planetf1.com

Ocon is paid by Mercedes, you're just using semantics to make one thing worse than the other.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 1st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

You don't see how someone in a team is being paid by a direct competitor and has to move over as being bad????

The RB situation is different in that the TR is seen as the junior team of RB. This doesn't make it better, but the two teams are more unrelated than most people think. In terms of racing, they are conceding position, but I'm not sure if it is a team order or the drivers being nice in order to get promoted to the RB squad.

In Monaco we had a direct order from another team. Surely you can see the difference

sadly, I don't think he can, Saio. Had this been Ferrari ordering Haas or Sauber to let their driver to let a Ferrari past, likely, poker would have been going ballistic against Ferrari, he'd see it very well indeed!

The difference is that we actually have a driver (and team principle?) admitting the orders... And ,the orders then being followed, even though racing for position at the time! While we may suspect other examples of this happening, we have no irrefutable proof of it, so it is nothing more than suspicions. This simple truth is that we now have proof of one team in collusion with another to affect a race. That, no one can reasonably deny, despite their team/driver of preference.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

It's not about who is doing it, that's irrelevant. I stated my position on this after the first instance we found out. I'm not going to repeat myself and make sure I make as many posts about each instance just to satisfy you.

You've made it pretty clear that your opinion on this matter is distorted by your biases but that doesn't mean everyone else's is.

Well it's like I said before so long as you use plausible deniability or the 5th amendment then it's alright, we see what happens with the STR drivers but we can't conceive they might not be under orders, not a word was said before the race?

Also lets' not forget that was for actual race position, Hartley was not a pit stop behind.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 1st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

When I said one post I wasn't saying that you only made one post, I meant you were the only one to post condemning the Hartley pass, it seems everyone else gives it a free pass because unless you actually admit you were under orders it's perfectly alright, we can't ever imagine there was an instruction given before the race?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 1st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

To be fair, I think Max was racing Hartley for position at the time so it would make it similar situation. The difference is that we are not aware of team orders there, apart from the obvious move that could very well be down to the driver being nice to RB hoping for a future promotion.

I have heard of various rumours through the years, that TP are sending SMS's between them to ask for a driver to move, etc., but it is all hearsay in forums. The closest thing I remember from memory was Jean Todt going to another team's garage asking them not to interfere with the WDC duel back in the Ferrari days.


Here we had a TP admitting to the orders. It is a completely different thing

Sorry for the misunderstanding poker.

I know it was for position, I just wrote it in another post. And I did not say anything about plausible deniability or anything, nor did I explicitly denied that there may be some agreement between TR and RB.

But this is completely different. A thread is opened regarding Wolf and Ocon admitting orders and you jump into the defence with - quite frankly - absurd remarks that if it was bad enough the FIA would have done something.

So let's get to yet another 360 turn with this to remind you that the thread is about a team (forget that it is your favourite team please) that is funding a driver of another team and orders him to jump out of the way.

Glad to get it sorted.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 1st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

Sorry I think that's a certain level of naievity here, the teams and the FIA obviously know this happens hence why it's seen as no big deal, the Hartley pass in context of the race itself was worse than the Ocon pass because it was for actual position, but yes let us believe they were no orders used and it wasn't as important because it was near the back of the field rather near the front hence we didn't have reporters asking Hartley why he let Verstappen past, but then again would they even bother because such a thing happens quite a lot.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 1st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

So we can expect you to be outraged next race when Ocon concedes the position for Hamilton or are you just going to point fingers to RB?

What do you mean Ferrari having Haas? What are they having, can you elaborate? I don't remember Haas jumping out of the way of Ferrari (it doesn't mean that it hasn't happened, just that I don't remember it).

The RB-TR position is unique. They have the same parent company, but they are different entities nowadays. They don't even share the same engines to give each other data anymore. They used to in the early years, then they separated completely. The biggest thing is the driver situation, but this is again dictated by RBR and not RB. This means that the two teams are separate, but the drivers are all contracted as Red Bull Racing drivers. Because of that they can swap around drivers between the teams, they are not the "sister" teams that they used to be.

In terms of racing of course we can expect them to do something like that, it is not nice but if the drivers want to please their bosses, then so be it. For me orders are orders, even if it is in the same team. They can be used in good effect, say when the two drivers are on different strategies or when for example Hamilton recently asked if he could have a crack at overtaking the other car and if not then he would give his place back (can't remember which race though). But when they are manipulated then it just leaves a bad taste.

I don't remember before a team not being affiliated with another but paying their driver directly. It is a bit absurd. They are not under the same ownership, just straight paid from the competitor.

Wow, didn't think the thread would go to four pages

One of my original thoughts while starting the thread was also the effect this may have on the championship battle - imagine a similar situation in Hungary where it's Vettel/Grosjean in place of Hamilton/Ocon, and Vettel effectively pulls off the undercut because the Haas moves out of his way (or conversely, holds up the Merc/RBR cars allowing the Ferrari to overcut).

The outrage here would be massive (and justifiably so IMO) - the fact that RBR/TR situation concerns fewer people is because they aren't really in a position to affect the race outcome up front. As the OP, I want to say that I was also super upset when (in Abu Dhabi 2010 IIRC) the Toro Rosso moved out of Webber's way ASAP, but then proceeded to hold up Alonso (something like that - my memory is a bit hazy around it).

The thing that really needles me is that Wolff (and the Brit media) is quick to get on the high horse and talk about fairness, except when it concerns their own team/drivers.

RE: Ferrari/Haas - does anyone recall any instances where the Haas team made life easy for the Ferraris, but not for any of the other front-runners? I can recall quite a few instances of Force India making life difficult for the Red Bulls (and sometimes Ferrari) with their straightline speed, but not any of this happening with Haas (might also be because of their terrible drivers ).

Agreed A.J.

I also think that the RB/TR deal does not include any team orders. Because they don't have to, they know what they should do... It is sad, but it is technically not a team order I guess. The difference with this was that we had a TP agreeing that a team order was given. Shall we applaud his straight-forwardness or be annoyed with the whole thing?

+2

BTW A.J., were it the Vettel/Haas scenario you described, the 4 pages would have been reached within two hours of the race end, I suspect.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

Call me thick but I am still struggling to see how one is worse than the other. It's not like some random mechanic in TR suggested to their drivers over a friendly pint that they might like to let RBR cars past, if they feel like it. This is clearly a permanent request/instruction from on high to be standard practise. The fact that Wolf felt the need to apparently get on the phone in a particular race suggests if anything, that no such general arrangment is in place between Merc & FI. I'd be surpised if there wasn't, but I just struggle to see how this particular case is such a heinous crime in comparison.

Ultimately none of them should be doing it.

Why would I do that? hehe

Look, I agree that the RB/TR situation is a bit silly. No one is saying the opposite, so I'm not sure why Poker gets his undergarments twisted about it. But lets get real, we all know they are closely related and the drivers are all owned by Red Bull Racing. It is probably not right and I do not think that many people are condoning it. We do not, however, know without a doubt that they have an agreement. It is very well known that the drivers want to "graduate" to RB and they want to please them by letting the RB boys through. We've seen dropping the drivers without a second thought, so playing the good boys may get them kudos with the bosses. I can understand this and it is technically not wrong.

Now compare this with a team that pays directly another team's driver and admits that they give them orders. I may be the thick one here, but I find this worse. Especially when Wolf is so blase about it, it leaves a bad taste as if he is rubbing it in.

I think it's similar - the only difference being that Red Bull finances both teams, so they can do whatever they please. Doesn't make it any better - though I think Toro Rosso have hardly ever been in a situation where the could impact the races for RBR's competitors (except the aforementioned Abu Dhabi 2010 race perhaps).

Force India are not connected to Mercedes in any way except them paying for their engines - to obey an instruction from another team's TP (or even the order in the first place) is what leaves a bad taste in the mouth (especially when you hear Toto/Sky talking about "fairness" - the implied message always being that they do things "the right way", and others don't). At worst this is inter-team collusion, at best it allows people to see the hypocrisy the next time they climb on the high horse (and I'm sure they will).

I'm only outraged at the double standards I see on here.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 1st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

You seem to be a fairly big contributor to it

Why because I put forward other instances of drivers getting free passes?

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 1st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

No, because in your eyes Hamilton (and by extension his team) can do no wrong. Surely your posting history makes it obvious to you?

In the same race Verstappen got a free pass on Hartley but this seems to be alright, like I say double standards.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 1st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

To whom?

Does this mean you agree FI should have not let Hamilton and Bottas pass?

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15

If that's a rule then yes but it's not a rule as we have seen in the past and earlier in the race.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 1st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

Well outraged would be an exaggeration as such I was just using the posters own terminology, for me it's more like politics.

_________________
PF1 Pick 10 Competition

2013: 5th Place
2014: Champion
2015: 3rd Place
2016: 4th Place
2017: 9th Place
2018: Currently 1st

Wins: Canada 2018, Abu Dhabi 2017
Podiums: (6)

So then you see no issues with either of the inter-team orders? What's your position?

It's hardly double standards. STR and Red Bull are owned by the same person. If you accept that you accept a certain amount of collusion between them.

What is different is a team who is merely a customer of another team in cahoots with them and not permitted to fight for themselves. Considering we only have four engine suppliers, one of which is in the back of a known junior team, that is a really disappointing situation to be in.

In my view it's totally anti sporting to have teams agreeing pre race deals of any kind. That includes STR and Red Bull. But with them it's not news because we know it's the case.

So, in one case both teams have contracts to the same person (the owner) and thus they collude. In the other case, the teams collude with each other without having a contract to the same third person (the owner). A huge difference, really? I can either buy a competitor or make a cartel-like contract with him - the result is the same: collusion instead of competition. And IMO it is the result that counts.

Anyway, I find it disturbing that the FIA does not seem to be worried by any of this at all. Perhaps, because Jean Todt is said to be an early adopter of the collusion strategy (Fontana, Sauber)?
I fear it will get more if FIA does not make clear to intervene in the future. And yes, that includes clearing up the ownership structures at RBR/STR as well.

TBF i said it was a difference not hugely different. I don't really see what the FIA can do TBH.

They could give all the involved parties a $100m fine for race fixing. That would probably stop it.

It would probably also make RBR and Mercedes quit, but hey, Macca took one of those and they're still here...

_________________
PF1 PICK 10 COMPETITION (4 wins, 14 podiums): 2017: 19th| 2016: 3rd| 2015: 4th
PF1 TOP THREE TEAM CHAMPIONSHIP (No Limit Excedrin Racing): 2017: 2nd| 2015: 1st
AUTOSPORT GP PREDICTOR: 2017 United States Champion! (world #2)

It would stop them doing it obviously. You would just find it was Ocon times time to come in to a pitstop instead.

McLaren did not lose position or spoil their results by placing their car between Ricciardo and Vettel. Additionally, Ricciardo definitely was struggling and a helping hand may have made a difference. Did you watch the race? Were you aware that early in the race (lap 17) Ricciardo's MGU-k died an ugly death and he was down 160 HP? Are you aware that the tech nuts are still going over what happened, because Ricciardo and his team had to work miracles to bring home the win? To state "it doesn't look like he needs assistance" is just plain untrue.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.

I don't think that was collusion. I see no reason why Mclaren and Red Bull would want to help each other. Not impossible but I think unlikely.

How about change the livery rules so that each car must carry different sponsorship than the other car? That way, the people that sponsor the teams would make sure that any collusion stops at the front door. If I sponsored a team for 100 million a year, I would not allow anyone an easy pass.

Personally I desire to see 20 cars battling each other for the entire race. And I mean intense, give-no-quarters, fight-to-the-last-breath stuff.

_________________
Only dogs, mothers, and quality undergarments give unconditional support.

This is a suggestion that I have made for years in here, Blinky. That might work for inner team orders, but I don't see that it would have stopped the blatant Mercedes/Force India collusion to affect a race.

_________________
Forza Ferrari
WCCs = 16
WDCs = 15