RE: F1's Button wants to stay at BAR

[Gruffy]

RobbieMeister said:

Contracts can be broken. The reason Button stayed at BAR last year was that both party's agreed to stand by the findings of the CRB.

What he said

I was just regurgitating what I've been informed by some trusted F1 insiders - trying to pass it off as my own knowledge and thereby sound all important.

Gruffy

[PhilboSE]

Joe911 said:

PhilboSE said: I'm afraid it *is* so. You can't "get out" of a contract. Both parties can agree to terminate the contract - if they can agree liabilities and any appropriate compensation. Is it not that case that a contract can only be enforced if it is deemed to be "fair and reasonable" (in the view of a court) and presumably not infringing on someones human rights etc. etc. Not that I'm suggesting that would apply in JB's case.

Yes, there is absolutely the requirement for a contract to be legally enforceable that it is "fair and reasonable".

Of course, the legal profession lives off making arguments to define "reasonable" in a given situation, but like you I don't think it's going to apply in this case.

Without seeing the contract detail it sounds like Button agreed to drive for Williams in 2006 for £XXX and now he wants to get out of it because he thinks Williams won't be competitive.

[PhilboSE]

RobbieMeister said:

Contracts can be broken. Ask any divorcee. As I understand it if a contract is broken then "wounded" party is free to call the contract null and void and therby be released from his side of the bargain. Additionally he can seek compensation from the other party for any loss. The reason Button stayed at BAR last year was that both party's agreed to stand by the findings of the CRB.

You can of course break a contract. Then you lay yourself open to be sued by the other party and a court won't look very favourably on your situation if you simply decided not to abide by the terms of the contract.

If Button simply refuses to drive for Williams without reaching a termination agreement then he will be in breach of contract and he will be liable for whatever damages Williams could reasonably claim.

Now Williams *could* make the case that not having Button cost them an engine deal with some other party, or a major sponsor, and that this cost Williams £20M directly by losing those benefits as a *direct result* of Button breaking the contract. Now a court would look at their arguments in such a situation and try to determine how likely that scenario was, whether the loss of an engine deal was wholly or partially affected by Button not abiding by his contract, and so on. The final amount of damages would be based on the strength of the evidence of the direct damage done to Williams by the breaking of the contract. But it would likely be a *lot* more than the £2M Button is offering. Plus the legal costs etc.

My point is only that a contract is a binding legal agreement and can only be adhered to, terminated with both parties consent, or broken by one or both parties. What you can't do is announce that you won't stand by the terms of the contract because you don't like them any more. That is breaking the contract and lays you open to being sued.

The outcome of this is that I expect Button and BAR to pay Williams a wodge of cash and Button to stay at BAR. I also expect Button to give his contract negotiations to a different team than the one who agreed the terms for the last couple of seasons

[rubystone]

PhilboSE said:

The outcome of this is that I expect Button and BAR to pay Williams a wodge of cash and Button to stay at BAR. I also expect Button to give his contract negotiations to a different team than the one who agreed the terms for the last couple of seasons

Yep, Byfield stepped down as a result of this - but Button is still managed by the same compnay I believe

[RobbieMeister]

PhilboSE

I think that's what I said.

[peter450]

sorry but i cant see were the support for button is comming from?? the guys an idiot he tried to cheat BAR out of a contract he signed in good faith
he spat his dummy out BAR wanted him to stay frank wanted him at williams and he decided he wanted to go there too and sod BAR (fair enough i guess if he really really really wants to go to williams)
So he got what he wanted except now all of a sudden he wants to stay at BAR and wriggle himself off another contract and all this "i love williams, respect frank, feel he's the one who gave me my break, i really wanna drive for them again bla bla bla" is seen for what it is the talk of a opportunist who's word is as shallow as his character

[me2]

peter450 I agree with you,he wants his cake and to eat it!!

[55jnj]

peter450 said:

sorry but i cant see were the support for button is comming from?? the guys an idiot he tried to cheat BAR out of a contract he signed in good faith he spat his dummy out BAR wanted him to stay frank wanted him at williams and he decided he wanted to go there too and sod BAR (fair enough i guess if he really really really wants to go to williams) So he got what he wanted except now all of a sudden he wants to stay at BAR and wriggle himself off another contract and all this "i love williams, respect frank, feel he's the one who gave me my break, i really wanna drive for them again bla bla bla" is seen for what it is the talk of a opportunist who's word is as shallow as his character

Agree

IMHO all this shows Button up in a very poor light. Integrity is clearly not a word he understands. He's an OK driver for sure, but definitely not a good ambassador for the sport. It is still a sport isn't it ?

& before everyone jumps in and says of course it's not a sport, it's a business - a) integrity can still prevail in a successful business, b) don't try & tell me that Jackie Stewart, Lance Armstrong, Seb Coe, Mohammed Ali, Jonny Wilkinson, Steve Redgrave etc etc, all VERY successful SPORTSMEN, would behave in anything like the same way in pursuit of their personal gains.



>> Edited by 55jnj on Thursday 28th July 22:23

[stumartin]

PhilboSE said:

Yes, there is absolutely the requirement for a contract to be legally enforceable that it is "fair and reasonable". Of course, the legal profession lives off making arguments to define "reasonable" in a given situation, but like you I don't think it's going to apply in this case.

Er, perhaps someone could correct me, but as between two business persons of relatively equal bargaining power, I'm not aware of too much that stops them agreeing to pretty much whatever they want (so long as it's legal) - unfair contract terms provisions and such are really for business-2-consumer contracts and therefore not relevant to this discussion?

[daydreamer]

55jnj said:

& before everyone jumps in and says of course it's not a sport, it's a business - a) integrity can still prevail in a successful business, b) don't try & tell me that Jackie Stewart, Lance Armstrong, Seb Coe, Mohammed Ali, Jonny Wilkinson, Steve Redgrave etc etc, all VERY successful SPORTSMEN, would behave in anything like the same way in pursuit of their personal gains. >> Edited by 55jnj on Thursday 28th July 22:23

Agree to an extent - but - I went to school with Michael Vaugn, and university with John Crawley and was a guy called Andy Whittle's lab partner (now of Zimbabwe).

All three really nice guys, but you only had to see them on a football or rugby pitch to realise that they would do pretty much anything to win - even though they weren't even playing their chosen sport. To some extent, integrity is an image rather than a mind set.

At the German Drivers briefing before the GP, they were explicitly forbidden from using the run off areas as track and that penalties would be applied. First corner, one M Schumnacher passes Button with no hope of making the move stick without cheating and risking a penalty (from a German steward in front of 100,000 German fans - hmm).

Mr Coultard is another case in point. He is seen to have irreprochable integrity - but is was him that caused the CRB to be set up in the first place.

These guys want to win and will do anything to get there - fair enough. Button's mistake has been in shocking planning and terrible PR.

[JonRB]

daydreamer said:

Button's mistake has been in shocking planning and terrible PR.

I've got to agree with you there. The Keystone Cops could have set up a PR company and done a better job than Button's lot.

[rubystone]

Is anyone looking at this from the teams' side? Let's examine the evidence. Button tells BAR he wants to leave, DR digs his heels in, he wins, but knows Button will be off.

Williams knows he'll get Button for 2006...he also knows that BMW are very likely to disappear, but doesn't tell Button that, natch.

Now all of a sudden BAR want Button....DR made a big thing of the integrity of drivers/contracts etc, yet now the boot is on the other foot!

BAR's actions show that for them, it's the winning that counts, hence their wishes to keep Button. Why should it be any different for Button? - he wants to win too.

Williams also has made no secret that he is interested in constructors, not drivers titles. Evidenced by his decision (made in 1995) to axe Hill at the end of the 1996 season and his refusal to accede to Mansell's salary demands for 1993...which is odd, given the amount he was rumoured to be paying Senna....his one weakness (in common with Ron Dennis).

It's a business, integrity counts for little nowadays. We all know that Jackie Stewart didn't ever have a contract with Ken Tyrrell and that Stirling Moss gave up his car to Fangio on several occasions, but times change...when was the last time you saw a bloke wearing a bowler hat in London?...did anyone take advantange of the bombs in Sham el-Shaik to go short on First Choice ?....of course they did! Welcome to the 21st Century!

[flemke]

daydreamer said:

55jnj said: & before everyone jumps in and says of course it's not a sport, it's a business - a) integrity can still prevail in a successful business, b) don't try & tell me that Jackie Stewart, Lance Armstrong, Seb Coe, Mohammed Ali, Jonny Wilkinson, Steve Redgrave etc etc, all VERY successful SPORTSMEN, would behave in anything like the same way in pursuit of their personal gains. >> Edited by 55jnj on Thursday 28th July 22:23 Agree to an extent - but - I went to school with Michael Vaugn, and university with John Crawley and was a guy called Andy Whittle's lab partner (now of Zimbabwe). All three really nice guys, but you only had to see them on a football or rugby pitch to realise that they would do pretty much anything to win - even though they weren't even playing their chosen sport. To some extent, integrity is an image rather than a mind set. At the German Drivers briefing before the GP, they were explicitly forbidden from using the run off areas as track and that penalties would be applied. First corner, one M Schumnacher passes Button with no hope of making the move stick without cheating and risking a penalty (from a German steward in front of 100,000 German fans - hmm). Mr Coultard is another case in point. He is seen to have irreprochable integrity - but is was him that caused the CRB to be set up in the first place. These guys want to win and will do anything to get there - fair enough. Button's mistake has been in shocking planning and terrible PR.

Button's bigger mistake has been in being perfidious.
When he was at Renault he performed mediocrely. David Richards threw Button a lifeline when he gave him a ride in a BAR. As Button's stock rose in '04, his handlers thought that they had found a loophole in his contract that would allow him to drive for someone else in '05, even though both parties had intended for the contract to apply until '06.
The loophole related to whether BAR had managed to secure a manufacturers' engine deal by a certain date. As we know, the CRB ruled that BAR had secured the engine deal in time and that therefore Button was obliged to drive for them in '05. The damning fact for Button is that he and his handlers made no attempt to ascertain whether the engine deal had been secured: Button didn't leave BAR reluctantly because they had no engine deal, he left them because he wanted to serve himself, and he hoped that they had no engine deal. The fact that David Richards had given him a drive when no other leading team would do so didn't matter to him.

In forming our opinions about Jenson Button and loyalty, let's be mindful of the difference between coincidence and causality.
As others on this thread have observed, world-class athletes (and high-achievers in all realms) need to be relentlessly driven and extraordinarily motivated. The people who are like that also tend to be quite ruthless and totally selfish.
You do not, however, have to be quite ruthless and totally selfish in order to succeed. Rather, those things simply make success more likely.
Jenson Button's had a choice - twice. On both occasions he's proved himself to be a pathetic little man.


>> Edited by flemke on Friday 29th July 14:40

[daydreamer]

I knew that Frank Williams was playing hardball, but after reading the Q&A on Autosport, I actually believe that he will force Button to go to Williams.

Having lost BMW, their only other sponsor draw is now Button. I am guessing that they will fight pretty hard to hang onto him.

[rubystone]

I wonder whether Jim Wright would agree with you there - to my knowledge, Williams have never integrated their drivers in marketing campaigns to the same extent as other teams (eg McLaren) have. In fact I'm also wracking my brain to think of a driver sponsor whose logo has made it onto a Williams in the last 20 years.

Clearly, BAR's sponsors have used Button in a big way though - you only have to look at his choice of sunglasses to see that - BTW am I the only person who thinks that Alonso's comedy shades must have come from a 99pence shop?

[flemke]

rubystone said:

BTW am I the only person who thinks that Alonso's comedy shades must have come from a 99pence shop?

But the shades did go well with his "a-worm's-crawling-up-my-chin" goatee.

[rubystone]

flemke said:

But the shades did go well with his "a-worm's-crawling-up-my-chin" goatee.

Just what is the point of this form of facial decoration? I just know that I'd get up in the morning and shave half of it off before realising what I'd done.

Now Emmo's sideburns - a totally different story

[flemke]

rubystone said:

flemke said: But the shades did go well with his "a-worm's-crawling-up-my-chin" goatee. Just what is the point of this form of facial decoration? I just know that I'd get up in the morning and shave half of it off before realising what I'd done.

The point is to prove to the world that you are a moron, rather than leaving any room for doubt.

[Sgt^Roc]

sjp63 said:

True but Frank is a bit of a tosser really. He shafted Mansell then Hill, dumping them both after championship winning seasons, lets hope he doesnt shaft Jenson by forcing him to drive for Williams who have no hope of winning in 06 .

Ye I aggree and William appears to have peaked in terms of being a top team at the moment, this for me all seems to have start after Newey left, now thaey have Webber who is not doing anything which shows how poor the car is

[david_s]

Whether F1 is a sport or a business is immaterial, integrity and reputation are important in both and a deal is a deal. If you can't trust somebody to keep his word even when he has signed a contract confirming his intentions, would you deal with them again?

Michael Schumacher is often criticised, but he went to Ferrari when it was weak and was instrumental in building the team into a championship winning outfit. Even this season, when things are not going so well, he is supportive and loyal to the team and Bridgestone. Button does not compare favourably in my opinion.