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

F1 Fanatic round-up

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.

Advert | Go Ad-free


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

1 2 3
  1. Fer no.65 (@fer-no65) said on 28th March 2013, 0:29

    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…

    • Sankalp Sharma (@sankalp88) said on 28th March 2013, 1:12

      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.

    • 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.

    • Enigma (@enigma) said on 28th March 2013, 5:59


      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 :)

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 28th March 2013, 7:00

      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.

      • TommyB (@tommyb89) said on 28th March 2013, 9:20

        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.

        • BasCB (@bascb) said on 28th March 2013, 9:33

          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!

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 28th March 2013, 7:58

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

    • Klaas (@klaas) said on 28th March 2013, 9:14

      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.

  2. DD42 said on 28th March 2013, 0:35

    A handshake means nothing if it’s forced..

  3. Fer no.65 (@fer-no65) said on 28th March 2013, 0:36

    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…

    • Fer no.65 (@fer-no65) said on 28th March 2013, 0:38

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

    • Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall) said on 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.

      • BasCB (@bascb) said on 28th March 2013, 7:02

        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.

      • jimscreechy (@) said on 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.

        • Ilanin (@ilanin) said on 28th March 2013, 9:17

          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?

          • jimscreechy (@) said on 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?

        • Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall) said on 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.

      • dennis (@dennis) said on 28th March 2013, 9:07

        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.

      • Todfod (@todfod) said on 28th March 2013, 19:16


        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

        • Daniel (@collettdumbletonhall) said on 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.

          • David-A (@david-a) said on 28th March 2013, 22:28


            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. SD (@sd) said on 28th March 2013, 0:38

    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. Prisoner Monkeys (@prisoner-monkeys) said on 28th March 2013, 1:11

    “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?

    • Eggry (@eggry) said on 28th March 2013, 8:50

      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. TMF (@tmf42) said on 28th March 2013, 1:13

    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.

    • Klaas (@klaas) said on 28th March 2013, 9:26

      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. bull mello (@bullmello) said on 28th March 2013, 1:14

    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.

    • Todd (@braketurnaccelerate) said on 28th March 2013, 1:20

      Lauda being Lauda.

    • FLIG (@flig) said on 28th March 2013, 2:35

      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.

    • Mike (@mike) said on 28th March 2013, 3:01

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

      • Ilanin (@ilanin) said on 28th March 2013, 9:20

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

        • MJ4 said on 28th March 2013, 9:54

          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.

      • Todfod (@todfod) said on 29th March 2013, 4:44

        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

    • BasCB (@bascb) said on 28th March 2013, 7:07

      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.

    • Red Andy (@red-andy) said on 28th March 2013, 7:20

      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.

    • HoHum (@hohum) said on 28th March 2013, 13:48

      Trying to turn a rivals success into a failure.

  9. Daniel Thomas (@iamdanthomas) said on 28th March 2013, 1:22

    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.

    • KeeleyObsessed (@keeleyobsessed) said on 28th March 2013, 8:25

      @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

  10. Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 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.

    • DVC (@dvc) said on 28th March 2013, 5:52

      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?

      • Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 28th March 2013, 6:06

        The evidence is in the polls.

      • Chris (@tophercheese21) said on 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.

        • HoHum (@hohum) said on 28th March 2013, 13:55

          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.

      • JCost (@jcost) said on 28th March 2013, 6:15

        Probably, emotions have a big influence over our choices.

  11. ivz (@ivz) said on 28th March 2013, 1:38

    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.

  12. Francorchamps (@francorchamps17) said on 28th March 2013, 1:52

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

    • Francorchamps (@francorchamps17) said on 28th March 2013, 1:58

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

      • Pelican (@pelican) said on 28th March 2013, 3:43

        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.

      • Ilanin (@ilanin) said on 28th March 2013, 9:28

        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. electrolite (@electrolite) said on 28th March 2013, 1:55

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

    • Red Andy (@red-andy) said on 28th March 2013, 12:16

      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. Adam Kibbey (@kibblesworth) said on 28th March 2013, 2:56

    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. MartyF1 said on 28th March 2013, 4:16

    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.

    • JCost (@jcost) said on 28th March 2013, 6:05

      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.

    • Keith Collantine (@keithcollantine) said on 28th March 2013, 23:22

      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.

1 2 3

Add your comment

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

All comments must abide by the comment policy. Comments may be moderated.
Want to post off-topic? Head to the forum.
See the FAQ for more information.