Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

Was Vettel right to ignore TOs in Russia 2019?


  • Please log in to reply
818 replies to this topic

Poll: Russia GP Ferrari TOs (421 member(s) have cast votes)

Was Vettel right to ignore team orders

  1. Yes (211 votes [50.12%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 50.12%

  2. No (134 votes [31.83%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 31.83%

  3. Don’t know/depends/it’s more complicated than that (76 votes [18.05%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 18.05%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 SophieB

SophieB
  • RC Forum Host

  • 11,943 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:45

My personal view is I get that TOs are way too powerful to leave them alone but oh my goodness, the trouble they seem to cause. Context: it appears that Ferrari had a pre-race agreement to allow Vettel the slipstream at the start to protect the lead from Hamilton. Vettel’s position appears to be that as his start was so good, he didn’t need the protection and therefore won the place on its own merit.

 
And were Ferrari correct to retaliate by swapping them in the pits? (Presuming that this was part of the intent).

 

Discuss.



Advertisement

#2 jannyg

jannyg
  • Member

  • 1,439 posts
  • Joined: June 10

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:49

Too messy. Just let them race

#3 goldenboy

goldenboy
  • Member

  • 6,112 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:49

There's the sneaky vettel I remember lol.

Charles is whiny but vettel never had any intention of honouring his agreement. True colours.

The whole agreement was doomed from the beginning.

Edited by goldenboy, 29 September 2019 - 12:53.


#4 MikeV1987

MikeV1987
  • Member

  • 5,961 posts
  • Joined: July 12

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:49

Fair enough if they made an arrangement but do it at a different time ffs. It was idiotic to try swap them so early especially when the car behind was slower.

#5 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 7,481 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:49

No, respect the agreement whatever the outcome . " Nobody is greater than the team "

#6 kosmos

kosmos
  • Member

  • 10,831 posts
  • Joined: December 06

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:49

If they had an agreement before the race, Vettel has to respect that regardless if he had a faster start than expected or not. He may have ruined Leclerc chances to win the race. The VSC probably ruined Leclerc's chances of win more anyway.


Edited by kosmos, 29 September 2019 - 12:50.


#7 mangeliiito

mangeliiito
  • Member

  • 869 posts
  • Joined: March 11

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:50

Yes, because if he let Charles by at that point he would had Lewis up his tail.

#8 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,851 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:51

Job done by Vettel. Leclerc will not obey any team order anymore.

#9 SCUDmissile

SCUDmissile
  • Member

  • 7,389 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:51

Ferrari were too naive to trust their drivers to honour that agreement at the start. Do it later on.

#10 TomNokoe

TomNokoe
  • Member

  • 20,844 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:52

He was the faster Ferrari.

#11 barzini

barzini
  • Member

  • 1,904 posts
  • Joined: July 16

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:52

Binotto has lost it. Ferrari is a joke, cars running 1-2 (2nd car is slower) and on lap 3 there's a team order.

 

 

What a yoke.



#12 balage06

balage06
  • Member

  • 1,266 posts
  • Joined: December 11

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:52

Typical Ferrari. Getting way too political over nothing. Just let them race for f's sake...



#13 SilverArrow31

SilverArrow31
  • Member

  • 1,504 posts
  • Joined: April 15

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:53

Ferrari were just a mess this race and are only adding to the fireworks between their drivers rather than water them down, only going to get worse from here. There was no need to manufactor a Lerclerc undercut.

Edited by SilverArrow31, 29 September 2019 - 12:55.


#14 hollowstar

hollowstar
  • Member

  • 1,937 posts
  • Joined: July 13

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:53

He was not right to ignore them. He hasn't shown this year that he would be good enough to be this cocky/entitled. The best part of Vettel came back in Singapore, and the worst part of him was on display today.

#15 CountDooku

CountDooku
  • Member

  • 10,350 posts
  • Joined: March 15

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:53

I was saying to myself that you need to swap the positions early as there’s no guarantee you will be able to do so later in the race.
If Charles was leading he would probably have had a big enough gap to Lewis that he would have been out of his VSC window.

#16 Astandahl

Astandahl
  • Member

  • 675 posts
  • Joined: June 18

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:53

Yes he was faster.



#17 Clatter

Clatter
  • Member

  • 35,842 posts
  • Joined: February 00

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:53

Yes. There may have been an agreement, but stupid to try and implement it at that time. It might have been possible if he was able to stay with SV, but he was simply the slower driver on the day and Ferrari should have reacted to that.

#18 Massa_f1

Massa_f1
  • Member

  • 4,971 posts
  • Joined: October 07

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:53

Seb had a brilliant start and showed to be the faster driver in race conditions. No need to loose time and move over. Ferrari are stupid for considering such agreement between the two of them. Seb did the correct thing he would of been passed Charles at the start anyway with the start he had in my opinion.



#19 goldenboy

goldenboy
  • Member

  • 6,112 posts
  • Joined: May 10

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:54

Ferrari were too naive to trust their drivers to honour that agreement at the start. Do it later on.

Or just not at all. A simpleton could have foreseen this happening at any stage of the race.

Advertisement

#20 Muppetmad

Muppetmad
  • Member

  • 5,905 posts
  • Joined: September 09

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:54

Was it a dumb agreement? Absolutely, yes. But if Vettel also thought it was dumb, he should have said so before the race. If you make an agreement, however dumb, you should honour it.

 

Ferrari should have seen this coming, though, and they have handled this terribly to the detriment of both of their drivers.



#21 Diablobb81

Diablobb81
  • Member

  • 6,687 posts
  • Joined: August 09

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:55

They should have asked them to swap in the second stint if there was a 1-2. It's beyond idiotic to ask in lap 3.

If Seb wouldn't have swapped then he could get flak.

#22 jacdaniel

jacdaniel
  • Member

  • 81 posts
  • Joined: April 19

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:55

Ferrari deserve what happened today.

#23 Andrew Hope

Andrew Hope
  • Member

  • 7,853 posts
  • Joined: October 09

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:56

"No good battle plan survives first contact with the enemy".

If you have a plan, and 30 seconds into the race circumstances have made that plan stupid to pursue, don't keep trying for that plan.

#24 l12mcg

l12mcg
  • Member

  • 346 posts
  • Joined: May 11

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:56

Yes, but not because Vet shouldn’t have been moved back.

The correct way to swap them was at the pit stops like they did. They would have got a 1-2 finish if it wasn’t for Vets car breaking.

Now there is a whole other argument about if that agreement Ferrari made with the drivers was smart or not - as it happens I think it seems fair enough, it secured the team a 1-2 where if Lec had wanted he could have made it a 1-3 or if he got it wrong a 2-3.

So he picked he’ll help the team and end up 2nd like he probably would have anyway but keeping the team 1-2.

But the right way to swap back was in the pits - Vet slamming on the breaks on the straights when the Mercs are only 2 seconds behind us crazy, Vet would have ended up 1 s behind Lec and that’s in DRS.

#25 PayasYouRace

PayasYouRace
  • RC Forum Host

  • 20,198 posts
  • Joined: January 10

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:57

Voted don’t know/more complicated.

I see ignoring team orders as a pretty low action by a racing driver, but at the same time I expect team orders to be meaningful.

When I say meaningful I mean helping a championship contender when the other driver is out of it, or when two cars are on different strategies and would mess each other up otherwise. Issuing an order to maintain a pre#race agreement when neither driver is in championship contention is gratuitous.

In this case I don’t blame Vettel for ignoring them.

#26 PlayboyRacer

PlayboyRacer
  • Member

  • 2,736 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:59

He was the faster Ferrari.

See here is the thing, when do we see their pure pace without compromises? Charles was in dirty air and told (rightly) that they'll swap, things will come your way.

So why do you expect Charles to be sitting on his gearbox for the first 20 laps? For what? As we saw, things came to Charles nicely. Until the VSC ruined it all.

I want to see them race proper. No bullshit team orders, no swaps, no promises or whatever bullshit that later 'you'll benefit' Just go for it and race. Beat your teammate fair and square under whatever circumstances the race throws up.

Edited by PlayboyRacer, 29 September 2019 - 13:02.


#27 Anja

Anja
  • Member

  • 4,277 posts
  • Joined: November 09

Posted 29 September 2019 - 12:59

We're in no position to judge as we don't know the exact agreement etc. 



#28 TomNokoe

TomNokoe
  • Member

  • 20,844 posts
  • Joined: July 11

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:00

See here is the thing, when do we see their pure pace without compromises? Charles was in dirty air and told (rightly) that they'll swap, things will come your way.

So why do you expect Charles to be sitting on his gearbox for the first 20 laps? For what? As we saw, things came to Charles nicely. Until the VSC ruined it all.


He was 4.5s behind. That's not dirty air.

#29 Marklar

Marklar
  • Member

  • 33,519 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:01

Was it a dumb agreement? Absolutely, yes. But if Vettel also thought it was dumb, he should have said so before the race. If you make an agreement, however dumb, you should honour it.

 

Ferrari should have seen this coming, though, and they have handled this terribly to the detriment of both of their drivers.

I dont disagree, but Leclerc couldnt shake Hamilton off, if Vettel let's him through chances are that Hamilton slips through both or gets in undercut range. IMO a driver should be a allowed to overrule a call that obviously is going to risk them the race.

Perhaps they should have discussed what would happen in that case.



#30 Wolbo

Wolbo
  • Member

  • 9,001 posts
  • Joined: January 00

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:01

What a Ferrari farce. They screwed Vettel by leaving him out after Leclerc's pitstop despite him telling the team his tires were gone, Vettel was simply faster today and should have been allowed to win. 



#31 Jordan44

Jordan44
  • Member

  • 8,199 posts
  • Joined: May 15

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:01

A driver when they see a win in front of them is never going to comply. I don't blame Seb, they would all do it.

The fact that Ferrari thinks this sort of agreement could work however is just mind blowing

It's racing, you can't script it.

Edited by Jordan44, 29 September 2019 - 13:01.


#32 DutchQuicksilver

DutchQuicksilver
  • Member

  • 4,718 posts
  • Joined: June 11

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:01

Felt sorry for Vettel. My view is, it was agreed to make up for Leclerc’s lost win in Singapore. Nice karma though that they lost the win due to Vettel retiring.

#33 THEWALL

THEWALL
  • Member

  • 2,080 posts
  • Joined: November 15

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:01

He didn't ignore them. He just waited for them to swap during the pit stop to make it safer.



#34 Grayson

Grayson
  • Autosport digital product manager

  • 3,251 posts
  • Joined: July 08

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:02

No.

It’s one thing to ignore team orders. It’s another thing to enjoy the team orders which benefit you and to ignore the ones that don’t, especially in the same race.

This is Multi 21 all over again.

#35 Ickx

Ickx
  • Member

  • 828 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:02

Fair to swap in pits. Would have been fair to let Leclerc past too but Lewis was too close and Leclerc did not keep up with Vettel on track. 



#36 Shuffle

Shuffle
  • Member

  • 135 posts
  • Joined: September 18

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:03

Voted no.

 

its amazing that a team with this much history at implementing team orders, is so poor at actually using them.



#37 PlayboyRacer

PlayboyRacer
  • Member

  • 2,736 posts
  • Joined: March 16

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:03

He was 4.5s behind. That's not dirty air.

Dude - Charles was told from the beginning, your ending up ahead. Chill and do the race.

You then expect him to drive the wheels off the thing? What for? Lol

When Vettel retired, where was Charles? Yep. My point is they are being given reasons to not race proper. I don't want to see that.

Edited by PlayboyRacer, 29 September 2019 - 13:07.


#38 ARTGP

ARTGP
  • Member

  • 1,451 posts
  • Joined: March 19

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:03

A driver when they see a win in front of them is never going to comply. I don't blame Seb, they would all do it.

The fact that Ferrari thinks this sort of agreement could work however is just mind blowing

It's racing, you can't script it.

 

Unless you are Valterri....



#39 LightningMcQueen

LightningMcQueen
  • Member

  • 131 posts
  • Joined: February 14

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:04

Leclerk was no where near fast enough, what was he 4 seconds behind.. ? No way I’d have given that position back

Advertisement

#40 Lights

Lights
  • Member

  • 16,685 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:04

An agreement to "allow Vettel the slipstream". 

Ha, what was Leclerc going to do about it? Vettel was always going to have the slipstream. This is a great circuit to start from P3, as Bottas also showed 2 years ago, especially when P2 starts on mediums. Vettel was always going to be ahead braking into T1.

 

Dumb of Ferrari to set this up.

Dumb of Vettel to then not honor it if he willingly agree on it



#41 Spillage

Spillage
  • Member

  • 5,911 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:04

Went for option 3. I guess if he agreed to the arrangement then he should stick to it. But on the other hand he was clearly the quicker Ferrari and the agreement was dumb to begin with.

#42 ebc

ebc
  • Member

  • 320 posts
  • Joined: April 13

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:05

No need for team orders in the first place, Vettel had Leclerc in turn 1 whatever. Seb was the faster driver and deserves to fight for the win, for ferrari to screw there own driver like that pisses me off, there was no point in doing it at all.

All the have done is pitted their drivers against each other, which could bite them on the ass in the future.

#43 Requiem84

Requiem84
  • Member

  • 5,851 posts
  • Joined: September 10

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:06

Why did Vettel got P1 at the start?

Because Leclerc did not defend at all into P1! That obviously was the agreement: Leclerc should make life easy for Vettel going towards T1 so that he could take Hamilton.

Basically letting Vettel by and then being screwed over by dirty Vettel...

#44 Ickx

Ickx
  • Member

  • 828 posts
  • Joined: February 03

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:06

See here is the thing, when do we see their pure pace without compromises? Charles was in dirty air and told (rightly) that they'll swap, things will come your way.

So why do you expect Charles to be sitting on his gearbox for the first 20 laps? For what? As we saw, things came to Charles nicely. Until the VSC ruined it all.

I want to see them race proper. No bullshit team orders, no swaps, no promises or whatever bullshit that later 'you'll benefit' Just go for it and race. Beat your teammate fair and square under whatever circumstances the race throws up.

Is it really a good option to slow down one driver several seconds and put him in a position where Hamilton will be in striking distance though? In the beginning of the race the driver that is supposed to be let through at least needs to be in blue flag window for a swat to make sense. 



#45 pRy

pRy
  • Member

  • 16,097 posts
  • Joined: March 99

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:07

If the team agreed that Le Clerc would help Vettel get the lead and then switch to ensure a 1-2 then yes, he was in the wrong. And Vettel's team radio messages suggest that with his "He needs to get closer to me so we can do it safely" type radio messages. 

 

However the team was wrong to even attempt such tactics and enter into such an agreement.



#46 whitewaterMkII

whitewaterMkII
  • Member

  • 6,747 posts
  • Joined: November 05

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:08

Not a fan of team orders, but in this case it seems it cost Ferrari a win in hindsight.



#47 BuddyHolly

BuddyHolly
  • Member

  • 3,288 posts
  • Joined: December 15

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:09

Personally I'm strongly against team orders unless its like the last 2 races of the season and even then I'm not a fan of it.

 

Seems with some around here though team orders for Ferrari is very bad but team orders for Mercedes is totally fine. 



#48 Massa

Massa
  • Member

  • 7,481 posts
  • Joined: February 10

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:10

An agreement to "allow Vettel the slipstream".

Ha, what was Leclerc going to do about it? Vettel was always going to have the slipstream. This is a great circuit to start from P3, as Bottas also showed 2 years ago, especially when P2 starts on mediums. Vettel was always going to be ahead braking into T1.

Dumb of Ferrari to set this up.
Dumb of Vettel to then not honor it if he willingly agree on it




Fully agree with you.

It was a dumb agreement but Vettel had to honour it

#49 gramsy1977

gramsy1977
  • Member

  • 273 posts
  • Joined: February 07

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:10

An agreement to "allow Vettel the slipstream".

Ha, what was Leclerc going to do about it? Vettel was always going to have the slipstream. This is a great circuit to start from P3, as Bottas also showed 2 years ago, especially when P2 starts on mediums. Vettel was always going to be ahead braking into T1.

Dumb of Ferrari to set this up.
Dumb of Vettel to then not honor it if he willingly agree on it


"Ha, what was Leclerc going to do about it?"
He would move right and close the inside and of course fight for his position. It's obvious he never did that because of the agreement. And something else. Was Vettel ordered to "park" or "pit" the car?

#50 apoka

apoka
  • Member

  • 5,756 posts
  • Joined: May 09

Posted 29 September 2019 - 13:10

We do not even know exactly what the agreement was.

 

If anyone can learn from this, then probably its Ferrari.

 

It's just very hard to set up those things. If you rewatch the start a few times, it's really unclear whether there was any defense for LeClerc against Vettel as the pace difference was high.

 

The other issue is the swap itself - it costs time for the leader and is risky to execute.