Comments on: Outrage over McLaren ‘team orders’

By: Mayu

Mayu — Sun, 27 Jun 2010 10:31:19 +0000

congratulations ! .. you have just won a new reader

By: Iaa

Iaa — Thu, 06 Dec 2007 15:21:02 +0000

Well, the fastest way to eliminate team orders is allowing one only car per team. But strategy is part of the game, pit stops, refueling, etc. as well. Strategy allows to win a different team from that one that is the fastest, and I find that interesting. Also I like to guess what the strategy of a team will be when watching a race.

I don’t like team orders such as slown down to let your partner win, but they are in the same team. When they are compiting against others, of course they must help each other (like trying to hold others cars), but when they are compiting against each other (like Alonso & Hamilton last season) they should give it all.

Sorry to say this but car race is a sport; F1 is a giant business.Like football is a sport when u play with ur friends in the backyard, but it’s business if u r playing in the Spanish League fo example.

By: Tuzes Katai Tamas

Tuzes Katai Tamas — Fri, 17 Aug 2007 18:03:38 +0000

I’am a 15 years old boy. i have a GREAT idea for a better brake and to reduse the brake distance.it’s serious, not joke.

By: Number 38

Number 38 — Wed, 30 May 2007 14:37:25 +0000

Re-fueling goes on another thread, the subject hear is the team orders………Doctorvee (above) has inserted what looks like a clipping from the all important MadMax variable rulebook:

â€œTeam orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited.â€

I’m going to reduce that to “orders which interfere with a race result”……..and suggest that is exactly what the FIA does to EVERY race……a drive-through penalty, a grid placement penalty, even a blue flag can change a result! And now comes word that Bernie is suggesting suspension
of McLaren for the Monaco ‘team orders’ flap. Isn’t that “interfering with the Championship results?

By: Keith Collantine

Keith Collantine — Tue, 29 May 2007 21:26:37 +0000

I’m tempted to dive into the refuelling debate and write a long comment on it now – but I’ve got something coming on that fairly soon so I’ll save it for that…

By: Jack

Jack — Tue, 29 May 2007 21:19:03 +0000

Sorry, ban refueling!? Nobody likes strategy??

I do. And I do not look forward to a time when the procession around tracks continues from start to finish, rather than having refueling stops which enable people to pass and also add an aditional element.

If you don’t like refueling why not just watch gp2 and be done with it? Why wreck something that many people are reasonably happy with?

By: Clive

Clive — Tue, 29 May 2007 20:42:37 +0000

The one good thing that might (and I say “might”) come from this farce is that the FIA will be forced to define the stupid rule regarding team orders a bit more clearly. That the tabloid hacks should not understand the difference between race strategy and race fixing is only to be expected; but that the FIA is obviously in a similar position would be laughable were it not so frightening that they are in charge of a sport that we love.

By: Keith Collantine

Keith Collantine — Tue, 29 May 2007 20:12:13 +0000

I think the ‘monkeys’ thing has been blown out of proportion by a few people. I’d far rather hear drivers speak their minds than be turned into PR robots.

If that means they occasionally get misinterpreted or cause mild offence it’s not the end of the world.

By: John

John — Tue, 29 May 2007 19:39:52 +0000

I was really enthusiastic with Lewis Hamilton`s appearance in F1
and pleased to see him on the front row and spectacularly on the podium so often. However, I am now sadly disappointed following his disparaging remarks at the weekend about his fellow drivers.
I am sure that if anyone else had called their fellow competitors `monkeys` as he did in his interview with Steve Rider, there would have been uproar. This I feel shows a previously unseen chink in his armour.

By: Evil

Evil — Tue, 29 May 2007 17:29:54 +0000

Alonso (allegedly) saved 2 laps worth of fuel in the first stint as he hadn’t needed to drive fast. According to the Press, Hamilton was fuelled for 6 more laps than Alonso, but came in only three laps later. Could he not have also saved 2 laps of fuel (he admitted to fronts graining in the first few laps, but that doesn’t cost fuel, just time)? And Alonso’s first stop (lap 26) was 7.5 seconds to fuel him till lap 51 (25 laps) whilst Hamilton’s, on lap 29 took 8.9 seconds to fuel him to lap 53 (a mere 24 laps). So is it the fuel rigs that are influencing the results of the race? (Stop times and laps are the Team’s press release, not ITV’s)