The German Grand Prix has reopened the issue of team orders in Formula 1. There have been hints of team orders and favouritism within the McLaren and Red Bull ranks up until now, but Ferrari’s more obvious approach to it has brought about uproar in the paddock and amongst the fans. Felipe Massa was leading the race, and comfortably too, so why did Ferrari not respect the rule stating that teams should not be allowed to influence the result in such a way? The problem is not the principle of the rule – the idea of all drivers being on equal standing is better for the racing and the PR – but the problems lies with the format of the sport.
In the 70’s teams could run as many cars as they liked. McLaren gave debuts to youngsters such as Gilles Villeneuve by running them in 3rd cars, and other big teams of the day such as Lotus or Ferrari would also do this. Often, running the third car was an opportunity to gain extra manufacturer points too – as again, McLaren handed a car to Jacky Ickx (having just defected from Ferrari) as a Nurburgring ‘expert’ to add a few points at the German Grand Prix of 1973. But it was not just the big teams that took advantage on the lack of restriction on team entries. Small teams were able to run just one car – allowing them to save money and build cars specifically tailored to a driver. In 1977, Wolf Racing fielded a single car for Jody Scheckter. The small but talented team provided an excellent car for its talented driver (who would join Ferrari two years later and go on to win the championship in that same year) – and won three times en route a very respectable 2nd in the Driver’s Championship. During that season, twenty different teams competed at various times (although some were not full-time entries).
By 1990, no teams could afford to run three cars, and with the development rate at the front, the one-car teams started to gain a reputation for being slow and underfunded. None remained for 1991, and F1 passed a rule stating that all teams HAD to run 2 cars. No more, no less.
The reason I mention this, is that if you stipulate that constructors HAVE to run a pair of cars, then they are a TEAM and should be expected to compete as a TEAM. The rules put the teams into a situation where they have 2 cars on track, yet they are not allowed to race as a team. Does nobody else find that ridiculous? Imagine playing in a football team where the rules said you weren’t allowed to pass to certain members of your own team. Imagine working in a kitchen where you weren’t allowed to share ingredients or pots with the other chefs. If you specify that constructors HAVE TO race more than one car, you should NOT be surprised if they compete as a team.
I think the main objection people have is the manner in which this took place. However it is not correct to view Ferrari as ‘evil’ in this situation. At Turkey, McLaren called off the race between Hamilton and Button by insisting over the radio that Button needed to slow down in order to “save fuel”. I write that in inverted commas, as the voice on the radio placed much more emphasis on the “slow down” than the “save fuel” part of the message… At a team like McLaren, known for its completely logical approach to racing, this was dealt with in the near-robotic manner we have come to expect from a team whose cars are mostly grey, and whose drivers and staff speak the same dreadful PR-speak at all times. At Ferrari, the most proud and passionate of teams, things don’t always work out that way.
Flashback to Austria 2002. Rubens Barrichello, known by everyone to be #2 to Michael Schumacher in Ferrari’s pecking order, was dominant all day. When he pulled over within sight of the finish line to allow his team mate to pass, the crowd booed and the F1 community hung its head in shame. But does anybody really believe that Ferrari waited until the last lap to tell Rubens to pull over? Of course they didn’t! Ferrari were applying some of that TEAM logic, but the emotionally charged Barrichello was determined to prove a point – that he was the driver who deserved to win this race – and so made his actions as obvious as possible. However it cannot be denied that Michael Schumacher was the team’s driver most likely to win the championship, and as a team it is logical to suggest that the efforts be put behind the driver in the best position.
In Germany, Felipe Massa – another proud Brazilian racer who has gone some time without a win – will have been aware that he is some way behind his illustrious team mate in the championship. His equally proud engineer, Rob Smedley, received the word from top brass that the time had come to allow the team’s best-placed driver to pass, and what followed was a case of two proud men determined to prove that they deserved to win this race. The engineers have the option of using a private radio channel – one that cannot be heard by the media – however Smedley chose to use the public channel, informing everyone of what was about to take place. Massa slowed deliberately in an area that would be most obvious, before Smedley returned the the public channel to apologise to his driver and confirming to the watching millions that they had just seen his driver lose the lead through no fault of their own. When viewed from a human perspective it is sad to see a certain victory taken from a competitor who deserves it, but when viewed from a business perspective the decision makes perfect sense. Massa is too far away in the championship so Ferrari’s only shot at championship glory lies with Fernando Alonso. The team’s cars have not been as fast as the Red Bull or McLaren cars, so the team have no choice but to compete tactically if they are to stand a chance of victory when all is said and done.
As I stated before, it is the manner of the act that has incensed people. In 1999 Michael Schumacher was injured in a crash at the British Grand Prix, so Ferrari diverted its attention to team mate Eddie Irvine. The Irish racer was now the team’s best chance of championship victory, and Finland’s Mika Salo was hired to replace the injured German. At the German Grand Prix that year, Salo was leading in the closing stages before handing the lead to Irvine, allowing the Irishman to score maximum points to aid his points tally. But Salo was a substitute driver and that was to be expected, so the act was not seen as improper. In Touring Cars, where teams are not limited on entries, it is still common for teams to hire extra drivers or ‘local experts’ to aid them in the championship. In the recent British round of the WTCC, Chevrolet’s Rob Huff pulled aside to allow team mate (and championship leader) Yvan Muller to pass and score victory. However, there have been some extreme examples of team orders in tin top racing over the years, in a format where team orders are not penalised.
In the 1996 BTCC BMW were running cars for 1993 champion Joachim Winklehock, 1987 WTCC champion Roberto Ravaglia, and Peter Kox. During round 23 at Brands Hatch, Ravaglia’s car was damaged and the team repaired it before the end of the race – and sent the car out to ‘check it’ for race 2 of the day. Kox was running second to Renault’s Alain Menu, and Ravaglia then turned a series of slow laps in order to position himself in Menu’s way on the last lap – in a bid to get Kox into the lead. Into the last corner Ravaglia slowed down so much that Menu lost all of his lead to the other BMW, although he just held on to win the race. The actions of Ferrari this weekend seem tame by comparison!
So where does this leave us? In my opinion, forbidding ‘team orders’ seems unreasonable, despite the negative impact they have on the sport. If the constructors are forced to race as a team, they should be allowed to compete as a team – as to say otherwise defeats the object of being a team in the first place. Everyone loves to see drivers, and the drivers are obviously the heroes, but the sport would not exist without its teams. F1 is the pinnacle of motorsport BECAUSE the teams are constantly pushing to create faster and faster cars. If you want to see the drivers race for nothing but themselves, you have to have a centrally-run sport with no teams, just drivers – and that is never going to have the appeal of F1 as it is currently, as the lack of technical innovation will prevent F1 from being able to claim itself to be the pinnacle of the motor racing world.
If all this talk of ‘team orders’ has got you down, just remember this tale. In the 2007 WTCC, Chevrolet hired 1998 BTCC champion Rikard Rydell to drive as a ‘local expert’ at his home round in Sweden. Whilst leading the second race of the day, Rydell received the call to drop back and allow his team mates to pass. Knowing this was the only race he would ever do for the team, and in front of his home crowd, the Swede ignored the team and pressed on to take an internally-unpopular victory ahead of bemused team mates Nicola Larini and Alain Menu. Nice one Rikard!
Entries (RSS)