[Rules] If $100,000 can buy you 7 points, just what are the rules for the rest of the season?

[Born Racer]

Can anyone else use team orders now or is just the favoured team?

Do you have to pay $100,000?

No doubt the tifosi will say this is sour grapes, but it's a genuine question? Has there been any consensus on whether it's allowed for the rest of the season? Martin Whitmarsh and Christian Horner in a BBC interview yesterday seemed to not know.

[Fox89]

There was an interesting point I noticed during the race, where Alguersari was close to Buemi. Brundle said "If I were Torro Rosso I'd be asking Buemi to let his team mate through". OK, it didn't happen, but he wasn't even reminded of Hockenheim when he said it. You can guarantee nobody would have cared if Torro Rosso had used team orders.

So it's only the top teams that would have to pay up

[ralf fan]

Originally Posted by Born Racer

No doubt the tifosi will say this is sour grapes,

I am not tifosi and I think it is pure sour grapes. Nothing else. Pure and simple.

[Born Racer]

Well, you're wrong ralf fan. Only I know what I think. Or maybe you would know if you had read my posts. Or maybe you just don't believe what I say and are therefore calling me a liar.

[ralf fan]

I understand your point however I was against the team order ban anyway so I am not particularly bothered.

[Born Racer]

I'm not bothered you're not bothered but refrain from calling me a liar.

[ralf fan]

I don't see where I called you a liar?

[Born Racer]

You said it was sour grapes. I had already said that it wasn't.

[TrapezeArtist]

Girls! Girls! Put your handbags away.

Ralf Fan, please clarify for me. Do you think other teams should be allowed to apply team orders if they pay $100,000? Or should they be allowed to apply team orders for free. Or should no-one be allowed team orders? Or something else?

[Born Racer]

< Do myself and ralf fan really look like this? We probably do, but it's worth it to justify my point.

It's a fair question, i.e.

1. Are we to presume that a team order is applied and if spotted the team gets a $100,000 fine?
2. A line has been drawn under this and until such time as the rule is changed, a team and/or drivers will get a bigger punishment for doing it again?
3. It's now okay and you will get a lesser punishment?
4 and beyond. Any other permutations?

[fourWheelDrift]

Originally Posted by Born Racer

< Do myself and ralf fan really look like this? We probably do, but it's worth it to justify my point.

It's a fair question, i.e.

1. Are we to presume that a team order is applied and if spotted the team gets a $100,000 fine?
2. A line has been drawn under this and until such time as the rule is changed, a team and/or drivers will get a bigger punishment for doing it again?
3. It's now okay and you will get a lesser punishment?
4 and beyond. Any other permutations?

There is a fifth possibility: everyone including all the teams and the stewards know that it would be a PR disaster if this issue re-surfaces before the end of the season. The stewards will ignore it unless it is so blatant as to be embaressing and the teams will make very sure they do things reasonably discretely.

[ralf fan]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

Girls! Girls! Put your handbags away.

Ralf Fan, please clarify for me. Do you think other teams should be allowed to apply team orders if they pay $100,000? Or should they be allowed to apply team orders for free. Or should no-one be allowed team orders? Or something else?

I think all teams should be allowed to use team orders without fear of any punishment.

[dgpearson]

If ur well in front in the championship u get a penelty if ur behind you get off

[Knowlesy]

Oh great, this again!

[ECW Dan Selby]

I think it's pretty clear that it's allowed, but you'll be fined $100,000 if it's for the lead (that's basically how i'd read it). Which is nothing, really.

Selby

[Born Racer]

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

Oh great, this again!

It's a different question to one I've seen elsewhere and has been put in its own thread to avoid debates about the lack of merits (or merits) of team orders.

[garcon]

Originally Posted by Born Racer

Can anyone else use team orders now or is just the favoured team?

Do you have to pay $100,000?

No doubt the tifosi will say this is sour grapes, but it's a genuine question? Has there been any consensus on whether it's allowed for the rest of the season? Martin Whitmarsh and Christian Horner in a BBC interview yesterday seemed to not know.

Whichever side of the fence one sits on the team orders debate, this remains an unanswered question and exposes the FIA's total incompetence in trying to deal with the matter.

Edit: And no it isn't sour grapes - Ferrari need to know were they stand for the rest of the season just as much as the other leading teams. If Ferrari did it again, would it be another $100,000 or a more severe punishment for a second "offence"??

[Born Racer]

Exactly, garcon. I know we sit at other ends of the opinion scale on this issue, but one does wonder what the situation is now. You raise a good point about Ferrari's present situation in this matter.

[Teretonga]

If the FIA was trying to please everyone they partially succeded..... but no one knows whetehr or not it is allowed, because they stuffed it up.

The regulation is still on the books so its still an offence..... which means another team could protest a rival.....
They should have been a little tougher on Ferrari, enforced their position that the rules are the rules, which would have shown some strength, then signalled a change at the end of the season. What we got was weakness, in spades.

Arguing that there was not enough clear evidence was just plain head in the sand stuff and in my opinion Todt failed the first real test of his leadership. Yes he was right to stay away from the decision making but he should have signalled to his lieutenants a more definitive outcome.

What happened was a mess and poorly handled.

[Wims]

They did penalize Ferrari tho, infact they gave them the hardest possible penalty (100k fine). Maybe they should have gone for a smaller penalty instead, say a stop and go penalty after the race was finished (25 second penalty). Altho who would receive it, Massa or Alonso. Probably Massa as he was the one doing the illegal stuff. Or possibly both

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Wims

They did penalize Ferrari tho, infact they gave them the hardest possible penalty (100k fine). Maybe they should have gone for a smaller penalty instead, say a stop and go penalty after the race was finished (25 second penalty). Altho who would receive it, Massa or Alonso. Probably Massa as he was the one doing the illegal stuff. Or possibly both

I would have gone for a time penalty for Alonso as he ostensibly made the gain....but not as much as 25 second, say 10 seconds.....as well as the $100,000 (or $50 000 just for Alonso). That way if a team manager thought it was a gain to him he could have taken the risk and he'd know what the gap needed to be..... at any time in the remainder of the season....

Of course it could always back fire if the 'faster' driver didn't manage to make enough gap or the safety car came out.....
Now no one knows what the rule or the penalty could be....?

[TrapezeArtist]

Originally Posted by Wims

They did penalize Ferrari tho, infact they gave them the hardest possible penalty (100k fine). Maybe they should have gone for a smaller penalty instead, say a stop and go penalty after the race was finished (25 second penalty). Altho who would receive it, Massa or Alonso. Probably Massa as he was the one doing the illegal stuff. Or possibly both

The financial penalty was a nonsense, and the FIA should have applied a sporting penalty. But what should that be? As the objective of breaking the rules was to improve Alonso's standing in the WDC, any sporting penalty should reverse that situation. BUT:
You can make a case for penalising Ferrari because they told Massa to move over
You can make a case for penalising Massa because he actioned the team orders
It's harder to make a case against Alonso because all he did was overtake a slow-moving car.
Now what's that nickname that everyone uses for Alonso?

[Adam43]

It is only 7 points for $100k if you manage to get both your cars in 1-2! In old money it us to be free!

Finding a new way to say an outrage doesn't make it any different. Ferrari should be allowed to run their team how they want. However I agree, the fine is silly.

[E.B]

.... and wont this discussion liven up if Alonso were to win the WDC by less than 7 points!

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by TrapezeArtist

The financial penalty was a nonsense, and the FIA should have applied a sporting penalty. But what should that be? As the objective of breaking the rules was to improve Alonso's standing in the WDC, any sporting penalty should reverse that situation. BUT:
You can make a case for penalising Ferrari because they told Massa to move over
You can make a case for penalising Massa because he actioned the team orders
It's harder to make a case against Alonso because all he did was overtake a slow-moving car.
Now what's that nickname that everyone uses for Alonso?

Don't agree.
The team gave an order against the regulations to penalise a driver (Massa)and benefit another driver (Alonso).
From the conversations its ludicrous to suggest Alonso is an innocent party in all this.