Button: Vettel’s move “will hurt him in the long run”

F1 Fanatic round-upPosted on | Author Keith Collantine

Jenson Button, McLaren, Melbourne, 2013In the round-up: Jenson Button says he is “surprised” by Sebastian Vettel’s defiance of team orders and said it will cause problems for him in future.


Your daily digest of F1 news, views, features and more.

Seb will pay for selfishness (The Sun)

“I think that will hurt him in the long run. I am surprised he did that. I find team orders difficult but to disregard a team order is something different.”

Lauda questions Brawn’s team orders (ESPN)

“From a sporting perspective, that was wrong. They should have let [Rosberg] go. We need to talk to Ross, if this is the strategy to be used from now on.”

Get a grip: Sebastian Vettel and Mark Webber have shaken hands and moved on insist Red Bull (Daily Mirror)

Helmut Marko: “In the debrief afterwards there was the relevant discussions about the race and then there was a hand-shake between the two drivers.”v

Red Bull point to team mates’ record (BBC)

“‘We are two races into the current season and it’s far too early to be talking about 2014,’ the team said.”

Fernando Alonso: ??I think we could really fight for a win?? (Adam Cooper’s F1 Blog)

“In the back straight the front wing dropped and we started to see some sparks from the floor and more damage, and at that point we were five seconds before the pit entry and we didn?t make it, and then on the next straight the wing fall and it was underneath the car and it was not possible to turn.”

Hamilton: Mercedes now second best (Autosport)

“We are the second best team. To be that close – I was competing with the Red Bulls at some stages in the race ?ǣ and to be in that position is a great feeling.”

New York motor show: Jaguar race return “obligatory but not imminent” (Autocar)

“Jaguar boss Adrian Hallmark has described the return of the brand to racing as ‘obligatory but not imminent’.”

F1?s pit crews feeling the pressure (Go Car)

“With McLaren targeting a 2 second pit stop this season, the pressure is on for all of the pit crews to achieve astonishing results, and Force India paid a high price in trying.”

History explains the present and the future (Professor Mark Jenkins’ F1 Blog)

“What we have is a very different history that marks Red Bull Racing ultimately as a team constructed for Red Bull drivers to show their talent, not, like Ferrari, McLaren or Williams for the building of racing cars, and like most aspects of an organisation?s history, it is both a strength and a weakness.”

Bringing to order (Sky)

Martin Brundle: “One big question remained, why didn’t the team simply ask him to drop back behind Webber again? I asked Christian Horner this on the way home, and his answer was that ‘we had asked him to hold position and maintain a gap for three laps before he overtook, so there was little point in asking him to reverse the move’.”


Comment of the day

Yesterday’s poll indicated a significant group of people believe Red Bull were correct to apply team orders in Malaysia but Mercedes weren’t. Jon Sandor has a trenchant view on why that might be:

A lot of the people saying “Yes” to Red Bull and “No” for Mercedes seem to be basing their stance on the entirely fictitious belief that Webber was the victim of a “sneak attack” having “turned his engine down while Vettel did not” and in any case that he was “totally unaware that there was a race on”.

The clam that Webber was unaware that Vettel was racing him for the lead is simply nonsensical and the people making it must be among the sizeable proportion of fans who get their views of the races from live text feeds or after-the-fact news reports rather than by watching the races.

The allegation that Webber was in “fuel saving mode” while Vettel was in “race mode” is likewise bizarre. A lot of people are repeating this allegation on a lot of fan forums, but the claim is based on no hard facts. No media outlet is making this claim. Mark Webber is not making this claim. Christian Horner is not making this claim. The belief in it seems to be a form of wish?ǣfulfillment for many people. They?d like it to be true, so it must be true.
Jon Sandor (@Jonsan)

From the forum

Happy birthday!

Casanova, LazerFX, Macca and The Genuine Jim!

If you want a birthday shout-out tell us when yours is by emailling me, using Twitter or adding to the list here.

On this day in F1

Ayrton Senna scored the second and final home win of his career 20 years ago today.

Alain Prost crashed out in heavy rain during the Brazilian Grand Prix and Senna easily passed the other Williams of Damon Hill to take the win.

157 comments on “Button: Vettel’s move “will hurt him in the long run””

  1. Horner’s the one that must be scratching his head more than anyone there in Red Bull. He was completely left behind in terms of team management. His decisions fell in an empty bag and there they laid, because he was unable to respond quickly enough.

    They had time to see Vettel going faster and faster before and after the final stop. They knew that telling him to stop was a long shot, to tell a triple world champion and the star in the team to stay, probably for the very first time, behind his team mate, who’s been always vocal about team orders and the way they ruin racing for everyone. And who himself had not followed instructions and not even cared about his mate’s championship. Which, to me, is perfectly okay…

    And so is Vettel’s decision to race until the end. The post-race apology, all the theatre behind the matter, it’s all Red Bull’s management failing badly. They ripped off the team, and gathered the pieces.

    That’s an extreme thing to say considering they are leading both championships, but I suppose within the team that’s never healthy. Just look what happened in the end at McLaren in 2007…

    1. Although this episode has made Horner look weak, I think his situation (read authority) is similar to Jean Todt’s (in Schumacher’s era), Briatore’s (in Alonso’s era) or Dennis’ (in Senna’s era). All those guys demanded preferential treatment. Vettel now having accumulated multiple championships perhaps may not have said so directly. But his actions on track clearly point to that. I think there is a direct-inverse correlation between a driver’s success and the team principal’s power, over a period of time. Horner is just one more data point on the trend line.

    2. No one really knows how Horner manages the team, apart from RB itself, and the results of course. That said we can always listen to what he has to say and I never really understood his position throughout all these years when it has to come with Seb vs Mark. I don’t know if there is more to see than meets the eye or if Horner is only worried with publicity and trying to play down everything. In the end what I got from his interviews this past weekend is that the team won, Seb disregarded a team order but all is fine after the drivers sort it out. Honestly that seems very odd and wrong to me, I think it is positive to admit that even though Seb went against orders, the outcome was still the best possible for the team thus denying Horner’s fear of a potential crash, on the other side I think it is not team principle alike to admit that your position in the team is redundant, and I shouldn’t forget that nothing was made to impend or warn Mark that Vettel was on full revs and going after himself. Never ever would Ross Brawn let his team rule by itself. Was it so hard for Horner to first admit the problem, speak about it and then talk about how well the team faired, he spent 2 secs saying that team orders weren’t followed and never mentioned all we heard about the fact that Seb went on full power against a sitting duck.
      Personally if I was on Mark’s shoes would have felt pretty small and very hurt after this weekend, for me it’s impossible to stay calm and collected when apparently no one really values yourself and betrays your trust, the thing that hurts you the most is the fact that you had already let the past go, you are the fool.
      The problem within the team is the lack of leadership, a leader doesn’t try to avoid a public row, a leader speaks first before anyone speaks, and everyone shuts after a leader speaks, because there is nothing more to discuss.

    3. @fer-no65

      They had time to see Vettel going faster and faster before and after the final stop. They knew that telling him to stop was a long shot, to tell a triple world champion and the star in the team to stay, probably for the very first time, behind his team mate

      In Istanbul 2009 he was told to stay behind Webber in the closing stages :)

      1. @enigma @fer-no65
        Yep. The exact words were, “Sebastian – save your car. Mark is faster. Save your car, Mark is faster.”

      2. @enigma ah, yeah. Well, but that time he was pretty far off Webber and the chances of overtaking him were slim to say the least.

        1. @fer-no65 SV finished the race 1 second behind.

          1. Though overtaking was deemed more difficult in 2009.

    4. Horner’s the one that must be scratching his head more than anyone there in Red Bull. He was completely left behind in terms of team management

      Pretty much @fer-no65.

      It seems the only thing Red Bull did different than in Turkey 2010, was that this time at least they did not blame Webber or any wrongdoing (there was really no reason) and did show they were not amused with Vettel. But a handshake will solve the issue?
      That just shows Mark knew full well what he was thinking about those last 15 laps, as LeeMcKenzee wrote in the article from yesterday’s roundup. Vettel is the No.1 driver, because he will not settle for being “equal” or even coming in second. And the team has nothing it can do if they want to go on winning.
      Will Webber find a way to get on top of this, will he want to retaliate, will he want to continue with the team? All of that will make the season that more intense, so again it shows how Vettels move was a good thing for the fans, even if Button could well be right it will not make life easier for Vettel nor for the team.

      For Marko and Mateschitz, I would say that they might now see the need to solve Horners role though. Its funny that while we have all been commenting how Mercedes is top heavy, during the race its pretty clear that Ross is the one in control (as he said he was), while at Red Bull there’s a weak Horner, and the very strong personalities of both Newey (he wanted the wing used in Silverstone 2010) and Vettel adorer and Mateschitz spokesman Marko.

      1. Speaking of Turkey 2010, didn’t Button defy team orders and overtake Hamilton who was in engine saving mode? Another one to add to the hypocrite list.

        1. He himself mentions it in that article @tommyB89, saying that he did not know Hamilton was in fuel saving mode etc. (what was it that Seb said about not being aware?). I never really believed that from him, its far more likely that he was proving a point saying that he would not just sit back as a good no. 2 driver.
          The difference being that in the end he did let Hamilton past again (who knows weather he lifted a bit or not), while Vettel did not. Maybe that is what Button sees as the difference then. He is ok with showing the world you will not give up, but not go explicitly against your team and take the place (and saying sorry quick enough before it gets awkward for the fans)?
          I am sure Button is not the nice guy he is mostly seen to be. As we know from Alonso carefully calculating how long to wait in the Hungary pits to just make it past for a quali lap, but making sure Hamilton did not manage, we can safely assume that they know full well what they are doing!

          1. uh, sorry for the spelling errors in that!

    5. The article from Prof. Jenkins on Red Bull and their approach is an interesting angle to consider in this matter.

    6. I think it’s naive from anyone following F1 to think that Christian Horner has any problems after to Seb’s ‘controversial win’. I believe 100% the everyone at RBR was more than happy with Vettel winning except Mark Webber of corse.
      I tried to put myself in Horner’s shoes. So let’s analyse possible strategies for the race: He got VET starting from pole wiht 2 Ferraris ready to jump him. WEB was going to start 5th right behind HAM. Taking into account the grid postions of the main rivals and WEB’s history of poor starts I don’t think Horner ever thought that his 2nd driver will be in P2 after the first 2 laps or even grab the lead later on.
      So they found themselves into a rather unexpected situation. It’s the second race of the season and issuing any direct team order would turn into a huge scandal (even in TOs are legal) especially after RBR was always the first team criticizing their rivals for using them and wipe away everything that was left of ‘we let our drivers race each other’ image.
      An annoyed VET in P2 asks the team to move away the race leader even though he was more than 1 second behind and never even tried to put up a fight. From the pit he gets some sort of consolation and encouragement: “It’s only half of the race, be patient”. So now all the genius heads at RBR were thinking how to switch their drivers as ‘clean’ as possible. And later on they decide to pit VET before WEB even if
      goes against the agreement the drivers and team have which is that the leading car pits first and gets the advantage of the undercut. After pitting 2nd WEB loses all his advantage but still manages to get out of the pits just in front of VET to his team’s disappointment (my belief). So the guys from the pit-wall had nothing else to do than accept VET’s defeat since apparently the ‘multi-21’ was agreed by both sides earlier (an obvious fact deduced from WEB’s questioning his team-mate just as they met immediately after the race) and let WEB take the extra 7 points. They order their drivers to mantain their position and save their cars with the consolation that at least they would grab the maximum amount of points for the WCC. VET is shocked by theis decision and encouraged by his ‘protected’ status he decides to take matters into his own hands and overtakes WEB. So in the end VET understood very well his bosses intentions and did what his team never dared to ask him on the radio. The messages and faces that followed were just a show set up for Webber and fans. I don’t believe for a minute that they weren’t happy with what VET did, the problem with Horner’s authority was never raised, the only problem for RBR right now is to how convince WEB to continue helping Sebastian in the pursuit of his 4th title.

      1. spot on

      2. I believe 100% the everyone at RBR was more than happy with Vettel winning except Mark Webber of corse.

        I imagine the mechanics who work specifically on Webber’s side of the garage weren’t happy though.

  2. A handshake means nothing if it’s forced..

    1. Marko to Webber: apologies now and shake hands.
      Webber’s mind: Don’t punch VETTEL, Don’t punch VETTEL.

  3. As for Button saying that… I don’t remember him saying anything when he overtook Hamilton at Istanbul 2010, with his car rich on fuel while Lewis’ was told he’d not be attacked and could switch his engine down…

    Ain’t it the same situation? except Button didn’t make it stick…

    1. Ah, he talks about that in the article… I was halfway through and got annoyed… Sorry ! CANCEL ALL PEOPLE !

      1. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
        28th March 2013, 1:03

        Oops, ignore what I wrote.

        1. @collettdumbletonhal I’ll ignore it, if you ignore what I want to ignore

          1. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
            28th March 2013, 20:41

            Yeah, I am doing. I didn’t because your post was not on my feed until after I had posted my comment.

    2. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
      28th March 2013, 0:57

      I don’t think Button was told not to overtake, that’s the difference. Hamilton was told he wouldn’t be overtaken but if Button was aware of that then I reckon he wouldn’t have made the move.

      1. That is what Button says at least, but I wouldn’t be surprised if he was just making a point of not accepting no. 2 there.

      2. jimscreechy (@)
        28th March 2013, 8:03

        So your saying Lewis’s engineer lied to him because he actually had no knowledge that button would not overtake, and that no team discussion had taken place on holding position before Lewis shouldl turn down his engine, or perhaps a discussion had taken place but Button’s engineer chose not to tell him? A Preposterous notion. Your assumption simply lays blame at the feet of the team rather implying impropriety simply exists elsewhere.

        1. Why on earth do you think that the idea that the left hand didn’t know what the right hand was doing is a preposterous notion when the team in question was McLaren, which tends to make at least one catastrophic race management mistake per weekend?

          1. jimscreechy (@)
            28th March 2013, 9:43

            Because Mclaren announced very publicly… practically every race weekend that the data, information and working practices were openly shared between teams of drivers and engineers. They even changed the layout of their garage from working on opposite walls of the garage on race weekends to a central information station to promote communications between the two sets of engineers. What, should I employ a inherently untrustworthy stance and discount everything they say and do in favour of a cynical opinion of Mclaren team management?

        2. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
          28th March 2013, 20:45

          I never said Lewis’ engineer lied to him, but wasn’t it on the team radio (or Lewis said) that Lewis would not be overtaken by Button.
          I am not blaming anyone, a communication error seems likely but you are jumping to conclusions.

      3. It all sounds fishy. Lewis has been told that Jenson would not overtake. Without any information about Button’s tactics, that would have been a blatant lie. Why would he do that?
        I’m not saying that Button is not telling the truth, but I would sure like to know who cocked up in that situation.

      4. @collettdumbletonhall

        Well Button claims that he didn’t know Lewis had turned his engine down.. but then again its Jenson.. who talks rubbish as often as he makes excuses.

        I found some typical Button statements in the article that cracked me up

        “How is he going to give that win back to Mark? I cannot imagine him leading the race and going to Mark and say ‘here you go’.

        “That’s very difficult and I could not do that.

        Yes its difficult… because Jenson would very rarely be in front of his teammate to begin with.

        “We all want to win but Sebastian drives for Red Bull and they have to call the shots. So many times it has worked in his favour.

        Every team calls the shots Jenson, not just Red Bull. Everyone benefits from these calls including Jenson

        1. Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall)
          28th March 2013, 20:51

          So Jenson is lying because he often makes excuses?
          I don’t think he is implying that other teams don’t call the shots, only that Red Bull should be calling the shots and not Sebastian Vettel. He is implying that Vettel has benefitted a disproportionate amount of times from team calls in comparison to other drivers.

          1. @collettdumbletonhall

            He is implying that Vettel has benefitted a disproportionate amount of times from team calls in comparison to other drivers.

            In which case, either JB is incorrect (how often have Red Bull even employed team orders for SV? Silverstone 2011, and the end of last year when Vettel was capable of fighting for the title and his teammate was not?), or Vettel is just one of the few drivers who is a significantly better than his teammate, causing the team to supposedly allow him to benefit a “disproportionate” amount of times.

  4. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gBQJS5FjB90
    At 1:30, he explains that Webber was in fuel saving mode, if you can trust Peter Windsor.

  5. Nice tweet from @WilliamsF1Team ,but it would be even better if they started it with “Dear Santa”.

  6. “One big question remained, why didn’t the team simply ask him to drop back behind Webber again?”

    Because Vettel had just ignored an order not to overtake Webber, so why would he obey an order to let Webber back past him?

    1. The point is, Red Bull has no willing to stop Vettel even though they originally ordered that hold the position. If they had ordered to gave the position back, then even if Vettel ignored, the team can blame Vettel more clearly. Instead, they chose not to ask Vettel to do that at all so all things gone out of control now.

  7. I can’t really recall a race where Mark pulled a Massa with the exception of Brazil 2012 although the start was a bit of a grey area.
    Mark and Seb never made it too easy for each other which is why I think they are the best and most interesting line-up of all teams. But I don’t have a crystal ball so we probably need to wait and see if it really matters.

    1. Mark never made it easy for Seb (maybe Istanbul 2010 is an exception) but definetly didn’t make it impossible because I can’t recall a race where Webber finished just in front of Vettel. In the end he always yielded the position to his team-mate. I have a feeling that WEB accepted to help Seb only if afterwards he’s allowed to polish his image a bit in front of the media, like in Silverstone 2011 (‘I didn’t listen to TO’) so he wouldn’t be perceived as a pure lackey like Massa is.

  8. Lauda questions Brawn’s team orders …

    “…We need to talk to Ross, if this is the strategy to be used from now on.”

    At the top Mercedes is a 3 headed beast. One head is now biting at another and probably wants to lop that head off to then attach yet another. Interesting that Lauda said “we” need to talk to Ross even though Wolff agreed with Brawn. Interesting that Lauda is publicly criticizing Brawn about anything since the car performance is doing much better than expected. Unless Lauda feels the need for a public spectacle, it seems this could have been handled in private.

    1. Todd (@braketurnaccelerate)
      28th March 2013, 1:20

      Lauda being Lauda.

      1. The “legacy” of Malaysian GP is: teams will handle team orders differently.

      2. @braketurnaccelerate…… lauda being lauda hehe ;) Had a good laugh there.

    2. He is correct in what he said, though. Perhaps if it had ‘been handled in private’, his words would have been dismissed. Now that we know what he said, his words will have more power, because we agree with him.

    3. Lauda is making cheap points there I think. In hindsight I’m sure Brawn would secretly wish he hadn’t made that call either.

      1. Why would he? Brawn’s call was correct and it achieved what he wanted it to.

        1. If it was correct, why did Ross Brawn first have to lie to Rosberg (about how he was in the same situation fuel-wise as Hamilton) and then develop that lie and keep on repeating it? As much as Horner came across weak, Brawn showed himself to be spineless.

      2. Lauda is making cheap points there I think. In hindsight I’m sure Brawn would secretly wish he hadn’t made that call either.


        Lets not forget Brawn is one of the pioneers of team orders, in fact, he has always focused on 1 driver in the team and moulded everything else around him.

        So I really do no think Brawn would change anything if he was given the opportunity again. You cannot change your whole philosophy of team management because Niki Lauda said something

    4. Not really a case of the team being a 3 headed beast @bullmello. The simple fact that both Lauda and Wolff mention they are not happy with it as stakeholders but have to talk to Ross about it, makes fully clear that Ross is the one in the driving seat and the others cannot influence things apart from going through Brawn.

      I think Lauda is very clear in acting as a public figure here. Mercedes (the car company) wants to see fair competition is his statement. And also its hard to look over the fact that Lauda is a pundit on German RTL. The ones who focus almost religiously on German drivers.

    5. Niki Lauda engages mouth before brain? I feel shocked.

      I wager Niki would have had steam coming out of his ear if Ross had let his drivers race, and they’d collided with one another.

      1. He should’ve called Ross, if he has problems with the tactics.
        But I guess he’s just not that kind of person.

    6. Trying to turn a rivals success into a failure.

  9. Comment of the day needed to be said! The BBC Sport comments sections are full of people moralising the whole thing based on prejudice and guess-work.

    1. @iamdanthomas Unfortunately that’s BBC Sport commenters for you.. They do the same on most articles (and most articles devolve into JB v LH). It only takes them to see ‘Andrew Benson’ on an article, they immediately criticise him for selling a bad news story, even if it’s actually a blog post.

      The best part is when you see them wonder why the beeb don’t allow comments on particular F1 articles, yet they moan about anything the beeb do let them have a comment on. I happen to think the beeb’s coverage is much better than Sky’s, as it was last year (And I’ve been fortunate to sample both, Sky’s only saving grace is the classic race re-runs they seem to show every now and again). BBC’s coverage has been made better since the Sky deal

      1. I agree . It’s annoying that most things turn into JB v LH debates even if the topic is nothing to do with them

  10. Chris (@tophercheese21)
    28th March 2013, 1:25

    I think the polling results show just how wrong Helmut ‘imbecile’ Marko’s comments on Mercedes were.

    Far more people thought that Merc shouldn’t have given team orders, and let Nico pass, this is because Mercedes dont have a clear number 1 driver, so they haven’t given preferential favours either Hamilton or Rosberg. So neither driver is really viewed as an underdog.

    Red Bull on the other hand clearly do have a No. 1 driver (the young German bloke), and over the time that Webber and Vettel have been teammates, Vettel has had far more team orders go in his favour, because of his preferential status. For this reason, people view Mark as the underdog.

    People like underdogs.

    And this shows in the poll results as well, with substantially more people voting in agreement of team orders compared to Mercedes.

    1. So, in your opinion people are voting on emotion rather than looking at the specifics of the situation and forming a judgement based on that? What evidence do you have for your analysis?

      1. Chris (@tophercheese21)
        28th March 2013, 6:06

        The evidence is in the polls.

      2. Chris (@tophercheese21)
        28th March 2013, 6:15

        Because, arguably, what Mercedes did was worse, yet more people voted in favour of team orders compared to Red Bull.

        But, because Mark is the clear second driver, on track for a race win, and it gets taken away by the Number 1 (Vettel), then people don’t always like that.

        1. I think it was important for Brawn to establish the principle of honouring the LEAD driver when imposing a “go slow” so when Nico gets in that position he can believe his position is safe and slow down even though Lewis is less than 1 sec. behind.

          Not much chance of Mark or Seb turning down the wick in future.

      3. Probably, emotions have a big influence over our choices.

  11. Who’s Webber’s manager now? There was a report on the news here that Webber’s ‘manager’ has announced that this will be Mark’s last season with Red Bull, and may look to go to Ferrari?
    I honestly think he should have just gone to Ferrari when he had the chance, he would have been a good chance to finished ahead of the Mercedes unlike Massa.

    1. Flavio Braitore

      1. Speaking of Briatore, he said that Horner has no balls:

        1. Good old Briatore! Horner may have no balls but he has no morals!

  12. The next race is in three weeks… Are we going to talk about anything else than RB team orders until the Chinese Grand Prix? :)

    1. I wonder if we will remembre this story in ten or twenty years… It could be a famous moment of Formula 1.

      1. Probably not, it’s too early in the season. If it happened at, say, the 2nd to last race and Webber ended up losing the championship the next race to Hamilton by 3 points, then it’d never be forgotten. But there will be a dozen other ways all of the drivers involved could have won or lost those points before the season’s over. I agree, though, that i’m very tired of the subject already.

      2. Unlikely. What do we remember from 1993, 20 years ago?

        -The European Grand Prix, one of Senna’s greatest victories. Kind of a pity F1 never went back to Donington, after holding one race which was a classic, but admittedly that was mostly the weather, and Britain in April is dicey at the best of times.
        -The row over active suspension, which is still one of the stupidest FIA moments I can remember. Ban it straight away, or leave it legal, don’t wait until every team has spent money on developing a system and then ban it!
        -If you’re British, probably, Damon Hill’s first year with Williams and the general sense of futility in cheering on somebody with 2 GP starts in the hope he can beat Senna and Prost.

        And that’s about it. Don’t quite see anything that’s happened being that memorable.

  13. If that’s true what Lauda said, then I find that highly unprofessional of him…

    1. I suspect they are building a narrative of disagreement between Brawn and the big cheeses, so that they can justify moving Ross on at the end of the year, or maybe sooner.

      They could put Lauda in charge – I suppose he’s got the experience of his hilarious tenure at Jaguar to fall back on.

  14. Well, if nothing else has come out of this affair, one things for sure. Team order are going to be used sparingly from now on, and I wouldn’t be surprised if the Red Bull drivers start to disregard them altogether. Seb isn’t going to allow himself to be reigned in and Mark certainly isn’t going to let this slide. Which is ultimately a good thing. Seeing the Red Bulls race, wheel-to-wheel, was the most entertaining thing we saw in Malaysia. If that’s the standard of racing we can now expect throughout the season, between the drivers of 4-5 teams of comparable pace, then we are in for a blazer of a year!

  15. I find the COTD pretty inflammatory, webber clearly stopped the fight because he was concerned about the team where as Vettel was the opposite. He could have run Vettel off the track but instead let him go because he didn’t want to jeopardise the points. Race mode or not is inconsequential, regardless of whether the bloodthirsty fans want the drivers to race to the death.

    1. On COTD,

      I think TV aired Webber talking to Newey and Seb yelling more than twice “Multi 21”, I guess that’s a team code to turn down the engine.

      By the way, Seb said sorry and it means a lot to me.

    2. Webber clearly stopped the fight because he was concerned about the team

      You mean when he backed down at turn four? When I first saw that I thought something similar until I noticed Vettel had saved a lot of KERS to get alongside Webber going into the corner, so I don’t think Webber had the choice to be any tougher with him.

      It’s worth pointing out that a couple of corners earlier Vettel had also had the opportunity to run Webber off the track and didn’t. Considering the intensity of the battle they treated each other with respect.

      bloodthirsty fans want the drivers to race to the death

      The Comment of the Day isn’t inflammatory but this clearly is. Fans expecting drivers in a motor race to be allowed to race each other is obviously not the same thing as wanting to see them crash and die.

  16. Shreyas Mohanty (@)
    28th March 2013, 4:22

    Vettel’s move “will hurt him in the long run”

    What does Button mean to say here? That other teams may be reluctant to offer Vettel a contract in the future – because we all know his RBR stint will end some day. Or he may get into an adventurous mood like Hamilton.

    1. Shreyas Mohanty (@)
      28th March 2013, 4:24

      * contract in the future?

      1. He probably means that if Vettel really need Mark’s help sometime in the future, there won’t be any. Vettel need that extra place to win 4th crown? He can forget it.

        1. Shreyas Mohanty (@)
          28th March 2013, 5:50


        2. You mean like how Webber “helped” him in Brazil last year? I’m not sure what Button thinks has changed.

          1. Webber did move over for Vettel twice in Brazil and was thanked by the team. Does that “help”?

          2. @juan-fanger – he did, but he made it far from easy for him – he nearly took Vettel out at the restart!

    2. he may get into an adventurous mood like Hamilton

      Newey and Vettel should raise funds and buy Marrusia or Caterham and build their own team, SEBASTIAN NEWEY RACING.


      1. I would genuinely like to see that!
        Who’d be the team mate?

      2. Vettel doesn’t need one because teammate will only get in the way. Save the cost by fielding only one car and just forget abut WCC because he doesn’t need that too.

  17. Love the video of the day, Keith. Epic race.

  18. Martin Brundle may have been in relative grounds an average F1 driver, but he is a top journalist.

  19. The allegation that Webber was in “fuel saving mode” while Vettel was in “race mode” is likewise bizarre. A lot of people are repeating this allegation on a lot of fan forums, but the claim is based on no hard facts.

    I heard Mark Webber during the interview in the podium talking specifically about that. He just said it, in plain english: “After the last stop the team told me the race was over and we turned the engine down to go to the end,” said Webber. http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/106337

    I found also funny the comment of “no media outlet has told anything about that…” Well, have you read all media available (worldwide)? Or just talking about the media you read.

    1. Its clear Webber did turn down the engine, and surely he did not push as much as he would have otherwise done on the pit exit. But I seriously doubt that he would not have turned up the engine a bit again during that battle with Vettel while defending.
      Fact is, no one who does know this (i.e. in the team) is telling us, so we can only speculate.

    2. @bascb
      We don’t know why WEB did not turn up the engine, and who knows, he could not be 100% sure VET had all the power from the engine, and in any case, I have a strong feeling WEB is not in the position of contradict team orders in any situation. If the team has already told him to turn the engine down, he turn it down and period.

      1. Webber has a history of disregarding team orders. Just saying…

        1. Are you talking about RBR, the team who has no “Team orders”?

    3. It’s also since came out after the race (posted in Keiths article a couple of days ago) that Vettels engineer told him not to KEEP his KERS in OVERTAKE mode AFTER he’d already made the pass on Webber because it may fail. Proving that not only was he using everything at dispolsal to get passed but then to stay there one he was infront. I’m sure if Webber was too, his engineer would have gave him the same warning, which he never.

  20. I find it strange that Alonso is still defending their decision to stay out with the broken wing. Of course, they couldn’t know at that time that the crossover point would be something like lap 7 rather than lap 3/4, but to say they would have won 20 to 30 seconds by staying out sounds like a bit of an exaggeration, as he wasn’t able to go at full speed with a broken wing. In addition, with a new wing he would have the option of staying on the inters longer, thereby jumping people who changed too early.

    Still, I don’t mind he didn’t finish the race; I think it will be good for the championship.

    1. I agree, it looks as being a bit in a state of denial, because the wing was horribly damaged all along, and on the straight naturally downforce pulled it down further. But the team had a new nose prepared, so its not quite as he says it is there (both the statement that it only came loose on the first straight and that they did not manage to react to that).
      To me it seems the team, and Alonso himself, might have started to believe in him doing magic a bit too much for their own good after he managed to achieve almost unbelievable results in a sub par car last year. Or its just that he is getting his cage rattled by Massa being right there with him on speed.

      1. The quote was after the race. I dont know why its being repackaged here.

        1. what quote was after the race? You mean Alonso’s?

          1. yes, it was from sunday i think

          2. Not sure what you are getting at though, he could hardly have made that statement before the race, could he?
            This interview from Adam Cooper certainly was after the race, and Alonso had had almost 1,5 hours of watching footage and looking at the whole situation by then, so its not as if he was defending himself/the team only minutes after crashing out.

  21. A Thay race being a real proposition then?

    The route agreed includes the main Ratchadamnoen Avenue, with the track using Din So Road to the Giant Swing and Wat Suthat Temple and then down to the Grand Palace and the Navy Club, with a run close to the Chao Phraya River. The paddock and grandstands would be located principally in the Sanam Luang park. The plan will be put to the Thai cabinet in the next few weeks.

  22. Lauda is clearly a nutcase, and is going to destroy this team.
    Lewis should go to Redbull next season, Mercedes engines are overrated.

    1. David not Coulthard (@)
      28th March 2013, 9:59

      Mercedes engines are overrated.

      I’m quite sure that the engines were not the reason that Lewis moved to Neo-Merc/Tyrrell. If it was he might as well have stayed at McLaren, not knowing the speed of the MP4-28. He probably wanted something new, and that didn’t have to involve Renault engines, or the designer that last won McLaren the WCC.

      And it’s not like Red Bull’s got a vacant seat, anyway.

  23. I am still struggling to understand why Mark Webber is getting so much sympathy from most people… I can understand why Rdbull are not so happy .. afterall vettel did not obey a clear instruction to hold station… Whether that was the right or not is something that depends upon how you look at it.. I see no problem with that, he was faster and he took the opportunity..

    Coming back to Webber.. If he thinks he was cheated or something why did not he do anything about it? If he had the pace he should’ve fought back… he could nt do that so clearly he was not faster… He could also have been more agrresive while defending.. I am sure he would’ve been if it was nt his team mate trying to pass him..
    He could nt beat vettel on track and then played victim in the podium and to the media.. That is not Aussie Grit Mark…

    1. David not Coulthard (@)
      28th March 2013, 8:35

      I am still struggling to understand why Mark Webber is getting so much sympathy from most people

      I think it’s because he said that he was told to turn the engines down, and the fact that nobody denied it, at least among those whose denial of Mark’s statement would’ve been believed had they denied Mark’s statement.

  24. BradandCoffee
    28th March 2013, 8:25

    Did the author of the comment of the day not listen to Mark Webber on the podium talking to Marting Brundle?

    Q. start, that’s not always your strongest suit but you were in good shape at the beginning of the race.

    Mark WEBBER: Yeah the first part of the grand prix went very well for us. I think very tricky conditions for all of us on the intermediates to start with. In the end, yeah I think we got the right strategy I think early in the race with the inters, getting the crossover quite nice. Then really it was just controlling the race and getting everything in place towards the back end of the race. Obviously I had to mark Lewis off a little bit in the middle there and then after the last stop obviously the team told me the race was over, we turned the engines down and we go to the end. I want to race as well, but in the end the team made a decision, which we always say before the race is probably how it’s going to be – we look after the tyres, get the car to the end and in the end Seb made his own decisions today and will have protection and that’s the way it goes.

    Q. So you were surprised when he went past you?

    MW: Yeah, well I turned my engine down and started cruising on the tyres and the fight was off. Anyway, we know he’s a quick peddler but I was disappointed with the outcome of today’s race. In the end the team did a good job, I had some good fans here from Australia, so thanks guys. I did my best.

  25. Yeah its so lousy, it’s strange it made comment of the day.
    ‘fuel-saving-mode’ for Webber?? Maybe he’s confusing the Mercs and the Redbulls.

  26. My GOD the video of the day is fantastic ………….. Prost aqua planing the hell off the track senna and a young Schumacher …..what action !!!!!!!!! I completely disagree with the COTD .. Where is the evidence ? Webber said so himself and moreover you want Horner to say it aloud himself when his team relationship is in tatters. That would mean shooting his own foot . He is surely more clever than that . Besides , if you feel there is not enough information to judge , then you should probably choose “can’t say ” in the voting

    1. @hamilfan – I find that comment ironic, as the COTD is about the very lack of evidence to suggest Webber was “caught off guard”.

  27. If teams are going to use team orders at least they have to stop lying to their drivers. Rosberg was lied to by Ross Brawn when he was told Hamilton could go faster, he couldn`t. Rosberg was punished for taking care of his tyres and car.
    Vettel was told something that stretched the truth a bit too, and he knew it. Vettel was told in his last stint that they were marginal on tyres, that was not true and Vettel knew it. His last stint was 13 laps on new medium tyres. In his second stint he had done 17 laps on the medium tyre with a much heavier car, how could Red Bull be marginal on tyres considering this? The answer is they were not, and Vettel knew it.

    How do teams expect drivers to do what they ask of them when the drivers know that much of the information given to them is incorrect?

    Vettel probably felt robbed in the latter stages of the race. First he was brought in too early for dry tyres, and that cost him the lead. Then he was held up by Webber when ha was fast, he was told “it`s only half race”. Then he was passed by Hamilton on the undercut because he had been held up by Webber and had to pit after Webber. He fought his way back to second place and started chasing down Webber, went for the undercut and was alongside Webber when Webber came back out. And here comes the crucial part, Vettel had saved a brand new set of medium tyres for that last stint and was thus faster than everybody around him. This combined with the fact that he and Webber were side by side after the last pitstop was enough to bring out the “red mist”. Vettel was beyond control by then, instinct and will to win completely took over. the fight was allready on.

    The moral of the story is: If you are going to use team orders you have to have a number 1 driver and a number 2 driver. The drivers that in their heart truly consider themselves to be the best in the world will not accept to be subject to team orders unless the situation dictates it (Schumacher “help-rider” for Irvine Malaysia 99`).

    1. How do teams expect drivers to do what they ask of them when the drivers know that much of the information given to them is incorrect?

      A very well made point @kimiwillbeback

    2. I think your missing point of Ross Brawns comment. Lewis could go faster but he would run out of fuel. So it was not a lie. He told Rosberg Hamilton was driving to a set lap time. He also told him the bulls were too far down the road to catch and risk breaking the car, running out of fuel or burning the tyres.
      The was going to be no advantage to let Rosberg past other than his own drivers points gain, but that was going to add unnecessary stress on the car. So apart from Rosbergs ego there was no point of swapping.

    3. Vettel was told in his last stint that they were marginal on tyres, that was not true and Vettel knew it.

      I found this argument from Red Bull stupid: the drivers are the best placed to judge the state of their tyres as they are the ones driving the car, not some technician on the pit wall with a laptop.

      1. Your comment is slightly naive. The guy on the pit wall with the lap top also has dozens of sensors to monitor the car and tyres. They can predict with reasonable accuracy by what lap the tyres are going to hit the cliff, so it is no surprise that they tell drivers to save the tyres.

        Are they often wrong? Sure, but I doubt a driver could do better with no help in avoiding the cliff. By the time he notices the grip is gone, he will be losing time, while the team could instead just pit him early safely and not lose any time.

        1. @churaragi – sure they have sensors and the like, but the driver is the best sensor of all when it comes to tyre conserving. They know how much grip there is because they can feel it – they are paid millions of pounds for a reason you know!

          1. @vettel1 @churaragi
            Sorry, but I have to jump in. You are both right, BUT the driver is only capable of judging the current/actual state of the tyres and track conditions, while the engineers can predict the tyrelife with the help of the gathered data on the compunds, and the continous telemetry connection. The engineers have the ability to give drivers a delta time, so that their tyres will last enough to make the strategy work, while the driver gives them feedback about the state of the tyres, so they can take steps accordingly.

            All in all, they have to work together, because on their own they could not make good decisions.

    4. “He fought his way back to second place and started chasing down Webber, went for the undercut and was alongside Webber when Webber came back out. And here comes the crucial part, Vettel had saved a brand new set of medium tyres for that last stint and was thus faster than everybody around him. This combined with the fact that he and Webber were side by side after the last pitstop was enough to bring out the “red mist” ”

      Interesting point. Question is, if roles were reversed, would Webber have done the same thing?

    5. Easily my vote for comment of the day. Well done, the misinformation and lies the teams tell the drivers is a point nobody has considered so far it seems.

  28. I’ve given myself a couple of days to reflect upon this incident after I wrote an furious comment here in the Vettel wins Malaysian Grand Prix thread. I like to see drivers bash it out for the win (even more when it is between teammates) and I am not a big fan of Team orders either. But for me an agreement is an agreement if two drivers make a decision with the team before the race that in the last stint both cars will turn down their engines and hold station regardless if the no.1 driver is in front or not, the agreement has to be respected.

    But as I have said before I’ve had some time to reflect and although I’m completely on Webbers side of the matter, you cannot deny Vettels relentless desire to win is a trait some great champions of the past have also possessed. It’s not the nicest thing to do but I can understand the motivation behind it.

    In short : No to team orders, Yes to free fighting an Yes to gentlemen agreements

    1. @force-maikel – is your avatar the Lion of Flanders?

  29. David not Coulthard (@)
    28th March 2013, 10:29

    No media outlet is making this claim.Mark Webber is not making this claim.Christian Horner is not making this claim.

    You do make a good point: they’re not making the claim – they already made it a few days ago!

    fans who get their views of the races from live text feeds or after-the-fact news reports rather than by watching the races.

    I didn’t get that from my text feed (though it did tell me about Brawn’s order to Rosberg), I got them from other sites, including YouTube.

  30. Fantastic COTD @jonsan! I too refuse to believe Webber – the same driver who has never failed to ignore team orders in the past – would just let himself be a sitting duck to Vettel, who had to close on him first; it’s not as if he just appeared on Webber’s rear wing. So I don’t accept the moral argument, but fair enough if certain people dislike disobediance (although personally I would support any driver to screw team orders, particularly at such an early stage)!

    1. It’s not disobeying team orders that leaves a bad taste, it’s sneaking up on your team mate after you’ve already agreed that you’re going to hold position. It’s a sucker punch and it’s disgusting.
      You should be ashamed of Vettel and his deceitful, treacherous way of winning.

      1. @juan-fanger

        But the fact that Vettel disobeyed the team order showes that he did not agree to hold his position. In addition, Webber had a marginal lead over Vettel (they were wheel to wheel) after MW’s final stop. The fact that Vettel would dare to overtake is hardly “sneaking up” is it? Especially given that Vettel saved a set of mediums from qualifying to use in that final stint. This may point to controversy in some sense, but definitely not “deceit” or “treachery”.

        1. @david-a, Vettel may only have agreed to hold position in the belief that he would be in the lead and it would be good not to have Mark to worry about, but either he agreed, or he pretended to agree in order to gain an advantage, either way he stole the win.

          1. @hohum – Did SV respond on the radio to indicate that he agreed with the team order? If he didn’t, then all we have to go on is the fact that he set those fast laps through the final pitstop phase (one could at least argue that RBR shouldn’t have pitted Vettel first), and then raced Webber as he came out of the pits.

          2. @david-a, team order is not the right word, the right word is team tactical agreement, ie “after the last pit stop there will be no racing between team mates, the pace will be reduced to conserve the cars for the next race”.
            Team orders were not suddenly introduced over the radio, although that is what Vettel wanted mid-race.

          3. @hohum
            How do you know that Vettel had agreed on doing so?

    2. @vettel1, yes, fantastic is the correct word, it is literally a fantasy.

      1. @hohum – do you actually believe Webber would just sit there and do nothing? This wasn’t a sneak attack like the pearl harbour anecdote you previously used; it had been in the making for several laps. I have yet to hear any footage/recordings of Vettel saying he agreed to maintaining position, so Webber will undoubtably have been en-garde.

        1. This wasn’t a sneak attack like the pearl harbour anecdote you previously used; it had been in the making for several laps.

          Actually a pearl harbour analogy might be pretty correct then @vettel1, because while it came as a surprise when the Japanese did it, it had been coming (and media had talked about it too), but the US in general felt it was save from attacks.

          1. @bascb

            the US in general felt it was save from attacks.

            I highly doubt Webber thought the same though, which is my point! If a driver is closing in you must assume every time he is going to attack – it is after all the point of motor racing! I would say it’s more like the grasslands of Africa: if the grass rustles, you must every time assume that it is a lion lurking in the grass, not just merely the wind blowing. You get complacent and you die.

          2. No Max – @vettel1, I meant to say that while the general public might have been sussed (the team telling Webber that Vettel is not supposed to overtake him), the people in the know/making the decisions – And I definitely count Mark as the one in that position – knew of the risks and likeliness of such an attack very well, he could see Vettel behind him and it was clear what he was doing.
            That is to say, we agree that Webber is not the fool people make of him when they say he did not see it coming and could not react.

          3. @bascb I see, sorry for the misunderstanding!

  31. Worst Comment of the Day I’ve ever seen from this site. The standards are falling here Keith. If you look at the poster’s posting history, you can see that he is a big Vettel fan and would say anything to defend Vettel, just take a look if you don’t believe me. Add to the fact that his claims in his comment are mostly false, like how NO ONE or MEDIA has reported that the engine was turned down.

    DAMN! This site is becoming like another site which shall not be named. Promoting comments that are so ridiculous so people will feel the need to respond, such as me.

    1. I disagree: in fact, that commenter always has reason to back up his points. Sure, as I am, he is a Vettel fan, but that is no crime. If we look at the evidence, there is nothing to say Vettel agreed conclusively to maintaing his position, and equally nothing to say Webber was unaware of Vettel’s closing. In fact, both of those suggestions are based on nothing more than “multi 21”.

      1. @vettel1 Mark’s comments to Vettel immediately after the race (“Multi-21 heh, Seb?) confirm that both drivers knew what the code stood for and since the matter couldn’t be discussed between them during the race it’s safe to assume it was a case of pre-race agreement. Not folowing team-orders that are made during a race is one thing – it’s more of a matter between the driver and the team’s bosses. But when you agree on something with your team-mate during a pre-race briefing but do the opposite in the race – this is dishonourable. And the worst thing is that Vettel kept b*itching about having no intentions to overtake and other nonsense like that.
        If Mark knew about Vet’s intentions? The fact that he was closing in didn’t necesarily mean that he was going to attack. Just look how Rosberg finished right on Ham’s tail, so did the McLarens in Instanbul 2010.

        1. @klaas I believe “multi-21” is an engine map setting, not a team order. That means that they could very well have been told during the race to turn the engines down, which Vettel obviously didn’t do. So it was a simple issue of Webber returning to the normal engine setting to defend.

          If Mark knew about Vet’s intentions? The fact that he was closing in didn’t necesarily mean that he was going to attack.

          What? By definition, closing in means he is getting ready to attack. That is how F1 works, and how all racing works! Rosberg made it clear he was wishing to do the same as Vettel did as otherwise he wouldn’t have closed on his teammate!

      2. While we obviously have no defenitive confirmation of either Red Bull driver explicitly agreeing to the team tactics of using the multi 21 setting and holding station and cruise to the finish, to speculate on either of them being unaware of that does nothing to support your argument @vettel1.
        The team has done the same regularly during the years, and from Vettels reaction to what Webber said, it was clear that he was aware of the setting being an order. Other teams, principals and ex team members from several teams have confirmed that they have the same sort of procedure, even if its called differently.
        That the team and Webber have repeated that he did in fact turn down the engine is not disputed @klaas, Roger and the rest saying the COTD is nonsense for this reason, the point is that Webber is not subservient enough to then keep it there while Vettel passes him. Indeed the speed of the cars, and the fact that Vettel still had to fight for the spot should be a strong indication Mark was no complete sitting duck there, even if he did get caught off guard and might have expected Vettel to relent in the end.
        I do agree that its tough to believe Webber did not get the wick up a bit as soon as he realised that Vettel was racing him, he would be stupid not to (which he is not)

        1. @bascb – I’m not disputing that, I’m disputing the actual meaning of “multi 21”: I don’t believe it is a pre-arranged team order as such, rather a setting on the cars with the implication that therefore the drivers should just coast until the end. So of course Vettel knew what he was doing was against the team’s interests (hence “this is silly Seb” from Horner) but can we really blame him for wanting to win? That is the point here: drivers obviously all want to win, so they shouldn’t be denied that opportunity whilst there is still a chance (so really I’d only support team orders if the other driver was out of title contention).

          1. Why are you disputing that @vettel1?

            As I wrote above, its perfectly normal for teams to have this kind of setting, which is used by all teams in a case where they want their driver(s) to cruise home. It is ALWAYS combined with staying put, either because they give up on improving AND feel they are not under threat (with two of them running together the idea is to do that telling both to do the same).

            I do not blame Vettel for going for the win, its a sport and they should be doing all they can (within the rules) to do that. Attacking the car in front because you feel you can should be applauded. I do not like the fact that teams want to take that away to limit risk.
            But it does also mean that what Vettel did ultimately was not nice towards Webber, as he knew full well what he was doing there. Vettel probably did not realise how the team would react in the moment of action, and now he has to deal with it.
            He is no more a nice guy on track than his idol Michael Schumacher (see interview with FOM yesterday), nor is Alonso, and Button, Hamilton etc. Or for that matter guys like Senna, Prost, and others. Schumacher took it over the limit too often though, which tainted his legacy.

          2. @bascb – because what it means is that simply Webber could’ve turned his engine back up to defend or mount a counter-attack, which a lot of people seem to think he was unable to do and that he was a “sitting duck”, which I believe is far from the truth.

          3. but surely its pretty much irrelevant if its either a team order, or a setting, or a setting combined with a default team order @vettel1, because Its pretty much a certainty that Webber would have turned up the engine in either case.

          4. @vettel1
            Read the thread above and you’ll see what multi-21 actually means:

          5. @klaas – yes, I was speculating this from before Christian made public the actual meaning of the code, which became known to me from an article here after I’d posted those comments so it’s best just to ignore it now!

    2. Just because you don’t agree with it doesn’t mean it’s wrong.

      I think a lot of people are jumping to the conclusion that because Webber (like Vettel) was required to use a lower engine setting, or because he did use it at one point, that means he continued to do so throughout the battle with Vettel and afterwards.

      I’m not making the case that he did or he didn’t. But unlike some people instead of assuming the worst about Vettel and the best about Webber I prefer to be sceptical until the facts are in. What we do know, for example, is they both set their fastest laps of the race so far on the lap before Vettel passed Webber.

      Whether you think Webber turned his engine down and kept it down even as Vettel attacked him, or turned his engine back up in retaliation to try to defend his position, is up to you.

    3. + 1.000.000

      I was thinking the exact same thing! That “comment of the day” significant lowered the sites normally high credibility in my opinion.

      The comment basically states that everybody else are wrong because I know better which I regarded as one of the most immature comments I had seen in a while already before it was “rewarded”. What makes matters worse is the “hard fact” that in order to believe this you have to regard Webber as completely dishonest for making his apparently bizarre claims.

      What bothers me the most about the entire case is that only very few people seem to get the actual point: there is no other possible way to avoid team orders than having only single car teams. Why do you want our beloved sport to be based on artificial rules that doesn’t work? It is sad and disgraceful, now that FIA is finally doing something good for the sport.

      Of course I prefer racing over ordered results but banning team orders will do absolutely nothing to promote that. And THAT is a hard fact learned from experience.

      The discussion of which team was right or wrong about their orders is so pointless that I refuse to take part and didn’t vote. Only the TEAMS have all the information it takes to make the right calls. They do it throughout every race and we know very little about their motivation for each call.

  32. May I suggest something, why doesn’t Red Bull just man up, and accept not using team orders?

    This incident has proved that team orders are a liability, they don’t prevent accidents, they simply delay them, via the form of inside the team fighting, and in Ferrari’s case, the completely bizarre and unjustifiable thing they did with the Massa gearbox fiasco.

    The F1 fan inside me tells that if teams simply decided to not give team orders anymore(doable if all drivers agreed not to follow them), then I think this would be done and no such problem would exist again.

    Would someone do what Schumacher did in Brazil by letting Vettel pass? Probably.
    Just as I think you would never see Hamilton do the same with Alonso for example.

    That inter driver battle is what still brings me to the sport, and if team orders are taken to the extreme, I am not sure I am ready or willing to watch another Schumarcher and Barrichello period(specialy stupid as a Brazilian but hey…).

    1. Just as I think you would never see Hamilton do the same with Alonso for example.

      We alreday saw this example in life. Had Petrov been such a nice guy in Abu Dhabi 2010 like Schumi was with Vettel maybe we’d had someone else as triple world champion.

  33. Everybody is talking of team orders, but this round up reminds me of a form of intrateam skewing of results which is just as annoying : not giving the same car to both drivers. Grosjean has had to race with an older version of the Lotus than Raikkonen. From a big team with ressources, I find that just as insulting to the second driver than excusing driver n°1 for misbeheaving and than keeping driver n°1 in front when he clealy can’t stay in front on his own.

    1. The consequence of making both cars equal would mean that both would have them later. And it would mean a bigger risk for the team (what if during the weekend they find out the new bits are no improvement, after all) @tango, its something wholly different.

  34. fictitious belief that Webber was the victim of a “sneak attack” having “turned his engine down while Vettel did not”

    I guess Webber was just angry because he lost the race then was he? Come on, this COTD is ridiculous. If it wasn’t the engine then it was just as likely they were preserving tyres. Note Vettel’s comment about finishing 8th and 9th here.

    Multi-21 anyone? Seriously, it’s clear as day that Webber was stabbed in the back.

    1. @john-h

      Multi-21 anyone? Seriously, it’s clear as day that Webber was stabbed in the back.

      To quote the creator of this site who picked that COTD:

      What we do know, for example, is they both set their fastest laps of the race so far on the lap before Vettel passed Webber.

      To label the COTD, which doubts the “sneak attack” theory, as ridiculous is a stretch. As is the claim that it was “clear as day” that MW was “stabbed in the back”. Webber somehow set his personal best laptime, while defending during a battle, all whilst saving fuel or tyres?

  35. “Claire Williams new Deputy Team Principal of @WilliamsF1Team. Brilliant news. Who ever said F1 is a man’s world?!” says the wife of the former Executive Director of the team about the daughter of the founder and team principal of the team :D

  36. Ferrari need to get their eyes fixed! Or I have (and my memory as well) because I’m sure that sparks were visible and showed in live television way before the back straight!

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.