arguably a worse indictment of Palmer's own involement in F2 than saying he didn't market it properly.

My point about fans not watching was mainly to illustrate that those who don't like the idea of motor racing as a team sport have a funny way of showing it by not supporting this kind of initiative, although I accept not knowing it exists is a pretty good reason for not watching! But that's not the sole cause of F2's demise because, from Palmer's point of view, the championship would have still been viable even if next to nobody watched it, provided he could sign enough quality drivers to fill the seats. He couldn't. That's not down to the marketing it's down to the product not being what young up-and-coming single seater drivers want or need in order to progress their career.



#157 study

study
  • Member

  • 2,452 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 13 April 2013 - 11:50

The biggest surprise about this is all the hyporcites that have come out against team orders including Bernie and Hill and others. A lot who have either benefitted or implement team orders.

#158 redreni

redreni
  • Member

  • 2,443 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 13 April 2013 - 12:35

Ricciardo has outqualified both Red Bulls today, I notice. Looking forward to some great battles between him the faster cars just like Monza last year, eh mattferg?