The FIA World Council’s decision not to punish Ferrari played right into the hands of all of those who believe that the letters FIA stand for Ferrari International Assistance – as you will read in a number of the comments on this blog – and you will see from an photo that was emailed to me overnight (below). It has done no good at all for the credibility of the new regime at the federation, which was hoping that this hearing would establish that Jean Todt is independent of all influence from Ferrari… his former employer.
Instead the decision has compounded the belief that Todt will do what Ferrari wants. This is an image that Todt is keen to get rid of and the team orders case was clearly a good opportunity to do that. Todt stood back and did not get involved in the discussions, leaving the Council to make its own decision. There was a huge dossier on the subject, which went through the entire story, examining whether of not Ferrari imposed team orders, whether the sport was damaged as a result and whether Ferrari told the whole truth to the stewards at Hockenheim. If the case was cut and dried there would have been no need for such a dossier… The decision taken was rather surprising and anyone who spouts forth the belief that Todt orchestrated the result simply does not understand the political realities of the sport. Alas, it seems that many members of the World Council also fail to grasp the significance of the decision they have taken and the effect it will have on the credibility of the federation. If there is anything to be salvaged from the result, it is the fact that the World Council has shown it is a democratic body, and can make its own decisions – even if it does not suit the president.
What is more interesting for observers is the question of how that decision came to be made. First reports suggested that the decision was unanimous: FIA decisions always are after a majority has won a discussion. It is clear from speaking to some of those involved that there was anything but unanimity on this occasion. A substantial number of Council members are relatively new and so are keen not to rock the boat and so voted with the majority. It seems that the Italians and Spanish were noisily defending Ferrari (and, by extension, Fernando Alonso), while others, without a vested interest, were less successful in convincing the membership that further punishment was a good idea, although one or two argued passionately that the federation needed to go down that path. While one can argue that nationalism played a role in this decision, the good news is that this is not going to happen in the future.
This is probably the last time in which the World Council will be involved in any disciplinary action. Among the many meetings in Paris this week was a committee reviewing the FIA structures and statutes. We hear that from next year onwards such cases will not go to the World Council, but rather to a new International Tribunal, which will be completely independent of the clubs, and will consist of legal professionals with experience in the sport. It is not entirely clear at the moment how this will work, but we understand that nominations can be made by anyone with an FIA licence. The resulting corps of judges will elect its own president and judges for each case will be chosen based on a rotational system, unless a judge is of the nationality of one of the parties involved.
joeblogsf1 
I think it’s evident from the ruling that the FIA is actually starting to recognise its position on team orders is simple untenable.
When you build up a championship where the grand prize, or grand prix as you like is the drivers’ world championship, you can’t expect teams not to start looking at ways to ensure that they achieve that all important goal.
Okay, there’s a constructors championship, but primarily people remember the drivers’ champions and the cars that they were driving. Who really remembers that Ferrari were the 2008 constructors champions? No, it was Lewis Hamilton in the McLaren that won in F1.
Teams are of course going to start manipulating the results as early as they can to ensure one of their drivers wins that title, and as soon as a team things that letting one score over the other is a threat to that, or in the case of a single race, the two drivers actually competing for position could cause trouble, they’ll intervene.
The problem is how do you actually rule what a team order is? There’s no part of article 39.1 that isn’t woefully subject to interpretation. If the FIA wants to ban team orders, then they have to define what it is. The problem is, if they do define what it is, then teams will know exactly what is outside of the boundary and work outside of it.
Some might say, providing better parts to one driver over the other is team play.
Some might say ordering one of your drivers not to attempt to pass your other is a team order.
And those are the two examples from Ferrari’s chief rivals that we already know about.
The problem is, team orders aren’t really a bad thing, and the FIA doesn’t want to get rid of them. What Red Bull did, the FIA don’t mind, what McLaren did, the FIA don’t mind. Quite evidently, in truth, what Ferrari did, the FIA don’t care about either…but when it comes to the average viewer, media, who wants to feel they’ve seen two drivers, even if they’re in their own team compete at the highest level, to a point where if they even take each other out, just like Red Bull did in Turkey, the fan can say at least they tried to fight for it.
Of course, from any teams perspective, what happened in Turkey was ridiculous, and should never happen…and the teams must have some control to prevent their drivers from compromising the teams’ goal of winning the Formula 1 drivers championship.
The rule would be overlooked in scenarios where the rule just seemed to work against the sport as well, another reason why it’s so foolish.
Let’s say it’s the last race of the season, Sebastien Vettel has been ruled out of the championship, it’s now Mark Webber vs. Lewis Hamilton for the 2010 drivers championship – but wait, Webber’s in second place behind Vettel, Hamilton third…the way the points stand means if the result stays like it is, Hamilton will win the championship by two points. If Vettel pulls over and lets Webber through, problem sorted, Red Bull are Formula 1 champions – but oh no, there’s Article 39.1.
So if Vettel pulls into the pits unnecessarily to get out of the way, is that a team order? Does it have to be said on the radio? Does it have to be agreed beforehand in some way to qualify?
Todt didn’t get involved, because the obvious declaration of bias would be thrown around if he did…even more than it is now than he wasn’t. Of course it’s unavoidable, the former team manager of Ferrari is now in charge of the FIA.
The most important action to come out of the WMSC is their review of 39.1. That says, they recognise something is wrong about it. The fact Ferrari were forced into a position where they blatantly had to lie about a very obvious implementation of a team order is the issue.
If they’d ‘dropped’ a wheel nut in the pitstop, that would have been fine? If after the pit board was put out with P3 shown as P03, and then Massa ‘accidentally’ skidded at the next corner and let Alonso through, that would have been fine? So as long as joe public were deceived properly, that’s okay, that’s where 39.1 becomes a joke. I don’t want to have to think Massa was an idiot, I like to know when a driver is doing the right thing for the team.
The rule came in because Ferrari were fiddling results in a championship where there was no real threat to their No.1 driver from winning the championship, and took away a victory from Rubens that would actually have been more popular than just another runaway Schumacher victory, in a season that was transpiring to be one of the most dire Formula 1 seasons on record.
Down with Article 39.1, and let’s get back to sanity again.
Thanks for your comments and those of the blog Joe. The level of discourse here is the best. I can’t help but wonder what the verdict would’ve been if it had been Ari Vatanen instead Todt…
Piss ups and breweries come to mind. If there is a written rule it should be obeyed. If everyone agrees the rule is a nonsense then its understandable to review it. However, in any other sport the fans would not accept result fixing.
Lets be radical, instead of 2 car teams, lets have single car teams, but more of them. Team orders not necessary, job done.
Or is that too simplistic?!
It is a poor decision. Ferrari must be very happy that Fernando Alonso scored 7 extra points for the cost of $100,000… considering Ferrari’s annual budget, that’s a very good return on their investment 😉
Joe – You are clearly not a Ferrari apologist and I know you have much inside knowledge of the workings of F1, and I mean this in all sincerity and respect. So please elaborate on the “political realities of the sport” that lead you to conclude that the FIA under Todt’s command is different from the FIA under Mosley/Ecclestone’s control, who consistently over many years turned a blind eye to Ferrari’s numerous indescretions. What would have caused a man who previously displayed a total disregard for sporting ethics of any kind to suddenly become a bastion of objectivity and fair play? Did Luca stop payment on one of his royalty checks?
Forgive me Joe, but for a moment there it sounds like you’re suggesting that Jean Todt should have taken the opportunity to make this a political stance of his own. I’m sorry, but the fact he stayed well away from it and allowed the body to reach a decision democratically is the great news of the day. It looks like gone are the days of autocratic rule under Mosley.
Carlos,
True. But it has not helped him.
Sad, but not surpriced. They should at least have been vipt.
Team orders should be alowd in ann team sport, also F1, BUT the teams should have to tell their intent clearly in advence. If we know we will enjoy the knowledge of knowing as part of the strategic puzzle that is F1
Joe,
what an opportunity to be missed by a new regime to make its stamp on new “tenancy”, especially with Mr todt’s past links. Not that it should have just for the sake of it and whatever the cost but this was deserved in ferrari’s case. I have loved this “sport” since i was a little boy but have always been amazed at how quickly it is willing to shoot itself in the foot. It has caused me to turn off in the past, however i always come back after i have stopped sulking ! It wont this time as I’m getting used to it’s inconsistencies with age. When i look at how other sports deal with (and i use the term with a heavy heart) cheating, i just wish f1 could be above these accusations. What will it take?? And i mean this for all teams ( i myself being a die hard mclaren fan) who lets face it are hardly whiter than white. I always refuse to accept F1 is more of a business than a sport and defend it to those who accuse it so with gusto but its getting harder and harder to make my point !!
Credibilty? Don’t make me laugh.
It astounds me how our sport never misses an opportunity to shoot itself in the foot.
How do we explain this one to friends? There was a rule. Ferrari/Alonso broke it. It was obvious. The world knows it. But, er, no…they weren’t punished.
Say, sounds like the same outcome as the Renault/Singapore scandal (where Alonso also benefitted, but I digress). So cheating is clearly fair game (is that an oxymoron?).
Ferrari paid $100K (.03% of its budget) to needlessly shift points from one pocket to another. Doesn’t reflect well on the sport.
The only explanation that makes sense is Ferrari and the FIA think they know best. That fans should take what they deign to give them, and like it. It’s insulting and condescending.
Here I was expecting a bit of follow through, now I wish Ferrari would make a mockery of the FIA all the more and ask for their money back, with interest.
I have long thought Ferrari gets special treatment in F1. That’s why I wish some of the other names eg Porsche would return. Not sure if this is realistic or not.
Can’t help but think if it were McLaren they would be have been flayed alive.
This begs the question: what’s the point of having a World Drivers Championship if the drivers aren’t allowed to participate in the championship?
I don’t think the Ferrari International Assistance trope has ever been too deeply believed in by many people outside a fanatical grouping, to be honest. It makes for a nice media angle, but I think the F1 fan base is a lot more mature and thoughtful than that.
I disagree. The stewards hit Ferrari pretty hard with penalties during the season, like in Silverstone. In my opinion the team orders rule is incredibly silly. So it was just understandable that the penalty was symbolic – these 100 K.
Joe,
What’s the point of having a varied group on the WMSC if the newer members are scared to rock the boat and voice their opinion? With the Spanish and Italian reps obviously voting one way (sounds like eurovision, and about as predictable) the newer members may well have been the ones who held the power to sway the decision. Perhaps national loyalties should be removed from the WMSC and anyone with such a bias (be it intentional or not) should abstain from voting. (turkeys voting for Christmas…)
Ditto to the comments of “Casey”, above.
These appointed positions in sport (such as WMSC representatives) are typically occupied by sycophants. Joe’s report that Todt did not *actively* have anything to do with the decision may indeed be spot-on, but spineless, invertebrate lackeys on an anonymous council are always keen to please their boss.
I daresay the decision would have been different under Vatanen.
This is precisely why I thought Todt’s candidacy was a terrible idea, and why I think anybody who voted for him is a lightweight. Directly or indirectly, Todt can’t wash the red stink off his skin. Todt’s presidency is as dreadful a spectacle as the two former Goldman Sachs CEOs who failed, as Secretary of the US Treasury, to keep Goldman from bringing down the world economy through pure primal greed.
Ferrari got what they wanted: the team orders ban will be reviewed by the FIA. And given their decision in this case, it’s most likely the FIA will decide to allow team orders again.
I think this was the reason why Ferrari was open about Alonso’s move on Massa. They simply wanted to force a discussion about the team orders ban (with the objection to see it removed because Ferrari never liked it). Ferrari – specialist in politics – knew very well what would happen.
And to be honest, this outcome is fully predictable. When the date of the hearing was announced, it was even more likely everything would be in favour of Ferrari. There’s no FIA official who would dare to appear in Monza, two days after a decision that was negative for Ferrari. Choosing this particular was like saying, “go on, Ferrari – you can do whatever you want, like you have always done”.
So Ferrari got everything:
– A race win they way they wanted it
– The points
– A chance to change the regulations
Changing the rules because someone breaks them is like allowing murder because someone killed one.
The World Council has brought the sport into disrepute by taking this decision
Neil, I agree with you whole heartedly. To avoid future disappointment, don’t barrack for number two drivers.
A poor decision? Why? Ferrari were punished at the time, end of story. The problem with F1 at the moment is that it is penalty led – a product of Mosley’s overtly political stance – and this has led young fans to scrutinise their TV screens for every possible infraction and shout ‘PENALTY’ at the screen in the hope that Driver A will be taken to court and have his win removed giving their man, Driver B, the victory, and the points. We even see drivers getting penalties for making mistakes! It is ridiculous, and the ban on team orders – in what is a team sport – is ridiculous, too. I’m surprised at you, Joe, as a long time follower of the sport as you surely know, as we all do, that even post-2003 ‘team orders’ did not go away. Are you suggesting that, because the stewards – in this instance – believed they saw such ‘orders’ carried out they were right to penalise the team, while in other cases a ‘long pit stop’ that just happens to switch positions can be ignored, despite it being equally as blatant? Either team orders are banned – in which case all instances should be punished – or they are not, or as it would seem they are only banned when it is seen on screen, in the race, on track. Punishing Ferrari further would have served no purpose whatsoever; the casual fans have already forgotten the incident (and those I watched the race with wondered – and still do – what all the fuss was about). At least now we have a governing body with enough guts to accept that Article 39.1 is as much a farce as the press made this out to be. Far from a poor decision, for fans of F1 it can only be the right one.
That’s a brilliant photo, made me laugh into my cocopops.
Re the FIA decision, I’d be interested to see a transcript of the proceedings. Did they, for example, ask Massa if he was told at any time during the race weekend that he should move over in certain circumstances?
It does seem to me, however, that the WMSC had little choice but to act as it did. It is not a court of law, it does not have the power to seize evidence from the teams, and there is no legal standard of answering under oath.
Therefore, if Ferrari stuck to their, admittedly implausible, story that Massa was not actually instructed to move over, then how can the WMSC have proved, beyond reasonable doubt, that the race result was being interfered with?
TBH – how were the FIA ever going to legally PROVE that the message was a “team order” .. what constitutes a team order anyway? Anyone around long enough will appreciate all that happened here is Ferrari came out from under the rug where everyone else lives. Clumsy and arrogant – yes, illegal, no.
On the lighter side… for “only” $100k a race the teams are now clear to the end of the season!
http://www.f1infocentre.com/news/2010/9/9/the-100000-start.html
International Tribunal…legal professionals with experience in the sport..
I just hope this is not composed of 10 ex-Ferrari lawyers, if so it’s definitely a silver lining.
In Australia this was reported on radio as “while other sports are trying to stamp out match fixing, the FIA has endorsed it by not punishing Ferrari”.
So that’s the way some of the general public see it. Ferrari have deliberately broken a rule and the FIA have just said “well it’s not a very good rule”.
Quite disappointing given some of the decisions over the past few years.
In a similar spirit to that Photoshop you reproduce, I just thought it might be worth mentioning how Chris Evans on BBC Radio 2 reacted to the decision this morning. After the sports reporter played in an interview with Stefano Domenicali, Chris Evans had the following conversation with the sports guy:
“What Stefano really wanted to say there was ‘Woo-hoo!'”
“Yeah, exactly!”
“That was Italian for ‘Yesss, we got away with it!'”
You can hear it here for the next seven days: http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/console/b00tmgb0/The_Chris_Evans_Breakfast_Show_09_09_2010?t=46m36s
(the bit I transcribe above happened at 47:18).
The show is listened to by around 8.5 million people a week.
Well who’d have thought it? The FIA ‘not being able to prove’ that team orders were being exercised at Hockenheim. Of all the dodgy excuse I have heard from the FIA when ‘prosecuting’ teams, this has to rank as either naive or ignorant. Either way, the World Council should resign in shame if they cannot understand what has been going on.
The Council do not have to operate a ‘reasonable cause’ obligation on ‘convicting’ – it has taken similar decisions without ‘evidence’. Even Jean Todt has said that tended to agree that team orders were being used that day (see Autosport, http://bit.ly/dfOT3n)
The sooner that Ferrari are ranked as mere mortals in the F1 world, the better. And the sooner the decisions that the World Council make. fit the ‘crime’ in front of him the better.
I mean, that as the season comes to a close and the usual sporting practice of letting your driver with the most points finish higher than his uncompetitive teammate there will be a new procedure. All of the teams will have to dump $100k on the steward’s desk at the beginning of each race, with a statement that team orders will be used over the weekend.
$600k for the rest of the season is a cheap price worth paying… Not.
What about the lie part? Ferrari clearly lied to the stewards about the team orders. Last year McLaren was thrown out of the Australian GP results and Hamilton humiliated himself for the same crime. Double standards again.
If it had been McLaren in the wrong with Ron Dennis at the helm we would have definitely had a very different outcome of this hearing. Points deduction, large fine, probably $ millions, suspended race ban, etc…
I really don’t know what’s going on in the background but it has to be more than meets the eye. I heard the other day that Luca Di M had plans to take over F1 when the current Concorde agreement ends. Maybe Joe you know more about that than us.
I was so disappointed and disgusted about all this. I’ve been watching F1 since I was a kid and there have always been this “red car rule”. I don’t know what Ari Vatanen could have done in this situation but anything would have been better than this nonsense…
Neil – agree totally, couldn’t have put it better myself. It’ll be fascinating to see what they do with this rule; the stark choice is making it stricter and less open to interpretation or chopping it from the rule book altogether. I lean towards the latter, if only because it’s the clearest option and anything else leaves the sport open to further controversy later down the line.
At the moment, it’s a totally arbitrary rule. You can say that it should only apply when someone has a mathematical chance of winning the title, but where is that in writing? Why is not just a “realistic” chance of winning, why is the judgement on whether to impose the rule seemingly made by the media and fans and not the teams involved?
Hell, we all know what to expect if you sign up to drive for Ferrari… if you want fair treatment, go someplace else (although Red Bull and McLaren probably aren’t good bets, or Mercedes, or HRT).
I don’t see what the problem is. The sports history is built around team orders. A football manager can pull a player out of a game and replace him or decide who takes a vital kick. And a formula one team manager should be able to decide who comes home first. Alonso ahead of Massa was better for the team, and last I heard F1 is being presented as a team sport.
Does this make the anti team orders regulation a dead letter then?
So it all came down to nationalities. How pathetic. Good news then that the system will be changed, but a shame it hadn’t already happened.
In the meanwhile and while you’re waiting, if you want a real contest, find another sport.
Could it not be the fact that penalising Ferrari would make one of the most exciting seasons in recent memory a two-horse race and that it’d be better from a showmanship POV to keep Ferrari in the running?
Don’t get me wrong I’m not apologising for their blatant flouting of the rule but in order to keep things exciting for the rest of season surely it’s better to have as many teams vyting for teh championship as possible?
I suppose that the FIA could have chosen some other penalty other than a points deduction but what shape could it have taken?
The wiser decision.
I am glad that things stay as it should, otherwise we have to remove the WDC from Hamilton to Massa because the same facts happened in Germany 2008. we do not want to do that, do we?
I am also glad that British Media do not get their way specially when many of them have such as selected memory and want to apply double standards as they pleased.
Having said, shame on Ferrari because the name of the game is make it discrete, therefore fans will not make such a fuss.
Great article, Joe!
But I would better put the FIA logo on Alonso’s car not Massa’s.
I can’t seem to believe how much noise people are making of this. Surely if they were given a suspended sentence as all the other infractions the last two years then you’d still be mad that the FIA didn’t go for blood. But a suspended sentence is no different than none at all.
Be happy that a new structure is being put in place for the future.
The result on track was no different than any other time teams swapped places (such as the final few races) and how could you police a rule suggested by others that would put an arbitrary line in the sand (“its only fine for the final 3 races” etc.). Furthermore, any suggestion to kill communication between the team and the driver is silly for many reasons.
Many are too incensed by anything that has to do with Ferrari. I know those years of Ferrari dominance were boring for everyone. And it makes me sick that national bodies will ‘represent’ their members the way they do at the World Council, but this will all change.
I wish the FIA hadn’t have been so heavy handed with McLaren’s fine of $100 million as that would have left these discussion with a more even-minded spirit. I will never forgive them for that, but it is of the past, and the future must be bright.
Well said Neil Hudson, very well said.
Those who feel that Todt and or the new regime had to do something severe to make their point fail to recognize that Todt willingness to distance himself from the proceedings is more of an act than sitting there casting down firm judgement.
If we achieve fairness in respect to judgements of the sport, unbiased and uninfluenced rulings are the first step.
Some people seem to want to change from a pro-Ferrari ruler to an anti-Ferrari ruler. Is one autocratic rule better than another. If you live in a democracy can you seriously answer that question in the affirmative?
Unenforceable rules are pointless.
Kudos to JT for not getting involved directly, and setting up a fair panel for review of incidents in the future.
This result is the one most (if not all) Teams and drivers predicted.
It is what most people expected.
Oh Deary Deary Me
This “sport” does test one’s resolve.
Looks like single car teams or cheats prosper
Ferrari has already been punished . This meeting was to decide on whether further punishment was required.
I believe the right decision has been made, particularly as Ferrari was, quite rightly, considering legal action to determine whether teams should be run as teams, or whether they should be broken up into individual drivers. Think of the skyrocketing costs of the sport if the latter were the case.
I understand why team orders were banned after Austria. However, when all is said and done, those who are spending egregious amounts of money on the sport should be able to maximize their investments in the way they see fit as far as drivers are concerned. As well, it will get rid of the ridiculous amount of finger pointing that goes on right now – which couldn’t happen soon enough for me. Most of us are intelligent enough to understand why these decisions are made.
*shakes head to try and make sense of it all*
Nope. No joy.
The FiA had an opportunity to set a new standard, and instead they punted and defaulted back to the Mosley-protect-Ferrari-era.
Whether a rule is nonsensical or not, it’s a rule codified in the books, and violating it SHOULD be subject to consequences from the governing body. I don’t care what color the car is.
The argument that Ferrari was rightfully forgiven/not penalized because the rule is untenable, is ludicrous — is that the new defense? “M’lord, we’re not guilty because the rule sucks, and it should be abolished.”
So what this latest, and apparently last, decision from the WMC does is validate Ferrari’s placing itself above the rulebook, sets a 100k as the new price for team orders (for as long as that weak-kneed rule is on the books), and creates a credible “the rule’s stupid, we’re therefore innocent” defense.
*eyeroll*
Excellent decision.
Maybe now after this unenforceable rule has been removed, teams can do it as open and transparent as possible.
Still amazes me that alot of “fans” actually prefer to be fooled by teams using pseudo-team orders, though.
Hi Joe,
We’ve heard from the fans, teams, and fia on all this, but what do the people who pay the bills have to say on the subject?
Given how significantly this topic in particular affects the sport, what voice do the race promoters, tv rights holders and sponsors have in the decision process behind the rulemaking?
These entities have a significant investment on the line based on the F1 show. And many have multi year contracts they just can’t walk away from. Do they have any input on the decisions made that affect the sport?
At what point do they lose confidence in the fia’s politics, band together like the teams did with the manufacturer’s association and start pushing back?
What about the betting public? If I’d have had money on Massa to win I’d feel badly defrauded.
I believe opportunity to damage the sport is greatest when incidents reach “court rooms”. I also believe that damage to the FIA’s reputation of impartiality is more damaging to F1 than damage to a team’s reputation of sportsmanship.
This incident would have be less damaging to F1 had the team orders rule not existed. After all, Ferrari issued the team orders despite a rule being in place and the FIA were put into a position of having to make a ruling that would have caused controversy regardless of the decision. It certainly would have been a smaller story without there being a broken rule.
I think team orders is an area where F1 is better served leaving it up to the teams’ to decide how much sportsmanship they want to display. Displays of sportsmanship will always create fans, boost a team’s brand and presumably sell more cars and merchandise. Likewise bad sportsmanship can have the opposite effect. If maximising the marketing return from participating in F1 isn’t enough incentive for a team to behave as we would like them to, then at least we have a villain to want to see beaten.
Football is a team sport.
What if heading into the finals a team throws a match because they think they will have a better chance beating a different team in the finals as opposed to the one they would have to play if they won.
Is that ok?
I mean they are doing it for the team.
No its not ok, just like the blatant rubbish Ferrari gets away with.
It still puzzles me how you have 2 teams, Ferrari and McLaren, who both had 1 rogue employee each who shared information between them.
Someone finds out and blows the whistle. McLaren get a $100millon fine and Ferrari get what? Nothing.
It’s time to redefine “win” in respect of the World Drivers Championship.
I think it is timme to bring F1 back to a sport when the individual can legitimately race every time he gets in the car.
I’m fed up of watching races where 20 or more people are driving the car – I mean all the telemetry proplr and the engineers and pit wall sitters.
Do away with all radio communication except for safety reasons – engine to blow, tyre puncture, brakes gone, flags.
Then when the driver gets in the car essentially heis in control. Go out and race, no turning engine up and down unless he decides to, no info on who fast and whos not – until they turn up in his (bigger) mirrors, where he is losing time etc.etc.
Then we would see the race craft of old and team orders would be very difficult to implement so they would be much easier to police!
Money and power have taken over the sport – let the drivers take it back.
A ban on radio communication would make things more difficult though I remember that even in the old days, team orders existed. If I just go back to 1978, Ronnie Peterson was not allowed to pass Mario Andretti. Back then drivers sometimes signed contracts that clearly stated they should never stay in front of their team mate.
A ban on radio communication would certainly help make races more exciting as there is a lot more that would come down to driver skills and not to engineering resources.
I also like Niki Lauda’s suggestion: a ban on team orders as long as both drivers of the team have a chance to become world champion. And heavy penalties when a team breaks the rule – a deduction of points instead of a fine. Combine it with a ban on radio communication and things could become mor fun again.
Now the FIA has more or less legalized team orders for those willing to pay $100,000 which is nothing for a Formula One team (unless you are HRT).
FIA will remain suspect for as long as they keep Carlos Gracias and like characters. Appalling.
The rule should be scrapped. It is impossible to enforce and therefore it should never have made it into the rule book at all.