Should Ferrari get a penalty?

CommentPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

A lot of discussion went on during the live blog about the Ferrari drivers swapping positions in the closing phase of the race. Kimi Raikkonen clearly backed off his pace to let Felipe Massa past.

There were some who felt this deserved a penalty. Team orders are supposedly illegal under article 39.1 of the Sporting Regulations which reads:

Team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited.

However, as I wrote a few weeks ago, many teams have gotten around this rule in the past simply by not issuing their instructions over the radio.

What Ferrari did today was no different to how Lewis Hamilton breezed past Heikki Kovalainen at Hockenheim, or how Robert Kubica passed Nick Heidfeld at Montreal. Just as they went unpunished, so should Ferrari today. Raikkonen was merely returning the favour Massa did for him at Interlagos last year – which also went unpunished.

It seems to me that the FIA simply cannot enforce the rule banning team orders. Should they scrap it then? Perhaps, but at least the rule in its current form may prevent teams from more overt and unsporting team orders in some situations – blocking rival drivers, for example.

The only thing that struck me as odd about the Ferrari swap was how blatant it was. At Montreal and Hockenheim the chasing driver (Kubica and Hamilton respectively) was much quicker than his team mate. Today Raikkonen surrendered a lead of almost nine seconds to let Massa past.

All the same, I don’t think Ferrari deserve a punishment. Today’s race was pretty dull. The last thing we need is the stewards getting involved yet again.

More on team orders: F1?s unwritten rules: team orders edition

Comments have been split across multiple pages. If you are having difficulty viewing the pags click here to see all comments.

123 comments on “Should Ferrari get a penalty?”

  1. Again, this was hugely different to how Hamilton breezed past Kovalainen. And for that matter how Kubica struggled past Heidfeld.

    Massa was a lot slower than Raikkonen. Raikkonen practically had to park his car to let Massa by.

    Still I don’t see why this should be punished. It’s disgraceful for Massa (and Raikkonen), but that’s about it.

  2. Not. Do you remember Germany GP? Kovalainen let pass Hamilton.

  3. I’d like to see it punished, but we all know it never will be, and would never even cross the steward’s minds. I think looking down our noses on Kimi and Felipe with pity is punishment enough.

  4. i saw nothing wrong in that move; if there were Kovalainen and Hamilton in such situation im sure Heikki would let Lewis by. Cause F1 is also about team work its not only about driver against driver.

  5. It was a pretty classless move, but not really punishable.

  6. A few races back Hamilton has a clearly faster car than Kimi, cuts corner after being pushed off, and lets Kimi past, passes him too soon for the stewards likng ( he would have passed him sooner or later) and gets a 25 second penalty for gaining an advantage( his real advantage was having a quicker car). However letting your team mate pass by obviously slowing when they have been struggling to match your pace all race is perfectly acceptable and not giving them an advantage. By allowing this sort of inconsistency is turning people off FI, it really is farcical now.

  7. Totally sensible thing to do for Ferrari, I’ve no problem with it.

    I think the rule should be abolished anyway… F1 is both a driver and a team game (which makes it quite interesting, and unique) so let’s just remove the grey areas and allow team orders again, even if we do get the odd Melbourne/A1-Ring moments!

  8. David Watkins
    19th October 2008, 11:26

    Ferrari are no fun anymore. They could have entertained the crowd by swapping positions with some Marcel Marceau-like miming in the pit-lane. (stuck fuel hose, mechanic tripping over tyre, forgetting the tyre a la the Irvine incident)

  9. I don’t think Ferrari should be punished here, but what’s the point of banning team orders (ie explicitly saying in the rules that they are not allowed)?

    When would a driver get punished over this rule?

  10. There is a sense in which,whilst the tactic is understandable,it carries a ‘burden of injustice’ in this race having regard to steward’s interventions earlier this year. To permit an obviously slower car and
    driver to pass,with a view to maintaining a championship possibility,is at the least something of a contradiction to the aims of the sport.
    I would have been happier to see Massa first or second on his own merit. I guess he also would have been happier

  11. I think team orders move was legal

    I agree, but IMHO “team orders move was impossible to punish” would be more accurate. Also I think that if McLaren had done it so blatantly and so close to the championship’s end, they would have been punished.

  12. Hamilton was told in Monaco 07 not to push Alonso. No penalties there.

    I don’t remember hearing any orders on the radio this race, so I think this is a non-issue.

  13. I’m not sure Ferrari shouldn’t get some kind of ‘team’ penalty for those orders, Kimi was clearly the faster driver today, unlike Kovi at germany where in truth Hamilton not only passed him but everyone including Massa with ease.

    What will be interesting is if Hamilton at Brazil was to fall into 6th place and 30 seconds behind Kovi with 2 laps remaining due to say a puncture, if Kovi then slowed to let Hamilton pass – would the FIA punish McLaren and Hamilton? I believe they would but i’m biased. What is everyone elses view?

  14. Yes! Swapping 2nd and 3rd is as much “affecting the result” as who finishes first. It’s against the rules and both Ferrari’s should get a 10-place grid penalty at the next race.

    The Hamilton/Kovalainen move was nothing like what happened today. Then, Hamilton was significantly quicker, Kovalainen just got out of the way. The proof being how easily Massa and Piquet were also passed.

    Today we saw Raikkonen slowing down for fifteen laps! And then then had to put it in neutral to get Massa past.

    So blatent, and about as clear-cut rule breaking as you can get. Considering McLaren got investigated for the 2007 Monaco Grand Prix then Ferrari should get investigated for this one…

    They won’t, obviously. But if the rules had any meaning, and if the stewards had any sense, they would.

  15. This also raises the question about Hungary 2007, why was the McLaren team punished in qualifying? Hamilton didn’t let Alonso pass and then Alonso reacted by holding Hamilton up and yet the team got punished for it but why exactly? Knowing the FIA they would have punished Kimi had he not let Massa overtake, I really believe they want Massa to be champion and will do everything legal or ‘illegal’ to achive that! The Boudais penalty last week was a joke!

  16. Twister: that would be an incredible scenario and yeah I think McLaren would be punished for bringing the sport into disrepute. Which Ferarri of course can never do.

  17. But there werent any orders! And if there were they would be punished by now. What do you expected after hearing Kimi saying that he knows what to do? That hes going to ram into Hamiltons back?

  18. Ferrari are no fun anymore. They could have entertained the crowd by swapping positions with some Marcel Marceau-like miming in the pit-lane. (stuck fuel hose, mechanic tripping over tyre, forgetting the tyre a la the Irvine incident)

    Well said, David ! ! Atleast that would have livened up an otherwise boring race.

    BTW, Keith : Why don’t you have a poll alongwith this topic. My opinion; NO PENALTY

  19. Kimi made it pretty clear that he wasn’t ordered to do it (unlike Barrichello in Austria) and that he knew it was best for the team. These kind of team tactics are perfectly welcome at this stage of the season, and the title of this article made me shudder!

  20. On the basis that, for right or wrong, the rule exists, shouldn’t the stewards at least be investigating if the rule has been broken or not. Other incidents during the year have been subject to enquiry after the race presumably on the basis that the stewards needed time to look at them. Do they actually know as soon as the race is finished if Ferrari gave any team orders either before or during the race. Do they monitor all the conversations between drivers and Teams during the race.

  21. No, obviously not.

  22. No penalties, even if, the FIA won’t do that. But Massa’s post race interview was funny, he said, I caught up with Kimi and overtook him.

    @Shostak.. it appears you didn’t read the article.

    Although this article is sort of pointless, like punching the air to bring down a high flying aircraft.

  23. Ferrari should have the book thrown at them without question. Team orders are illegal and it throws the sport into disrepute yet again.

    The cases you site above, as I recall, are quite different in that Kubica was on a different strategy to Heidfeld in Canada, and the same goes for the Lewis and Heiki incidents. Therefore it is my opinion that there is room for manoeuvre.

    With today’s blatant Ferrari antics and rule transgression, it is clear to see that Ferrari are brazen and have no fear of repercussions. Kimi and Massa where on the same strategy today. It’s disgusting appalling and it’s a travesty. The rule should not be scrapped but simply enforced. Kimi as much conceded, all be it inadvertently in the post race conference, he had to move over for the team as he had nothing to loose or gain. And if Ferrari deny this, then both their cars data and pit radio should be made public. Lets face it the drivers looked embarrassed.

    Perhaps another “booo Ferrari” is in order!

  24. The FIA should scrap the rule banning team orders, on the proviso that any such swappings are examined on a case by case basis.

    I think it’s hard to argue that in a situation to keep a title fight alive or as close as possible a team switching its drivers (without the need for the embarrassing way Ferrari did it today) is completely 100% understandable in the final few races of a season.

    Likewise I think regardless of where you are in the season if you have one driver on a heavy fuel strategy (or is just plain slow) and is holding up the teams other driver directly behind then the swap is absolutely fine – the team should not have to cut off its nose to shoot itself in the foot, if you see what I mean.

    The rule was introduced because Ferrari went too far, and in a season when they were absolutely dominant and already had a huge points lead with Schumacher more or less untouchable, even though it was still pretty early in the season. To switch the drivers then was just taking the mickey a bit, even though it was Ferrari’s prerogative to do what they wanted.

    To ban the first two because of this is not only silly, it’s proven impossible to do. I know then you get into problems of grey areas and it being a decision by some faceless stewards, but I think it would be better than what we have currently – these “nudge nudge wink wink” team orders that are banned and yet circumventable.

  25. From the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport2/hi/motorsport/formula_one/7678482.stm

    Massa says:
    “I was strong enough to catch and pass [Raikkonen] and that was the best part of the race for me – but it was not enough.”

    Who, exactly, is he kidding?

    Great race for Hamilton. Flawless execution from McLaren. That car must be a pleasure to drive.

  26. I think some people are upset with todays “team order” because Kimi is not one that would fake like an Italian football player and pretend to brake to late, going wide, or something like that. He is Finnish, and this is how he do it. He wouldn’t do anything to destroy Massa’s chance for WDC, but at the moment he don’t give a rats *** about Ferrari’s reputation. He would do it like this even if it could cost him the next years seat.

    And for those who cry about team orders. F1 is a team sport. Every team has to have two cars. Of course there will be team orders. Anything else would go against all form of common sense.

  27. Massa really needed the points as obvious by the race pace…he was actually lighter than Kimi. If only Ferrari had fixed Kimi’s problems earlier in the year instead of focusing on Massa.

  28. No penalty should be given, because its a team sport, but at the same time you cannot make a rule then apply it whenever you feel like it.

    Lets keep the racing alive!

  29. If people want to talk about blatant team orders, why not talk about how McLaren decided who would win 2 consecutive races at Jerez 1997 and Melbourne 1998? It seems that the anti-Ferrari, pro-McLaren group conveniently forget these incidents, which happened way before Ferrari’s Austria 2002 farce (as did Senna letting Berger past at the Japanese GP fwiw).

    Having said that, all forms of team orders should be allowed imo.

  30. kimi had to go so slow for massa to catch him, that i thought at one ponit he would have to park the car and have a nap while he waited for massa.

    if massa is that off the pace in brazil, then he can forget it!!

  31. Nick, you mentioned the fact that Ferrari didn’t fix Kimi’s problems aarlier. Well fact is Kimi hates testing. Ferrari made the mistake of believing Kimi was a driver in the same mold as Schumacher, and then allowed him too many liberties. I think they have learned that he must drive the car during tests and have put him on a very busy test schedule for the coming year.

    @Rohan
    Ferrari have always had a number one and two driver all their years of racing.

  32. I don’t think it deserved a penalty, but you expect a defending world champion to at least make massa desrve the points, even if raikkonen isn’t in the title hunt himself.

  33. If people want to talk about blatant team orders, why not talk about how McLaren decided who would win 2 consecutive races at Jerez 1997 and Melbourne 1998?

    As far as I know team orders were not disallowed then. They are now.

  34. Navs

    Massa says:
    “I was strong enough to catch and pass [Raikkonen] and that was the best part of the race for me – but it was not enough.”

    He must say fake stuff to press; otherwise Ferrari would have been investigated after the race ( Although, Ferrari being investigated is unlikely, Why take a risk??)

    Remember Monaco ’07 Lewis’s comments led to Mclaren being probed

  35. @Oliver : “Well fact is Kimi hates testing.”

    Is there an interview or article where this is made clear? I’ve seen him admit that he is “lazy,” but I’d like to see something concrete on your specific claim around him hating testing. Thanks!

    @Sumedh
    Point. But I think comments similar to what RAI made would have been ok.

    RAI himself could have been a little classier and made the move a little more subtle, but can’t really blame him.

  36. Interesting series of intelligent comments, Keith, the site gets better and better.

    You are never going to stop two-car team drivers manipulating results to their own teams advantage if the situation is as it was today. No matter what rules apply to such behaviour. Nevertheless, it is interesting to speculate that had highly questionable punishments like those against Hamilton at Spa and more particularly Bourdais at Fuji not taken place, Hamilton would already be champion.

    This years championship will go down as one of the most controversial ever. Just like 2007.

  37. Im a Mclaren supporter so i obviously wouldnt argue if ferrari got punished. However i do think that its a silly rule in this case as of course there are going to be code words or agreements before the race to avoid getting penalised. After all thats what “team” is all about and why shouldnt they be able to work as a team?

    I did a have a little smile when Felipe claimed all credit for passing Kimi in the press conference to cover their backs.

    No penalty. Not that the FIA would anyway..

  38. I forget, so maybe someone can help. What date exactly was the team orders rule ban brought in? Keith’s previous blog mentioned 2002, but is there a more precise date? Therefore, lets try keep the passionate allegations and counter allegations to incidents after 2002. This makes sense don’t you think!

  39. I had to get up at 2.30 am to watch the GP live. It was obvious to me once the grid positions were known, that Raikkonen would concede his position to Massa. What was so appalling was the blatant way in which he did it. Ferrari may deny there were explicit team orders (and I don’t agree with this rule) but there was very obviously an ‘understanding’ and the manoeuvre was undoubtedly a breach of the current rules.

    I agree with some commentators that had the same manoeuvre been carried out by any team other than Ferrari then there would have been a Stewards Enquiry. It’s not surprising that the FIA are now known Ferrari International Assistance.

  40. When a driver blatently allows a team mate through it is not racing, and obviously giving an advantage so should not be allowed – I have never agreed with it even when it advantaged drivers/teams I support. IMHO it is not racing – the fastest best driver/car package should decided the result.

  41. They both drive for Ferrari as much as they do for themselves. I don’t see any team orders there but mutual understanding between them and that is the way it should be in a team.

    I was quite comfortable with the way they passed but for sure Massa should have shown some more pace. Even after the pass he slowed down Kimi and gave Alonso an outside chance to pass him .

    Having said that I believe that team orders should stay banned. At least we would be free from such crap that has been going on in the World Rally Championship for the last 2 races.

  42. Even Hamilton has come out to say it was okay. I know Mclaren have been punished a lot for frivolous reasons, but no point going on and on about this one. Ferrari did the right thing. Kimi just wanted it to be known that he helped Massa. But in Brazil last year Massa did the hand over in a very subtle way. This also happened in several races last year.
    Ferrari did 100% ok, however if it was Mclaren, for sure there would be a stewards inquest by now :-)

  43. No, There need not be a penalty for Ferrari

  44. Not the FIA should punish Mass, but I really think that Raikkonen should tar and feather Massa for his outrageous remarks in the post race press conference.

    Geez, “it was the best time for me in the race, I was quite strong and then I caught him and I passed him”. That’s Massa’s way of saying “thank you for putting the handbrake on for 15 laps just so I could pass”? Raikkonen must have felt like he was slapped in the face with a closed fist when he heard that.

  45. I am 100% in favor of team orders, which have been practiced since the beginning of the sport. The only reason why this is an issue now is because the FIA enjoys reserving the right to meddle with race results and judge things right or wrong. Also, I would blame it on the commercial exploitation of Formula One which caused viewership to expand, making them more accountable to newer/casual fans who don’t understand that 2nd drivers used to have to jump out of their cars for the 1st driver. I believe Formula One has traditionally been a race between different machinery, not just drivers. With or without Raikkonen moving over, McLaren demonstrated they had the quickest car in China, and Ferrari came 2nd. But the FIA is bowing to a very new idea that machinery doesn’t matter–it’s all about the driver–hence the rules about team orders and turning Formula One and everything else into a spec series.

  46. What date exactly was the team orders rule ban brought in? Keith’s previous blog mentioned 2002, but is there a more precise date? Therefore, lets try keep the passionate allegations and counter allegations to incidents after 2002. This makes sense don’t you think!

    18th of March 1998 – http://www.fia.com/resources/documents/1964457264__18_03_1998_WMSC.pdf http://www.grandprix.com/ns/ns01513.html
    But the FIA forgot all about that by 2002, when they banned them again after the Austria incident.

  47. Massa saying he passed Raikonenn was clearly funny, but I guess he had to make that comment to make sure there was no inquiry. Mclaren were investigated last year in Monaco only because Lewis complained about it.

    Also when were teams orders banned exactly? I remember watching 98 Austrian GP, at the last stages Schumacher was 4th and Irvine was 3rd. Martin Brundle and Murray Walker was chatting about how ferrari can move MS up to 3rd without making it so obvious. Martin Brundle said Irvine having brake problems was a good excuse and Ferrari said in the race that Irvine was having brake problems. If teams orders were banned in 2003, why then Ferrari would be thinking of excuses at that time?

    About teams orders, I have no problem with any form of teams orders, blocking, moving aside etc.

  48. its a team sport. end of story.

  49. Kimi did the decent thing & let Massa get the maximum possible points, I’ve got no problem with it.

    It’s understandable at this point in the season.

  50. again, its a team sport. end of story.

  51. Keith – There’s little point in pretending it’s anything like what McLaren did in Hockenheim for the sake of appeasing Ferrari fans. Just say it was a team order but you totally understand why they did it.

    In my opinion, even as a McLaren supporter, there’s nothing wrong with what Ferrari did today. The no team orders rule was created in the wake of Austria 2002 when Rubens Barrichello, mathematically a championship contender himself, slowed on the last lap to let Schumacher breeze by not withstanding the fact that Schumacher was really under no real threat for the drivers championship that year. Austria 2002 WAS wrong. Today wasn’t.

  52. It is illegal!
    It was blatant!
    It was undeniable (Kimi admitted to it during the interview)
    It affected the outcome of the race!
    It’s targeted to affect the outcome of the Championship

    I’m for limiting official involvement in general but this is just unacceptable.

    I’m a Ferrari fan and was offended and ashamed.

  53. Team orders have been here since the start of F1 and they will continue to be there right up until the end of it. What’s the difference between a team pressuring a driver at the before the race and them getting on the radio 20 laps before the end of it? If they tell the drivers explicitly or by implication the outcome is the same.
    What kills me is how the press and the British go on about McLaren being absolutely fair to both of their drivers. You people have short memories. They may draw the line at a different place but they still use the same chalk.
    Lets get one thing straight. There is only ONE FASTEST way around a race track and only one driver can have it. Even if it comes to what driver comes in on what lap to pit. The other will be denied the optimum strategy because of it.
    Hamilton has great speed but in this day of F1-on the fly-rules. He will be victimised as was Schumacher and others before him.
    Before you Lewis guys guys say he’s not Schumacher, who DELIBERATELY flew up the inside of a Ferrari in Japan knowing full well he couldn’t stop?
    And that’s just a start.

  54. well… the ******** law needs to be changed
    there sud not be any ques of a penalty
    its for the team

  55. DG: flying up inside cars in Japan is a trick up Senna’s sleeve, and Hamilton already pointed out that he is no Senna;)

  56. rule 39.1 >>> sud be fixex

  57. Jian: Whether he said he’s no Senna or not is irrelevant. He still did the deed. He must be judged upon his actions.

    Whether a move is blatant or subtle if it’s deliberate it’s still wrong. Watch for more of the same during his career. I’m don’t hate him for it I just think he and F1 supporters in general need to get real and see something for what it is. It can’t be unacceptable only when the opposition does it.

  58. I think the BMW case is completely different. In that instance, the 2 drivers were on different strategies, the drivers weren’t directly racing each other for position. If Kubica hadn’t been let past Heidfeld, he would have finished behind several other cars, not just his team mate. So, the swap was done in the interests of the team as a whole, not just one driver. It gained them several constructor’s points, not just their chosen driver a few driver’s points. So they weren’t directly “interfering with the race result”, they were giving Kubica the chance to maximise his strategy, and the team’s constructors points total. The swap didn’t automatically mean Heidfeld finished behind Kubica, it simply allowwed the drivers to race each other, which is meant to be what the rule is all about.

    So while the McLaren case is comparable, the BMW case is a completely different situation, so should not be mentioned as a precedent.

  59. @ apostrophe ” ‘ ”

    Great comment man. I never looked at the BMW incident from this angle. It was vital that Kubika passes Heidfeld so that both could race each other. Infact; if Kubika hadn’t passed Heidfeld may be that would have passed off as a team order.. hmm.. A big controversy saved there.. Thanks for that insight..

  60. A ban team orders ban in a championship that has a constructors title is terribly misleading. How can you have a constructors championship and punish a team working together?

    seems a tad silly.

  61. DG: I know, my post was irrelevant, that’s why I had a smiley wink;)

    On the relevant side, Fuji was a huge mistake from Ham which still might cost him the championship. Yes the move was as deliberate as it was irrational, if Ham would do the start again, I’d think that he would calm down and surrender the position to Kimster since he was essentially racing Massa. That is the difference to senior Schumacher, his deliberate moves were almost certainly rational as well. Look at 97, he got away with it 94 so he thought he’d get away with it again.

    Hamilton is in his second year and 33:rd race in Fuji, I’d like to give him the benefit of doubt on these incidents until he is a proven mature driver and however successful he might be, there are still a couple of seasons left for that.

    Back on topic, the Ferrari move doesn’t warrant any penalty but if was embarrassing for the ones involved. If Massa really was quicker he could have proved that by getting past after a lap or two and then started hunting Lewis down. Now Ferrari tried to sit pretty on both sides of the fence and looked in my eyes very very silly, that is punishment enough. (sending Kimi out on the first 2 stints to reel Hamilton in, mission failed, thus plan B).

  62. Jain: Point taken. The powers that be in F1 have an almighty task on their hands. I remember way back DC had an agreement with his team mate about the outcome of the race depending on who arrived at the first corner first and were badly slated for it. So it seems that whether it’s the team or the driver that makes the decision somebody somewhere will lose their temper over it.
    The trouble with The FIA is that they haven’t got a consistent panel of judges to make the decisions.
    Mind you even if they had that wouldn’t be enough for some. If that panel favoured Ferrari then I suppose they’d always favour Ferrari. At least different set of people at each race reduces the probability of them being bought by the one of the teams or owners.

  63. I really wouldn’t want to play poker with Massa – he has to be the best liar in F1 (either that or he’s crazy and actually believes the things he says). “I was quite strong and then I caught him and I passed him” – how could he say that without laughing? Every time he’s involved in an incident he has some ridiculous quote about how everyone else was wrong: Claiming Sutil should have stopped in the pit lane to let him out, that Hamilton forced him off in Japan (from 10 feet behind him), etc, etc. I can’t believe he can say all these things with a straight face. Massa is a good driver, but it’s just crazy to have to listen to him spout this drivel. I’d have a lot more respect for him if he would show some integrity and honesty – admit that you or the team made a mistake and move on.

  64. I actually think this is one rule where a grey area does no harm.

    Having the rule prevents anything as stupid as a contractual position occuring (Schumi/Ferrari?) but the lack of ability to enforce it for on track events does give the drivers some flexibility.

    Why shouldn’t a driver be able to make a decision that a) helps his team – rewards the mechanics etc. and b) keeps the championship race alive?

  65. Silly rule. It should be scrapped. No chance of it being applied to Ferrari. Of course if Mclaren had done it for the victory it would have been applied.

  66. As there is a rule about team orders, then it shouldn’t be blatantly flouted. Massa was so much slower than raikkonen that it was obviously flouted. Raikkonen had to slow so much had he had slowed any more, he would almost have stopped. Yes I think, if there is going to be a rule, then it should be obeyed by all, but as this was Ferrari they were bound to get a way with it.
    Did anybody see the interview when Max Mosely was defending his behaviour? There was a large model of a Ferrari in a very prominent position, but I did not see a Maclaren. Mmmm.

  67. Jian makes a great point – there’s nothing wrong with it, it’s just a bit embarrassing for those involved on an occasion like this one. Where Kimi had to drop his pace to that of a midfield runner for Massa to make up a couple of seconds (over several laps).

    Just as it was embarrassing for Schumacher to be gifted a win from Rubens relatively early in the season when he had no real competition for the title.

  68. no penalty should be given as Heiki let Lewis past earlier in the season. It shouldn’t happen but it does so they either have to turn a blind eye or give a penalty on every occasion. To be fair to Massa, he has done the same for his team mates in the past so what goes around comes around. Lets hope Lewis can pull it off in 2 weeks.

  69. Seriously amazing to see so many people who actually think that Hamilton passing Kovalainen in Germany is similar to Raikkonen letting Massa past.

    You really don’t see the difference between “not defending your obviously lost position to the death” versus “lose a 15 seconds lead just so the slower guy can get past”? Really? Seriously, no difference?

  70. Following rules Ferrari should not be punishde. Why? Well rules said clearly that ” team orders” are forbidden”. So where was team order? Did somebody ear that ferrai asked Kimi let Massa pass?
    people here wo say tat ferrari sould have penalty are mixing 2 things.
    Let teammate pass is not against rule until order to do so comes from teams. And its difficult to proofe that ferrari asked Kimi let Massa pasted.
    So there is nothing what steward can investigate.
    No matter if we like it or not, rules are like thery are and end of story.

    And btw. somebody said something about last season Monaco. Yes case was under investigate because hamilton and his father went to steward and told them that Lewis had team order.

    “what you eyes do not see and ears dont hear that your heart do not cry”

  71. The team order rule is ridiculous to start with. After todays boring procession what will they now bring in to liven it up. No, Ferrari is not favoured by the FIA if you have been watching the sport more than 2 years. McLaren cant expect much sympathy after their sying disgrace anyway. Hamiltons cowboy tactics at the start of the Japanese GP and his previous idiotic prang into a stationery Raikonnen instead of the other car ahead of him was extremely dangerous and he should have been made to miss a race or worse. One motor for all is the next farce coming. Maybe we can then combine F1, A1, A2, GP2,Formula Ford and F BMW etc. in one race and make the pole sitter start at the back and all on street circuits! I will watch more Moto GP then.

  72. Why should only the team orders that are voiced on the radio be deemed illegal? Where in the rules does it say this?

    Raikkonen says that he knew what the team expected of him. So he was told (ordered) upfront about this. His team gave him an order. Put that together and you have a “team order”.

    I don’t think Ferrari should be punished, but this type of excuse making is a bit tedious.

  73. #53 Piquet
    A direct and devastating logical summation.
    Thank you for your honesty and sportmanship

  74. @Patrickl:-
    I don’t think a driver can on his own, report to the stewards. I believe it’s the job of the team to report.

  75. That was an abomination of the sporting regs! Massa and Raikkonen should not have any points taken away(because it would lessen the treat in Brazil) but the team should be fined. They should be made to pay millions! They made a farce of the outcome, and admitted it in the post race.
    All of the money the team will make for winning the constructor’s(at least an approx. amount) should be paid. I have no idea how much the teams are payed for each point they earn, but the money earned from the 14 points is a minimum amount.

  76. @Patrickl:-
    I don’t think a driver can on his own, report to the stewards. I believe it’s the job of the team to report.

    @Oliver,

    I think you meant #71 @Snoopy. For some reason the name of the person who posted the article is on the other side of the line.

    I have to admit the post separation is really confusing me all the time too. I’m still pretty new here though. have mostly been lurking anyway.

    Seriously, could the layout be changed so the line is on top of the header? Or othewise maybe some extra space between the comments?

  77. Regulars here will know that I am no Ferrari fan, but to punish them for something like this would be about the third dumbest punishment this year. And that’s saying something!

    Massa is a complete tool, he probably believes he caught KImi and passed him. In fact, he was probably mad that Kimi was still on the road at all. Kimi, for his part, dealt with the whole thing in such a deadpan fashion I was laughing the entire time Massa was supposed to be ‘catching’ him.

    The no team orders rule was just Max’s pathetic attempt to calm a rabid, uninformed public. There are many drivers over the years who have benefited from team orders and we hold them in seriously high regard. If we don’t like team orders, we don’t like luminaries such as Fangio right through to Schumacher (team orders took on a whole new meaning with Schumacher at Ferrari…). The rule is weak and open to interpretation and Ferrari complied. Kimi said ‘I know what the team expects’ not ‘the team told me to move over.’ In that careful way, he was saying ‘This is up to me.’ Which it was…

  78. bacardi breezer
    20th October 2008, 7:05

    this is a part of “TEAM” strategy in Formula 1…..there is no rules against it, and it happened many times when Schumi was at Ferrari……i dont know why this question was brought up unless the author is ****stirring!!!

  79. A fair punishment would be to strip ferrari of their 14 constructor’s points they earned. Very similar to what was done to Mclaren in hungary 2007.

  80. #3 – be careful , as if you look down on Felpipe’ “with pity” , he is after all only 7 points behind , and that despite a season filled with mistakes and reliability problems , would then make Lewis also pitiful , which I don’t believe to be the case.

  81. mp4-19.
    A McLaren model designation I believe? You are going to put forward an unbiased opinion then aren’t you?

    Blatant or subtle what’s the difference? That punishment is fair in your eyes. What about a couple of seasons ago when certain teams used the Michelin tyres that didn’t wear evenly in contravention of the rules. Not the teams fault but so what, were they punished?
    No. The FIA need to devise a set of hard and fast rules to eliminate subjective comments such as the one you have just posted.

  82. Although I am one to say that since the drivers race as part of a team, and therefore team orders are part of the whole race weekend, and if the FIA don’t like team orders they need to restructure the whole F1 philosophy, I do think that the Ferrari move was a bit blatant, and everyone knew it was coming too!
    For Kimi to slow down so much and Massa not to overtake until the last minute shows just how secure Ferrari are with the FIA steward’s judgement. I am sure if that had been Hammy and Kovy swapping places it would have resulted in a stern phonecall from Max and the loss of any points from the race!
    Why didn’t Ferrari use the Pit Stops? They could have quite easily made the move in the first lot of stops and nobody would have cared really – as it was it showed the world just how slow a driver Massa really is!

  83. Regardless, bottom line is that while Massa might still
    “win” the series this year he has lost the opportunity to
    become a world champion.

    To do that he has to actually beat the opponents in race
    not by help from team and stewards.

  84. There’s obviously a very strong split between McLaren and Ferrari fans on this one. McLaren fans think the Hockenheim and Shanghai incidents aren’t comparable; Ferrari fans think I’m trying to make trouble just for bringing it up…

    One thing I would like to be clear on: I’m not saying Hamilton/Kovalainen at Hockenheim was the same as Raikkonen/Massa at Shanghai, I’m saying they’re comparable. Both were examples of a driver treating his team mate differently to how he would treat another rival, so it’s reasonable to assume team instructions were involved. But the two scenarios were quite different, which I did say in the article.

  85. I think the lines are more subtly drawn than just Mclaren vs Ferrari. It definitely is that but also to do with when you started watching the sport. Anyone starting in the mid 90’s onwards- ie the Schumacher era is likely to think tema orders an anathema- probably because as with most thing MS pushed the idea to its limit. ( did you know theres no direct translation of “sportsmanship” in the German language ( or fluffy!)) Anyone 80’s and before is likely to think it almost chivalrous to step aside for your team mate fighting for a title. As a Lewis and Mclaren fan -but really just F1 in general, i think what Kimi did was completely fine and only really an issue to the drop in fans or drop in press.

  86. I think that Ferrari should be punished for Team Orders. Heikki was slower than Lewis when he let him past, whereas Kimi practically had to stop his car to let poor Massa get past and was then almost eaten up by Alonso, thanks to cold tyres, brakes, etc.

    If the point of Team Orders is to stop teams affecting the outcome of a race, then Ferrari were certainly guilty of that on many levels. Kimi should have been fuelled short on the first stop and then ‘ordered’ to sit on Lewis’ gearbox and hassle him into making a mistake, cooking his tyres, whatever.

    Instead we had to watch him lap slower and slower lap after lap while Massa struggled to catch up and Lewis cruised to victory without risking a puncture/crash/breakdown. Normally we’d have the thrilling spectacle of Kimi coming alive in the last ten or so laps, reeling Lewis in, forcing him to go faster, increasing the chances that he might crash.

    Bottom line is that Lewis and Mclaren were too fast and Ferrari failed to beat him to the first corner. After that, the race was lost. Ordering Kimi to let Massa go past simply compounded Ferrari’s failure and should be punished. If one team member is faster, but happens to be behind another, as was the case with Lewis and Heikki, then it’s OK to let him past, but a faster driver letting his slower team mate past is affecting the outcome for all the reasons stated above.

  87. The bottom line is – if it’s a team decision, it’s banned, if it’s a driver decision it’s not banned. Kimi’s never going to admit it was a team decision so there’s no way you can (or should) enforce. It’s a team sport and it was totally fair in my opinion.

    And I’m a hardcore Hamilton supporter…

  88. I think there is a difference between not holding up your much faster teammate (heikki-lewis) or what happened yesterday, but they shouldn’t do anything about it.

    It’s pure logic that you let a title candidate pass you, it would be idiotic if they didn’t, and everyone knows that!
    And you can’t punish a driver because another one want to let his teammate pass (when you play it like that it isn’t a real teamorder)

  89. So, why have this rule at all, if it cannot be enforced?

  90. Alastair, I agree with your #86, since Kimi had to slow down to let Massa pass. To me that is equal to the Rubens/Schuey move which started the whole ‘team orders’ debate going in the first place.
    I was hoping that Kimi would be allowed to push to the end too, if only to maybe see a little action in the last laps in the race, as it was we just saw Ferraris going slower and slower and a McLaren off into the distance (which is no bad thing). Perhaps Jean Todt etc had been expecting the McLaren to get a penalty for having an advantage over the Red Cars into the first corner?

  91. Alastair
    So, why have this rule at all, if it cannot be enforced?

    Yeah I was wondering the same. I’d say it’s to prevent things like happened on the A1 ring in the middle of the season (when both drivers are still on for the drivers crown).

  92. OK this is my first comment here, but I’ve been lurking for a while enjoying the great writing and insight (thanks Keith) and the good debates here.
    Firstly a small disclaimer, I’m a longtime McLaren fan (being British) with a Finnish wife who is a rabid Kimi fan.
    I can’t say I liked the overtaking move by Ferrari yesterday and it goes against the spirit of the law. But if we really want to talk about no team orders you need to have parity in race strategy too don’t you?
    Ferrari made arguably the most obvious transgression of Team orders yesterday but what about refuelling strategy in qualifying? In the current technical conditions a lighter fuel load almost assures you are ahead and stay ahead of your teammate as it is so hard to overtake anybody. Looking back at strategys throughout the season you see Ferrari being quite even handed in giving the lighter car and so the optimal strategy to alternating drivers while McLaren seem to have been operating a defacto no.1 giving Hamilton the optimal stategy at each race (except one I think!).
    Either the team order rule should be scrapped or there really should be equality on the track don’t you think? Just punishing one incident would be another dodgy decision in a season of them.

  93. shostak – Have you read Keith’s write up , he has already covered the Lewis pass HK
    tworyeay – Whats the connect of Hamilton/Kimi Spa story to this one ??
    David W – Ferrari gave us the biggest comic event of the year haven’t they , it was worst than the Ill prepared days of Minardi or Albers running away with the hose at Magny last year.
    And like the night race, we need one or two pit fiasco per year , too much will be boring ;)
    Twister27

    unlike Kovi at germany

    Who knows, Kovi is master of disguise :P and that explains why McLaren has retained him for another year.

    “if Kovi then slowed to let Hamilton pass – would the FIA punish McLaren and Hamilton? I believe they would but i’m biased.”

    I guess you answered you question, by saying you are biased. I have time and again maintained FIA is inconsistent and unprofessional, thats hurting the image of the sport for sure. but they are not that stupid to take Anti Lewis/McLaren stand and lose the newly acquired fans of the sport ( Its a different story that these newly acquired fans have a highly skewed view of sport in thinking that their Man is Superhero and everyone else are the forces of evil)

    Hungary 2007 –

    You have contradicted your Pro-Lewis Stand now. Do you then agree that Lewis was wrong in jeopardising Alonso’s qualifying lap sequence and it was just that Alonso acted in equally childish way, by stalling Lewis?? and that FIA rigged the qualifiers in favor of Lewis by penalizing Alonso and that was wrong?

    I don’t support Alonso, but you have picked up contradictory examples, to prove that FIA is not really Anti-Lewis

    ———————–
    All – Felipe is not good in hiding feelings and his embarassed looks in post race conference was enough punishment for the poor brazilian.
    Another aspect that comes out of this one, is the quality of Ferrari Pit-wall this year . While Ferrari pit-wall (read Todt)orchestrated “perfect switch” last year in Brazil, they did such a clumsy job yesterday, shows they are not on the ball.

    If FIA/FOM are that very Anti-Lewis as Some of the fans have made an impression. Peter Windsor who conducts “Official” interviews in post race conference , wouldn’t have embarassed Ferrari/Massa by repeatedly probing on the “Pass”

    So enough of the Bias about the Bias and lets get over it

  94. I believe the team orders scenario was always going to happen in this championship, and would have been applied by McLaren if deemed necessary.
    Concerning the rules, penalties were meant to stop fiascos like the David Coulthard/Mika Hakkinen and Rubens Barrichello/Michael Schumacher moves, inwhich a team mate allowed his team leader to pass at ‘the last possible moment’.
    If Ferrari’s tactics in China were illegal, then Kimi Raikkonen would have been stripped of his championship last year. The events in Brazil, with Felipe Massa leading like he was, was clearly orchestrated to make Raikkonen the champion.
    I do not often give Ferrari much benefit of the doubt, but this time they did what any other team would have done in their position.

  95. Patrick “A ban team orders ban in a championship that has a constructors title is terribly misleading. How can you have a constructors championship and punish a team working together?

    seems a tad silly.”

    Doesn’t matter which order the team’s 2 cars finish they score the same number of points – swopping places only affects the which driver scores the more points, and therefore the drivers championship, not constructors.

  96. navs @ #25

    From the BBC:
    “I was strong enough to catch and pass [Raikkonen] and that was the best part of the race for me – but it was not enough.”
    Who, exactly, is he kidding?

    If indeed he did say that, my opinion of this man just keeps dropping lower and lower.

    Anyone (apart from his self-reightous, can-do-no-wrong self, of course) could have seen that Massa was nowhere near able to compete with either Lewis or Kimi this weekend.

    Anyone notice how Alonso only sped up after Kimi had let Massa past? Fred had said he wanted to help Phil in any way, and so wasn’t pushing to take Massa’s 3rd place and points, but was perfectly happy to power right up to the back of the other Ferrari once it had demoted itself.

    Jean @ 80

    #3 – be careful , as if you look down on Felpipe’ “with pity” , he is after all only 7 points behind , and that despite a season filled with mistakes and reliability problems , would then make Lewis also pitiful , which I don’t believe to be the case.

    I look down with pity at Massa because he can’t win for himself sometimes, Kimi had to slow right down to let him past.

  97. So sad to see Kimi play the “bitch role” for Massa, just like Barichello had to play for Schumacher for so many years, Retire now Kimi you are a joke. But don’t worry tafosi I’m sure the stewarts or King Bernie will figure out a way for Ferrari to win it all in Brazil. I mean it’s not like Ferrari have to play by the rules like every other team.

  98. too good “tworyeay – Whats the connect of Hamilton/Kimi Spa story to this one ??”

    It’s about unfair adavatage. If Hamilton obtained an unfair advantage in Spa and was penalised, what did Massa get by Kimi all but stopping to let him pass.

  99. @Too Good

    Hungary 2007 was just an example of a situation the FIA shouldn’t have even got involved in, in my opinion. Nothing to do with pro-lewis bias. In my opinion the FIA should not have got involved in what was essentially a team dispute, I’m still unsure even now as to why McLaren where stripped of their constructors points? If anyone has the answer I’d like to know.

    Just to clarify I’m not new to the sport, I’ve been watching it and other forms of motorsport for nearly 18 years now but this year has in some instances Belgium and Fuji for example left me feeling despondent about the rule makers. The Belgium decision was in my opinion wrong for the sport. Goodness knows what the sports ‘newly acquired fans’ must have been thinking after watching those thrilling final laps only to find the result scrapped a few hours later to the benefit of two drivers that clearly where not going to win or come second in that race. In the DTM a few weeks later drivers where cutting the chicane but no punishment was handed out, decisions need to be consistent across the sport. As for the Bourdais penalty I really did think it was an April fools, it was without doubt a joke of a penalty, in my opinion the FIA shouldn’t have got involved in what was esentially a ‘racing incident’.

    Yet we get to a situation at China where a team has one way or another clearly contrived the outcome of the race, to benefit one its drivers not the team, remember they still got the same constructors points. I accept it’s a facet of the sport but the FIA placed a ruling and it should be adhered to, in my opinion this is a situation they should be stepping into, unlike Hungary 2007.

    Going back to my pro-lewis mode, I feel a sense of jealousy towards Massa I guess, in that he has a team mate that can potentially out score Lewis, yet Lewis hasn’t got that advantage – how many times has Heikki out raced Massa this year when both have finished the race?

  100. Grandadgardener
    20th October 2008, 15:22

    Hang your heads in shame Ferrari…We all know what you get up to.Felipe Felipe Felipe,what on earth have you done,you’ve totally ruined any street cred that you may or may not have had.Kimi knew what was coming in the interviews after the race,thats why he burst out laughing.Get a grip FIA Officials(laughable)and make Formula one plausible again.

  101. Come on guys this dead horse has been flogged enough. They ALL do it. All the teams and all the drivers.
    Either for themselves, the teams, the sponsors, or the governing body.
    Seems you’re all arguing about whose ludicrous behaviour looks the most ludicrous and who and when it suits.

  102. Yes…

    50 million pounds and loose all their constructors points.

    Turn about is fair play.

  103. DG:
    It is not a question of flogging a dead horse. People who contribute to this site don’t make the rules. All we want to see is whatever rules are agreed by FIA are administered. We may all think a particular rule is ridiculous or unenforceable. That isn’t the point. The fact is, it exists. In this case, there appeared to be a situation that arose that, on the face of it, may have contravened the rule on team orders. I am not saying it did, I am not saying it didn’t. I am just saying that the stewards should have at least examined it. Maybe they wouldn’t have been able to prove it one way or another. But as things stand they didn’t even try and have just assumed there were no team orders. Given all that has gone on this year about stewards reviewing after the race instances of possible rule infringements, I find that surprising.

  104. Point taken. Yes the stewards could/should have been a little more forthright.
    Pretty soon this whole farcical way of running the sport will come to an end. People will have had enough.
    On the bright side it means that when the FIA do decide to find one supplier for a common engine, (I heard this being talked about a while ago and then again at the end of China), the manufacturers will tell them to stick it and breakaway.
    We’ll then end up with the sport as it should be, the absolute pinnacle and showcase for worldwide automotive technology sans messrs Ecclestone and Mosely.

  105. DG , if FIA comes with such a stupid decision , f1 losts its charm…its just not a drivers championship ..it is the place where technology and innovation plays a key role.

    I hope FIA wont make such a decision

  106. Livio Oricchio, Brazilian insider has said that Ferrari has get some boos from the crowd because of Ferrari drivers swapping positions…

  107. Hey sujesh, I think it already has. I watch F1 because I love cars. But over the years the governing body has taken all the innovation away from the teams. I don’t think Colin Chapman would recognise it as it is today.
    I mean Active suspension, ground effects are the main two, traction control has been throttled and ABS is not allowed I don’t think. Apart from ground effects these are all options and sometimes standard fit on a lot of mainstream cars. Having the teams perfect them can only be a good thing.
    Anyway we’re a little bit off topic here, my fault I know so back to the matter at hand. I shall summarise it thus: What a farce!

  108. All the time the current rules apply to F1, with Teams running two cars and competing for a separate Constructors Championship, there will be Team Orders. Otherwise why are they there?
    But, we can all guess from previous articles on the blog, and from comments elsewhere, that by the time F1 has mutated into GP1, Bernie and Max would have done away with the Constructors Championship, and the current Points system, and that all the focus will be on the drivers, and away from the cars and the teams.
    Under those conditions there will be no place for Team Orders, and it will be more like ‘Every Man for Himself’.

  109. Let it be Guys, Massa will do it next year! NO TEAM ORDERS

  110. I don’t think team orders are wrong; particularly when this is clearly a team sport. The FIA rule on team orders must be eliminated.

  111. Let me just put it in this way for the satisfaction of all you Hamilton fans-Formula 1 is a team sport.If it werent a team sport,then we wouldnt have had two drivers
    in one team or for that reason the constuctors championship.There was a mutual understanding between both scarlet cars and Kimi did what was good for the team.Even Lewis said that if he had been the same position,then he would have done exactly what Kimi did

  112. As anti ferrari as I am, I have to say NO.
    First of all, you cannot prevent this. Raikonen could also have faked a wheel lockup and slide a bit off track.
    Besides that it still a team sport. And if you cannnot be bothered to act on that you don’t belong in that team. (Example: Alonso @ McLaren last year.)

    B.t.w. Alonso really outshines everyone else this year.

  113. Agreed that the “Switch” was executed in most clumsy manner by Ferrari and even though I have always been Anti-Ferrari person, I wouldn’t blast Ferrari for trying to Retain “Both” the titles.
    Kimi returning Massa’s Favor is not bad at all.

    And well now because “Lewis’s” Championship is in Question there is so much hue and cry about the “switch”

    When It was clear in 2005 after Montoya returned from Two race injury break, he had pretty much limited to play Second fiddle to “Kimi’s” campaign.
    Only when Engine Penalties forced Kimi to start race at back of grid did JPM go for wins, not to mention If you had seen his lap times, he did everything possible to hold the field back and let Kimi gain ground as much as possible. Obvious event was in SPA when McLaren Pitwall effectively helped Kimi to assume race lead by cutting 30+ second lead that JPM had. That Antonia Pizzonia took JPM out further helped Kimi.

    Nick Heidfeld’s contribution to Kubica’s maiden win is well documented so , won’t reiterate that. but given that Alonso Broke down ultimately in that race.If Nick had played Selfish and blocked Kubica as Long as possible it could have been he breaking his duck finally. The look on his face on podium told the complete story. Don’t remember Nick/Robert being grilled by Peter Windsor at that podium about the pass , nor remember Nick Whining I have number two on my car either

    So Team Rules come first Period.
    Its Only Certain Blessed Souls Break those repeteadly (Monaco, Hungary ’07), and still get all sympathy from all sectors media and fans

  114. What difference does it make if the command to give up position is made during the race or if its made before hand, a week prior, in a team briefing?

    The rule is really in place to prevent the kind of BS theatrics Ferrari did at races ends when they were totally dominant. Those were objectionable for being obvious and late. But I also question how obvious it is for Kimi to drop almost nine seconds to do a switch.

    Massa has received his penalty in the form of the shame. I think this result will have an important result: even if Massa wins the title, Kimi has shown that he is still the faster driver. And if Massa cannot cleanly beat his teammate in Brazil on speed, after his swoon in the last 3 races, he will give up any claim to being the lead or co-equal driver in the team in 09.

  115. @Patrickl
    Yes wrongly accused, I scrolled back up while typing my post and picked the wrong name.

    Its still amazes me people are still venting posting on this matter. I must admit the stewards have made it rather an uneventful race for us,so there is some frustration as we have nothing much to write about.

  116. What a penalty for Ferrari, that is not permitted

  117. I really can’t believe some people actually think Ferrari should be punshed.

    Bravo I say to Raikkonen for supporting his team mate and his bid to become World Champion.

    Like antonyob said, its a team sport.

  118. lewism made a really good point about pit-stops etc.

    When you look at the pit strategies, they are effectively team orders – the driver the team is ‘supporting’ gets the better strategy. In Schumacher’s day, he got the better *everything*. That’s team orders.

    Felipe was lighter and still didn’t outqualify Kimi so the team orders (in the sense I outline above) were broken before the race even started. Felipe is completely overwhelmed, in my opinion, and certainly will be in Brazil.

    Anyway, the whole subject is moot – if the FIA didn’t punish McLaren for it (ref Germany) they won’t be punishing anyone. Fine with me.

    As for the clumsiness of the switch – Fangio changed cars for goodness’ sake. Nobody moans about that. All we focus on now is the job he did to get that car back to the front. Anyone here wish to decry Fangio? Probably not! :-) Point being that the FIA have no interest in banning ‘team orders’ because team orders are such a nebulous thing unless teams are caught on the radio saying ‘move over.’ If memory serves, Williams did a deal with some team or other in at Jerez in 97, letting somebody past Villeneuve to make sure Villeneuve finished (I could be making that up). Nobody heard a peep.

    The team orders thing really came up because of a high-profile team, high-profile driver made a high-profile switch that angered bookies. Frankly, if you bet on F1, you need your head read.

    The debate here is interesting – a number of Hamilton fans don’t have a problem with the switch, so I don’t think that it’s particularly clear-cut…

  119. I dont follow either ferrari or mclaren, but am sick of their whinging fans. The FIA should get rid of both teams to give everyone else a little peace & quiet

  120. The problem is how to define team orders & how to define oh I let him pass as I have no reason not to. That’s the real problem – As for the examples given, well they happened so much earlier in the season that it was imposible to say 100% that they let him pass as at the time it was not obvious of the outcome. Here we are 1 race from the end of the season & it was damn well clear what happened.

    That’s my opinion & anyone may agree or disagree.

  121. The reason they did not receive a penalty was due to no evidence of any team orders.

    The drivers acted on their own free will.

  122. Mosley make that law to avoid another Austria case.

    The unwrited law now is that team orders are allowed ina same cases as when you have less points then the leader.

    For sure you need to switch the law or give the penalty. There was plenty of time for a competent lawier like M.Mosley to do it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All comments are moderated. See the Comment Policy and FAQ for more.