magician

Patrick Head is ticked at Jean Todt over the finish of the USGP:

Yahoo! F1 Story

Head says that when your team is substantially superior to the others you have an obligation to motor racing.

What obligation is that?

To slow down to make it look like there's really a contest, the way Mark Donahue did when driving the Porsche 917s? It seems to me that would make a greater mockery of motorsport than anything Ferrari's done this season.

To have the drivers on your team race competitavely against each other the way Ralf and JPM do? Knocking your teammate out of the race qualifies as stupid, but hardly respectful.

It seems to me that the obligation to motorsport lies at the feet of the remaining teams in F1. If Schumacher and Barrichello had to be concerned about their track position vis-a-vis the McLarens, the Williams, the Saubers, the Renaults, and so on, they would have less time to play games with each other. Ferrari is in this position because the remaining teams haven't met the challenge. The failure on the part of the other teams should not impute any additional obligation to Ferrari; they've met their obligation: making the best car/driver combinations they can. The rest is up to their opponents.

Kobe

I think you miss the point of what Head is trying to say about what is happening at Ferrari. You can have a very dominant team (and it will happen every 3-5 years) but you can still keep the fans interested and therefore the sport financially healthy.

don't you think when Prost and Senna both drove for Mclaren and were gunning for each other from day one - it was slightly more interesting.

matrix

Very well stated magican .

magician

I didn't miss Head's point at all. There is risk in having your drivers compete against each other a la Prost and Senna. Head believes that risk is justified. My point is that he's wrong. And the rules (allowing team orders) support my position.

Niki Lauda just stated publically that Ferrari were stupid in the way they handled team orders. I disagree wholeheartedly. They were honorable, in the sense that they were open about what they were doing, rather than clandestine. Is it better for the fans to be allowed to believe that Rubenho has a legitimate chance to beat Schumi when, in fact, he hasn't? Or is it better to be honest with the fans and say that, as long as Schumi's in a points race Rubenho will support him? Anyone wagering on the outcome would prefer the latter, and anyone not wagering on the outcome should.

If the fans don't like the way F1 is run they'll let the governing bodies know (by staying away), and the rules will be changed until the fans like it again. Is there something wrong with this picture?

This sort of thing has happened in other sports. There are occasions when a team will improve its position by losing rather than by winning. (Examples would include competing for last place, which would give a team a higher draft pick the following year.) In that situation, if the rules make it advantageous to dump a match, it is not only sportsmanlike to do so, it is unsportsmanlike to do otherwise. If you don't like the idea of sportsmanlike dumping, change the rules so that it cannot be advantageous to dump a match. Similarly, if you don't like team orders, change the rules so that it cannot be advantageous to engineer the finish.

Kobe

but isn't this the whole reason that we have threads like 3H - with all the stupid rule changes.

I don't mind to have team orders - yes you can say Ferrari were honest,

the problem comes when you know that the best car is Ferrari and that only one driver can win the championship (by a holding a better contract)...then what is the point of watching.

So team orders coupled with a dominating team - make for total switch off. Team orders with non dominating team - can be acceptable,.

I was at the Suzuka circuit in 2000 and cheered to see Schui win his first title with Ferrari (even though I can't stand him). I am a life long F1 fan - I live only 200km from Suzuka - it's only $70 to watch the GP for the 3 days. I did not bother going this season since I knew that Schu would win. So I voted.

matrix

It is up to the other teams to come up to Ferrari's level - not hoping a rule change or no more team orders to even the field out. Team orders and Ferrari's dominance is not the problem, the competition is the problem. Get more team up to Ferrari's level and this conversation would not be happening.

I still watch to see if the gap between winning and losing is closing or opening. See how the race strategies play out, etc. Having Ferrari so dominant is a huge plus though .

Kobe

I absolutely agree. Ferrari bet the whole house on Shui by getting him even when their cars was unreliable and not performing - but together with all the continuous investment they have got to that dominant position and justly cashing the rewards. Both Mclaren and Williams could have bought Shui, Brawn and Berne - but both teams never want to pay over the odds for drivers basic package - hence several world champs have walked away from Williams and Mclaren drives in the past.

I guess Ferrari just overestimated how good the other teams were going to be this year.

i.e. they did not need to make the "PR" mistake (as opposed to breaking any rules mistake) in Austria.

You need to remember that F1 is a heavily British centric industry - so an Italian badged car driven by a German winning indefinately is a big

matrix

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kobe
[B]You need to remember that F1 is a heavily British centric industry - so an Italian badged car driven by a German winning indefinately is a big

Kobe

matrix - I'm not saying Ferrari is not the best supported team

what I am saying is that the F1 British fraternity are more than happy to have Ferrari at the table due to the added kudos that the marque brings - but they are not happy to be beaten in consecutive years. Hence all the comments about "damaging the sport". I'm pretty sure if Williams had just had 3 consecutive championships then Mosley would have not spouted off as he is doing now,

edit - I am (was) a Lotus fan.. colin chapman and senna etc, so I don't even get to vote since the team is dead, the founder is dead and one of their greatest drivers is dead.

matrix

Happy to have Ferrari at the table so long as they lose, eh This makes no sense.

No team would be happy by being beaten continually, still does not mean that Ferrari is "damaging the sport" by continually winning...the competition is - since they cannot step up to the challenge.

BTW, Ferrari has now won the championship 5 consecutive times.