Has "sportsmanship" gone from F1? - Page 2

Marbot · 27 Mar 2013, 14:29 (Ref:3225573)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bononi

Sportsmanship is a rare beast in F1, specially in higher ranks...

Indeed it is. But where does it begin? Vettel and Webber would have provided us with a more interesting battle than 'Multi-21' ever could.

**Peter Mallett** · 27 Mar 2013, 14:38 (Ref:3225582)

A small point. Would we be having this discussion if we had no access to team radio messages and the instant news that is the interweb?

Marbot · 27 Mar 2013, 15:51 (Ref:3225616)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

A small point. Would we be having this discussion if we had no access to team radio messages and the instant news that is the interweb?

Good point. We would have just thought that Vettel won it fair and square, and then wondered why Webber was looking a bit miffed on the podium. But I don't think that it will be too long before the drivers are actually accessing their own facebook accounts during the race.

I was going to say that 'pit-to driver' radio should be banned, but 'Multi-21' wouldn't take too much space up on your average pit-board.

jedrinck · 27 Mar 2013, 15:53 (Ref:3225618)

Or what would the argument be like if the roles had been reversed? Webber being told to maintain the gap and not obeying and heroically passing his spoilt brat teammate for a deserved win? Seriously, take a moment to think about that.

I'm not defending Vettel's actions here, really!

Knowlesy · 27 Mar 2013, 15:59 (Ref:3225621)

We would be having the discussion, just a few days later once we read the latest Fifth Column or whatever.

jedrinck, the reaction would be the same. Although admittedly it is somewhat funnier when Vettel has strops, because he looks about ten years old.

**Peter Mallett** · 27 Mar 2013, 16:01 (Ref:3225622)

It would have been the same, with the names reversed.

**Peter Mallett** · 27 Mar 2013, 16:02 (Ref:3225623)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Knowlesy

We would be having the discussion, just a few days later once we read the latest Fifth Column or whatever..

And not on here cos it wouldn't exist.

Knowlesy · 27 Mar 2013, 16:05 (Ref:3225626)

Well no, not on here, but presumably you'd have someone to discuss it with.

People would be outraged on a local rather than global scale.

Or you could have a discussion over many weeks via the Autosport letters page.

**Peter Mallett** · 27 Mar 2013, 16:07 (Ref:3225627)

Probably not because the coverage would be pretty miniscule so outraged on a household basis maybe.

**GTRMagic** · 27 Mar 2013, 23:23 (Ref:3225778)

An interesting view... Daily Telegraph, London

Marbot · 27 Mar 2013, 23:32 (Ref:3225784)

Oh yes! There will be those that see Vettel as the new Messiah of F1. Cunning, ruthless, selfish. All of the things that make great racing drivers great, or at least very successful.

**Bononi** · 28 Mar 2013, 01:28 (Ref:3225816)

Nothing new really.

Trev Campbell · 28 Mar 2013, 02:47 (Ref:3225840)

Quote:

Originally Posted by wnut

On the surface of Vettel attacking his team mate, I agree he shouldn't have, and his denial on the podium was apparently a misrepresentation of the truth, or an inability through protecting the team to express his real feelings about the situation.

Vettel was only behind Webber through two slow pit stops from RBR, what happened?

Having been put behind Webber through RBRs error, he was then told not to attack Webber.

Given that he was only behind Webber due to the teams stuff up he was in no mood to listen to "team strategy".

Webber has never supported Vettel's WDC campaigns, so it is no wonder Vettel does not feel he owes him anything.

Under the circumstances, I doubt if many racing drivers would let their team mates win.

Webber IMO did not deserve to win this race!

Are you serious ??? Have you never watch a motor race before ???? I couldn't count the times that races have been lost due to poor pit performance and wrong decisions. None of the Red Bull pit stops were poor. He would have been beaten because he pitted early for slicks. If this decision was made on the pit wall, as a driver he has the right to say 'it's still to wet' That was Vettels mistake, disobeying team orders was a calculated decision, I think made in the knowledge that as Mark alluded to 'Seb has protection' within the team.

stump_1100 · 28 Mar 2013, 04:09 (Ref:3225853)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Armco Bender

Red Bull......gives you troublesome No2's.

Brilliant!

Quote:

Originally Posted by kartincolin

I presume the sportsmanship you are referring to is in the context of what Vettel did on Sunday. I have seen that many threads relating to the incident that it has gotten to the stage where it is tedious writing replies, but nevertheless I will persevere! Because Vettel disobeyed team orders and attacked Webber for the Grand Prix victory, he is now the Anti-Christ of all motorsport and has received widespread condemnation from the vast majority of fans and journalists.

If being a "sport" is settling for second place when victory is within sight, then I don`t think that any driver on the grid should be overly worried about whether they classify as a true "sport" or not.

Agreed, he should have just come out and said no, I wanted to win and no one was getting in my way. I still think he's a ****** but you could respect that attitude in a racer.

sizzle · 28 Mar 2013, 10:11 (Ref:3225926)

As an irate Aussie

I have to admit that I had the sense of the inevitable for a long time before the passing move. The biggest difference I see is if Vettel is in front he will drive off into the distance, if Webber did indeed try and back Seb up to Hamilton and Rosberg as is suggested around the "he is too slow" period then Mark has only himself to blame. In the same situation Seb would have been that far ahead no one could have Multi 21d him.

**Aysedasi** · 28 Mar 2013, 18:32 (Ref:3226102)

But on this occasion, he wasn't......

**Bononi** · 28 Mar 2013, 22:52 (Ref:3226194)

Yes, he wasn't at all.

**Born Racer** · 29 Mar 2013, 19:34 (Ref:3226556)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I'm sorry, but you're just not getting it - not all of it anyway. The issue (for me and I know many others), is one of honesty. Whether Vettel's actions on track were right or wrong, I cease to care about. Post-race, he was dishonest. That's why I condemn him. Frankly it's just as tedious for those who are making these comments to read comments from those who don't (want to) understand our point.

Is that dishonesty not comparable to Senna's breaking of a pre-race agreement in Estoril (unless he convinced himself that the re-start didn't count), Alonso's dishonesty about Singapore, Hamilton's dishonesty in Melbourne?

The condemnation seems absolute rather than in proportion.

**Aysedasi** · 29 Mar 2013, 21:23 (Ref:3226608)

I'm not comparing him with everyone. I haven't at any stage in all the debate and discussions. When you start comparing, that's when you you start trying to justify something that you really know shouldn't be justified. Whether Alonso or Senna were dishonest is completely irrelevant. If they were, does it make what Vettel did OK then?

**Bononi** · 30 Mar 2013, 01:29 (Ref:3226689)

Most of discussions here is comparing with past drivers, I already said that different times and situations can't be compared, but I guess that doesn't matter.

**Aysedasi** · 30 Mar 2013, 09:25 (Ref:3226769)

But that's the problem. When a member's favoured driver makes a pigs ear of it or worse still, does what SV did last weekend, there is a dash to the history books to say 'He was just as bad' - as if that makes everything alright. It doesn't.

Kempi · 30 Mar 2013, 09:31 (Ref:3226772)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aysedasi

I'm not comparing him with everyone. I haven't at any stage in all the debate and discussions. When you start comparing, that's when you you start trying to justify something that you really know shouldn't be justified. Whether Alonso or Senna were dishonest is completely irrelevant. If they were, does it make what Vettel did OK then?

It does not say anything about one action being okay and the other not. It just says something about applying different standards. That is what is blowing this whole thing totally out of proportion: VET did this with someone on the receiving guy who is, for whatever reason, and as stated by quite a few before not quite rightly so, perceived as the good guy.

We do not even need to look outside the team for double standards: Silverstone 11 and Brazil 12 are enough. Had Mark made the moves stick in Silverstone, do you think anyone would have said: "wow, he shouldn't have done that?" No, the same people condemning VET here right now would have said: "great that he put the little protected arrogant brad in his place".

Did anyone really care that he almost destroyed the third WDC in Brazil last year by two unnecessary, risky and totally pointless moves on VET? No, because "he was racing and entitled to his own race." And please do not say there was no radio message in Brazil last year. Such things most likely were discussed in the team before and even if not, it is common sense.

These double standards are what really is annoying about this situation. Yes, VET's move was ruthless, did not help team spirits and will not make life any easier in the future. But it was not done to a guy who is a utterly good fellow and not susceptible to similar moves himself. These are two teammates who do not lile each other. They never will and now everyone can be sure of what help the other will get from their teammate: none. Should actually make for an interesting season should the Red Bull be as good as it looks right now. We should be happy about that and not go to ridiculous length of discussing what should be done and what not. They did not crash, I doubt they will (if they cause crashes, that os when the team will put an end to it for real and they know that) and therefore no real harm done.

**Peter Mallett** · 30 Mar 2013, 09:42 (Ref:3226774)

Quite wrong IMO. If it was unsporting when someone else did it, it is unsporting now. The personalities have nothing whatsoever to do with it. Ergo, there is no point comparing, because all you do is put a personal spin on it.

Vettel was wrong, full stop. If the roles were reversed Webber would have been wrong.

mister44 · 30 Mar 2013, 09:48 (Ref:3226776)

Seb was not sorry when he weaved across the finish line. He was not very sorry shortly afterwards. He was not particularly sorry when apologising to the team. He'll probably stay in the same frame of mind until the next opportunity to do the same.
We do not get to know what goes on behind closed doors, but I notice the theme of posts here going from sportsmanship to double standards. I think in reality we are more likely to get hypocrisy; but some other teams practice this to some extent.

bauble · 30 Mar 2013, 13:14 (Ref:3226860)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Mallett

Quite wrong IMO. If it was unsporting when someone else did it, it is unsporting now. The personalities have nothing whatsoever to do with it. Ergo, there is no point comparing, because all you do is put a personal spin on it.

Vettel was wrong, full stop. If the roles were reversed Webber would have been wrong.

Totally agree, it is all too easy to let personal preference (team/driver) to influence one's opinion. This quite obvious in many of the replies here.

Peter has it just right; What is wrong is wrong, and no amount of discussion can change that, it is not about any one person, or situation, it is about decency, good manners, and also common sense. If someone does not subscribe to these standards, they may well feel Vettel (in this case) was blameless, others who do believe in these virtues will disagree, and the gulf will never be bridged.

Any civilised society has rules to govern behaviour, without them you have anarchy, and this is almost certainly what will occur at Red Bull.
Many will no doubt look forward to that.

I know what my mother would have said.

Bauble the Pious.