Button: "Alonso title win would be tainted"

[Sheaf Saint]

http://www.planet-f1.com/news/3213/6496227/Jense-Team-orders-could-taint-Alonso-title

 

Have to say I agree with him really. While I do not doubt Alonso's ability as a driver, he comes across as a spoiled brat who throws his toys out of the pram when things don't go his way. He couldn't pass Massa fair and square at Hockenheim so he got the team to order him to let him past instead. If this is ultimately the difference between him winning the title or not then I will be very disappointed.

[Lighthouse]

Hopefully Button gives his team mate the best possible shot at the title by wiping the donkey murdered clean off the track going into turn 1. Either Red Bull for the title (assuming Hamilton doesn't get it). As long as one of them beats Alonso.

[MongoNeil]

Hopefully Button gives his team mate the best possible shot at the title by wiping the donkey murdered clean off the track going into turn 1. Either Red Bull for the title (assuming Hamilton doesn't get it). As long as one of them beats Alonso.

 

I think your sentiments are echoed by the whole world (apart form Spain maybe).

[doubleonothing]

Would prefer Webber over Vettel if it's not going to be Lewis (which now seems unlikely). Jenson could always make himself useful and take the 2 red bulls and Alonso out at turn 1! With Lewis at 66-1 it could be a nice little earner!

[Saint_Jonny]

I'm backing Mark Webber for the title! COME ON MARK!!! Might put a tenner on him, and have an ozzy F1 party on sunday, god ill miss the F1 when its not on, almost as bad as the footy close season!

[JackFrost]

http://www.planet-f1.com/news/3213/6496227/Jense-Team-orders-could-taint-Alonso-title

 

Have to say I agree with him really. While I do not doubt Alonso's ability as a driver, he comes across as a spoiled brat who throws his toys out of the pram when things don't go his way. He couldn't pass Massa fair and square at Hockenheim so he got the team to order him to let him past instead. If this is ultimately the difference between him winning the title or not then I will be very disappointed.

 

Like his wasn't tainted by the double diffuser debacle does he mean?

Edited 10 November, 2010 by JackFrost

[JackFrost]

http://www.planet-f1.com/news/3213/6496227/Jense-Team-orders-could-taint-Alonso-title

 

Have to say I agree with him really. While I do not doubt Alonso's ability as a driver, he comes across as a spoiled brat who throws his toys out of the pram when things don't go his way. He couldn't pass Massa fair and square at Hockenheim so he got the team to order him to let him past instead. If this is ultimately the difference between him winning the title or not then I will be very disappointed.

 

Good grief I can't think of any other drivers, Ferrari or otherwise who have done that in recent history

Edited 10 November, 2010 by JackFrost

[Lighthouse]

Like his wasn't tainted by the double diffuser debacle does he mean?

 

Tainted by a perfectly legal aerodynamic inovation?

[JackFrost]

Tainted by a perfectly legal aerodynamic inovation?

 

If it had been declared illegal there's no way Button would have won the title that year. It was a very dubious interpretation of the rules which was only declared legal just before the third race of the season. Brawn gained a massive advantage due to the law courts. So in answer to your question, IMO even though it was declared legal, yes.

 

I don't really get Button's comment, either he's jumping on a bandwagon or he thinks banned F1 team orders have only been going on under the radar since the German GP this season.

[Lighthouse]

If a perfectly legal aerodynamic part had been illegal, he wouldn't have won the Championship? I really don't see how that taints his championship. It's not in the same league as race fixing or blatant cheating.

[Sheaf Saint]

If it had been declared illegal there's no way Button would have won the title that year.

 

Agreed, as shown by the fact that the Brawn did not have the pace advantage in the latter half of the season. But he made sure that he capitalised when he did have the advantage, made no mistakes and got the points on the board; something which the Red Bulls have utterly failed to do this season. Their car is by far and away the fastest on the grid, yet neither of their drivers leads the championship.

 

It was a very dubious interpretation of the rules which was only declared legal just before the third race of the season. Brawn gained a massive advantage due to the law courts. So in answer to your question, IMO even though it was declared legal, yes.

 

I still don't see how you can compare the two scenarios. There was nothing illegal whatsoever about Brawn's design. The other teams only whinged about it because they didn't think of it themselves. The FIA ruled that it was perfectly legal, ergo Brawn did not break any rules.

 

What Ferrari did at Hockenheim was a blatant abuse of the rules, reinforced by the fact that they were fined by the FIA for it, and it left a sour taste for a lot of people; especially anybody who had put money on Massa to win.

[Ponty]

I really like Webber, although he's had his sulky moments this year, and I really can't help disliking Vettel (probably for the finger thing more than anything) but I totally dislike Red Bull and their "We don't favour anyone" bullsh*t so, assuming there won't be a McLaren miracle, I'll be rooting for Alonso.

[Ponty]

Also, here's a stat for you (I believe this is right unless I'm being blinded by the numbers whilst checking)...

 

No driver leading the championship this year has won another race until he's already fallen back to second place.

 

So I won't be putting any money on Alonso winning in Abu Dhabi.

[Ponty]

Good grief I can't think of any other drivers, Ferrari or otherwise who have done that in recent history

 

Really? There have been more than a couple. Besides there are no recordings of Alonso asking for Massa to be moved aside, which is what Bexy appears to be saying there.

[Lighthouse]

If we can keep Michael off the top of the podium, it will be the first full season in his career when he has failed to win a race (although USA was his only win in 2005 and that really doesn't count).

 

Did you know Michael and Villeneurve never shared the podium in 1997?

[JackFrost]

Really? There have been more than a couple. Besides there are no recordings of Alonso asking for Massa to be moved aside, which is what Bexy appears to be saying there.

 

Unfortunately I forgot the sarcastic smiley thing

 

I completely agree with you

 

What Ferrari did at Hockenheim was a blatant abuse of the rules, reinforced by the fact that they were fined by the FIA for it, and it left a sour taste for a lot of people; especially anybody who had put money on Massa to win.

 

What Ferrari did at Hockenheim was pretty much exactly the same as almost all teams have done and have been doing for years and years, and continually since '98 when team orders were supposedly 'banned'. The mistake Ferrari made was that they were far too blatant about it.

 

What I don't get is Button pointing the finger at Alonso at Hockenheim, whilst conveniently forgetting his own team have done almost the same thing for Hamilton many times. The difference is McLaren have just been more subtle about it. And it isn't just McLaren and Ferrari, it's pretty much every team down the grid. Team orders have gone on regularly since '98 and Alonso at Hockenheim was a long way away from being the first example since Coulthard let Hakkinen through at Melbourne in a er McLaren funnily enough

[Sheaf Saint]

What Ferrari did at Hockenheim was pretty much exactly the same as almost all teams have done and have been doing for years and years, and continually since '98 when team orders were supposedly 'banned'. The mistake Ferrari made was that they were far too blatant about it.

 

Yep, this is my gripe and, so it would seem, Button's too. I'm not completely naive to believe that there are no team orders, as such, going on all the time. But Ferrari with that radio message were basically sticking two fingers up to the rules in a way that would have made Pompey shudder.

 

What I don't get is Button pointing the finger at Alonso at Hockenheim, whilst conveniently forgetting his own team have done almost the same thing for Hamilton many times. The difference is McLaren have just been more subtle about it.

 

Really? Perhaps you could refresh my memory in this area then. Since joining McLaren, Hamilton's team-mates have been Alonso, Kovaleinen and Button. Alonso would NEVER have moved over for him, Heikki was never quick enough to be in front of him in the first place and Button has never been asked to make way. So maybe you could tell me exactly when, during Hamilton's McLaren career, the team have radioed his team-mate during a race and ordered him to move over.

 

And it isn't just McLaren and Ferrari, it's pretty much every team down the grid. Team orders have gone on regularly since '98 and Alonso at Hockenheim was a long way away from being the first example since Coulthard let Hakkinen through at Melbourne in a er McLaren funnily enough

 

Yes I agree, but that doesn't detract from what Button has said in his interview. Just because 'they all do it' doesn't make it OK in my book.

[JackFrost]

Yep, this is my gripe and, so it would seem, Button's too. I'm not completely naive to believe that there are no team orders, as such, going on all the time. But Ferrari with that radio message were basically sticking two fingers up to the rules in a way that would have made Pompey shudder.

 

 

 

Really? Perhaps you could refresh my memory in this area then. Since joining McLaren, Hamilton's team-mates have been Alonso, Kovaleinen and Button. Alonso would NEVER have moved over for him, Heikki was never quick enough to be in front of him in the first place and Button has never been asked to make way. So maybe you could tell me exactly when, during Hamilton's McLaren career, the team have radioed his team-mate during a race and ordered him to move over.

 

 

 

Yes I agree, but that doesn't detract from what Button has said in his interview. Just because 'they all do it' doesn't make it OK in my book.

 

Sure,

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2008/jul/21/formulaone.motorsports

 

LOL The very first bit of the second paragraph sounds familiar. . .

 

Ferrari never told Massa to move over, they only told Massa "Alonso was faster than him, did he understand", which is precisely a coded message that could have been used by any team. Course Kovalainen moved over on his accord and didn't fancy maximising the chance to beat his team mate LOL. Besides considering how much slower Kovalainen was than Hamilton I think McLaren made sure before and throughout the season that Heikki being in front of Lewis would have been an unlikely situation. This season however I genuinely do believe Lewis and Jenson have the same spec car and the team are letting them race and Lewis has just about outperformed Button.

 

The above link is the example of how to do it and get away with it. Ferrari got it wrong because Massa didn't want to play ball. Just because McLaren have been more subtle about it doesn't make them any less tainted than Ferrari. Hamilton won that race in 2008 and was significantly helped by the fact his team mate let him through.

Edited 11 November, 2010 by JackFrost

[Pancake]

Hamilton won that race in 2008 and was significantly helped by the fact his team mate let him through.

 

2008.... the same year he won the title too! Tainted fo'sho'

[doubleonothing]

In addition to Jack Frost's point regarding Germany 08 you only have to look at Turkey this year when the McLaren's were told to "save fuel" (something Jenson didn't do and raced Hamilton). However the way Ferrari did it is what has caused the most gripes. Ferrari did it blatently as they always seem to have done so (the most obvious being Austria when Rubens pulled over to hand victory to MSC). However not as shocking as when Ferrari tried to engineer a "dead heat" race result at USA 02 when Rubens ended up winning by mere hundreths of second.

 

Team orders which deprive the fan of a genuine race are wrong. However at this time of the year when a championship is on the line they have to be allowed. The question is how can they be policed? One of the ways I can think of is for each team to have a dedicated number 1 driver who will always be given preferential treatment and no matter where they happen to be running in a race (be it 1-2 or 19-20) if the teams 2 cars are running line astern with the number 2 driver ahead of the number 1 driver, the number 2 driver has to allow the number 1 driver through. At least that way everyone will know it is going to happen! (However the betting fraternaty may have something to say about it)

[doubleonothing]

2008.... the same year he won the title too! Tainted fo'sho'

 

Difference was that when Kovalainent let Lewis through he still had to catch and pass Mass and Piquet Jnr for the race win! And it wasn't quite as blatent!

[Barry the Badger]

The problem with this argument, as always, is where do you draw the line.

 

It is impossible to make rules for anything other than all team orders banned or all team orders allowed.

 

Most people seem to be comfortable with teams doing it at the back end of the season, but that can't be written into the rules.

 

Personally I am in favour of letting the teams do what the hell they like with their two cars, I find the tactics of it quite interesting.

[ChrisPY]

If it had been declared illegal there's no way Button would have won the title that year. It was a very dubious interpretation of the rules which was only declared legal just before the third race of the season. Brawn gained a massive advantage due to the law courts. So in answer to your question, IMO even though it was declared legal, yes.

 

I don't really get Button's comment, either he's jumping on a bandwagon or he thinks banned F1 team orders have only been going on under the radar since the German GP this season.

 

If it had been declared illegal for anyone but Jenson Button to win a race this year, he would have been world champion again.

[JackFrost]

The title depends on whether the Abu Dhabi track favours the Red Bulls or not. If it does then they usually dominate and (if they don't do an Istanbul) Webber should bring home a 1-2 and win it.

 

The other factor is whether Alonso's engine lasts. I think I remember reading something during one of the Interlagos practise sessions that out of his 3 least worn engines, 2 of them had done 3 GPs each and the other had only done 1 but it was Monza, where it's full throttle for like 80% of the lap.

[Lighthouse]

There's a difference between what Ferrari and Mclaren did. In Hockenheim '08 Hamilton was far ahead of Heikki and would have beaten him easily but for a badly timed safety car which coincided with his pit stop. Kovi was 5th (I think) and was holding up Lewis on a different strategy. If Kovi hadn't let him through Mclaren would have been 5th and 6th instead of 1st and 6th. It's a tactical move, whereas Ferrari just swapped a 1-2 around for 1-2.

 

There have been many instances of team mates letting each other through for a tactical advantage, but few were just the race fixing Ferrari have been guilty of. Montreal '08 Heidfeld lets Kubica through into the lead on a different strategy. Kubica builds a big enough lead, pits and gets a BMW 1-2. If Heidfeld hadn't let him through Kubica would have been about 10th.

[JackFrost]

There's a difference between what Ferrari and Mclaren did. In Hockenheim '08 Hamilton was far ahead of Heikki and would have beaten him easily but for a badly timed safety car which coincided with his pit stop. Kovi was 5th (I think) and was holding up Lewis on a different strategy. If Kovi hadn't let him through Mclaren would have been 5th and 6th instead of 1st and 6th. It's a tactical move, whereas Ferrari just swapped a 1-2 around for 1-2.

 

There have been many instances of team mates letting each other through for a tactical advantage, but few were just the race fixing Ferrari have been guilty of. Montreal '08 Heidfeld lets Kubica through into the lead on a different strategy. Kubica builds a big enough lead, pits and gets a BMW 1-2. If Heidfeld hadn't let him through Kubica would have been about 10th.

 

But their all still team orders, which aren't allowed. And all done through subtle coded messages to get round the FIA's official ban.

 

The difference is Massa wouldn't play ball and it became so blatant the standardised coded messages weren't enough to avoid the FIA's and the public's wrath (Especially with Ferrari's history on this).

 

They are all as guilty as each other, the only difference is Ferrari messed it up and did it far too blatantly. So for one team or driver to criticise another team/driver when they are all at it. . . .

[Lighthouse]

Ferrari crossed the line by actually fixing the result. McLaren, Ferrari and BMW Sauber have all in the passed ask drivers to let a team mate past because they're on different strategies or because one driver can't mathematically win the Championship. If Ferrari did it again in Abu Dhabi I wouldn't batter an eyelid. Why? Because now it's just logical, Massa can't win the Championship. Neither can Button, so I'd expect him to move out of Hamilton's way. It's not detracting from the race. You can't go a whole season doing that though, it would just be a farce.

 

Lets say next season Red Bull were clearly the quickest ahead of Ferrari, who had a comfortable gap to McLaren. The Red Bull said we are going to favour Vettel, Ferrari likewise Alonso and McLaren also with Hamilton. Would you turn the TV on at 4am for the Aussie Grand Prix thinking, "OMG I wonder who's going to finish 7th in this one!"?