Official 2024 Italian Grand Prix Thread ***SPOILERS***

[isaldiri]

AceRockatansky said:

You have made no allowance for a driver fighting for a Chance at a WDC.

History doesn't remember 2nd place. The team should be optimising everything for the championship that matters with the only driver that has a chance to win it.

It's not just about retaining Oscar, it's also about retaining Lando.

I remember Ferrari putting Schumacher 2nd when he couldn't win a championship and he was willing to play a supporting role when called upon.

As I said - define 'only driver that has a chance'. Is it at some arbitrary cutoff mid season at an arbitrary points lead and if so what would that be?

My point is - when do you want to tell another driver he has no chance and has to just roll over for his team-mate at every race subsequently?

[AceRockatansky]

isaldiri said:

AceRockatansky said:

You have made no allowance for a driver fighting for a Chance at a WDC.

History doesn't remember 2nd place. The team should be optimising everything for the championship that matters with the only driver that has a chance to win it.

It's not just about retaining Oscar, it's also about retaining Lando.

I remember Ferrari putting Schumacher 2nd when he couldn't win a championship and he was willing to play a supporting role when called upon.

As I said - define 'only driver that has a chance'. Is it at some arbitrary cutoff mid season at an arbitrary points lead and if so what would that be?

My point is - when do you want to tell another driver he has no chance and has to just roll over for his team-mate at every race subsequently?

There's no definition, it's based on observation and probability.

At this point in the season, Lando has the best chance of winning a championship. Next time it might be Oscar.

Teams constantly talk about "fighting" and "not giving up" yet here they are with a driver who has a credible shot at the title and they can't organise themselves to mount a serious challenge. RB must be laughing their socks off.

[thiscocks]

AceRockatansky said:

isaldiri said:

AceRockatansky said:

You have made no allowance for a driver fighting for a Chance at a WDC.

History doesn't remember 2nd place. The team should be optimising everything for the championship that matters with the only driver that has a chance to win it.

It's not just about retaining Oscar, it's also about retaining Lando.

I remember Ferrari putting Schumacher 2nd when he couldn't win a championship and he was willing to play a supporting role when called upon.

As I said - define 'only driver that has a chance'. Is it at some arbitrary cutoff mid season at an arbitrary points lead and if so what would that be?

My point is - when do you want to tell another driver he has no chance and has to just roll over for his team-mate at every race subsequently?

There's no definition, it's based on observation and probability.

At this point in the season, Lando has the best chance of winning a championship. Next time it might be Oscar.

Teams constantly talk about "fighting" and "not giving up" yet here they are with a driver who has a credible shot at the title and they can't organise themselves to mount a serious challenge. RB must be laughing their socks off.

Mclaren trying to implement team orders not far off mid season is pretty shameful. If you have two drivers fairly even in ability and no clear number 2 written into a contract then they should be racing, full stop. I cant believe the amount of people actually wanting team orders to be issued this early in a season! Can you imagine Mclaren telling Prost or Senna to give way to one another because one happens to be ahead on points? Pathetic.

[Gad-Westy]

thiscocks said:

AceRockatansky said:

isaldiri said:

AceRockatansky said:

You have made no allowance for a driver fighting for a Chance at a WDC.

History doesn't remember 2nd place. The team should be optimising everything for the championship that matters with the only driver that has a chance to win it.

It's not just about retaining Oscar, it's also about retaining Lando.

I remember Ferrari putting Schumacher 2nd when he couldn't win a championship and he was willing to play a supporting role when called upon.

As I said - define 'only driver that has a chance'. Is it at some arbitrary cutoff mid season at an arbitrary points lead and if so what would that be?

My point is - when do you want to tell another driver he has no chance and has to just roll over for his team-mate at every race subsequently?

There's no definition, it's based on observation and probability.

At this point in the season, Lando has the best chance of winning a championship. Next time it might be Oscar.

Teams constantly talk about "fighting" and "not giving up" yet here they are with a driver who has a credible shot at the title and they can't organise themselves to mount a serious challenge. RB must be laughing their socks off.

Mclaren trying to implement team orders not far off mid season is pretty shameful. If you have two drivers fairly even in ability and no clear number 2 written into a contract then they should be racing, full stop. I cant believe the amount of people actually wanting team orders to be issued this early in a season! Can you imagine Mclaren telling Prost or Senna to give way to one another because one happens to be ahead on points? Pathetic.

It's worth mentioning two relevant factors here though. Firstly that we are now two thirds through this season , not half way. If you're against team orders, full stop, how far through we are is irrelevant though. You either use them or you don't. No point employing them when it's too late to make any difference. But also worth saying that in the case of the the McLaren Prost/Senna years, they were both miles ahead of the competition. McLaren were going to win everything regardless. The reason why people are supporting team orders here (including myself) is that McLaren find themselves in a very particular set of circumstances that presents an opportunity. I'd far rather see open racing generally but right now, I'd also really enjoy watching McLaren, as a whole team, throw the kitchen sink at winning both championships.

[PRO5T]

Gad-Westy said:

The reason why people are supporting team orders here (including myself) is that McLaren find themselves in a very particular set of circumstances that presents an opportunity. I'd far rather see open racing generally but right now, I'd also really enjoy watching McLaren, as a whole team, throw the kitchen sink at winning both championships.

I’d say the reason most are supporting team orders is that it’s against Verstappen and red bull.

If it was the other way round, and red bull were implementing team orders to sacrifice Perez to let max beat Norris who was ahead there’d be an utter outcry, calls to reintroduce the ban on team orders and a million hashtags like #nochampionof mine etc

[Gad-Westy]

PRO5T said:

Gad-Westy said:

The reason why people are supporting team orders here (including myself) is that McLaren find themselves in a very particular set of circumstances that presents an opportunity. I'd far rather see open racing generally but right now, I'd also really enjoy watching McLaren, as a whole team, throw the kitchen sink at winning both championships.

I’d say the reason most are supporting team orders is that it’s against Verstappen and red bull.

If it was the other way round, and red bull were implementing team orders to sacrifice Perez to let max beat Norris who was ahead there’d be an utter outcry, calls to reintroduce the ban on team orders and a million hashtags like #nochampionof mine etc

I'm not sure it's quite as simple as that but perhaps it's fair to say there is some backing for this just to upset the apple cart which frankly I think is healthy for F1 regardless of which teams are in the mix.

[kambites]

PRO5T said:

If it was the other way round, and red bull were implementing team orders to sacrifice Perez to let max beat Norris who was ahead there’d be an utter outcry

From whom? I'd be astonished if Redbull did anything else, they've always run an open number-1 and number-2 setup with their drivers if they feel it might make a difference to the championship. Nothing wrong with that whatsoever, it's a team sport and the drivers are employed to do whatever is best for the team. If Mclaren feel they have any chance at winning the WDC, they should be doing the same.

There is, at least in my mind, a world of difference between giving team orders at this point in the season when its clear that such orders could decide the WDC in the favour of a particular one of their drivers, and issuing them from race-1 or in a situation where the titles are essentially already decided as Ferrari tended to back in the Schumacher days.

I dislike teams lying about whether they are issuing team orders, and obviously using them when they were actually outlawed was cheating, but doing it openly now is just common sense as long as both drivers understand the situation before the race starts. What you can't, IMO, is randomly change the rules of engagement mid-race.

Edited by kambites on Monday 9th September 10:29

[Gazzab]

PRO5T said:

I’d say the reason most are supporting team orders is that it’s against Verstappen and red bull.

If it was the other way round, and red bull were implementing team orders to sacrifice Perez to let max beat Norris who was ahead there’d be an utter outcry, calls to reintroduce the ban on team orders and a million hashtags like #nochampionof mine etc

Red Bull have a clear number 1 driver - that’s the difference and why they don’t need to implement team orders. They already have an order.

[PlywoodPascal]

Gazzab said:

PRO5T said:

I’d say the reason most are supporting team orders is that it’s against Verstappen and red bull.

If it was the other way round, and red bull were implementing team orders to sacrifice Perez to let max beat Norris who was ahead there’d be an utter outcry, calls to reintroduce the ban on team orders and a million hashtags like #nochampionof mine etc

Red Bull have a clear number 1 driver - that’s the difference and why they don’t need to implement team orders. They already have an order.

i.e. you don't need to order a slower driver to slow down.

reality is that Verstappen/Red Bull have set it up so that his closest potential rival is eliminated before he even starts.

[Gary C]

thiscocks said:

Mclaren trying to implement team orders not far off mid season is pretty shameful. If you have two drivers fairly even in ability and no clear number 2 written into a contract then they should be racing, full stop. I cant believe the amount of people actually wanting team orders to be issued this early in a season! Can you imagine Mclaren telling Prost or Senna to give way to one another because one happens to be ahead on points? Pathetic.

Early ?

Its critical now that team orders are implemented (and should have been two races ago)

you might not like it but its a TEAM business and their employees should be ready to do what is needed for the best for the team.

I would much prefer Norris to take the fight to Verstappen than be squabbling with his team mate.

[Leithen]

We’re into the last third of the season now.

[thiscocks]

PRO5T said:

Gad-Westy said:

The reason why people are supporting team orders here (including myself) is that McLaren find themselves in a very particular set of circumstances that presents an opportunity. I'd far rather see open racing generally but right now, I'd also really enjoy watching McLaren, as a whole team, throw the kitchen sink at winning both championships.

I’d say the reason most are supporting team orders is that it’s against Verstappen and red bull.

If it was the other way round, and red bull were implementing team orders to sacrifice Perez to let max beat Norris who was ahead there’d be an utter outcry, calls to reintroduce the ban on team orders and a million hashtags like #nochampionof mine etc

Agree. Good point about the 80s mclaren being miles ahead as a team but I guess I just don't like seeing teams like Mclaren acting like Ferrari. I'd personally rather enjoy watching some squabbling between team mates than one just having to give way. It is a team sport but they are also called racing drivers.

[Hustle_]

Mclaren are trying to behave as Mercedes did during their dominant period. They had nothing to lose by letting them race and they most often did.

Mclaren have a slim chance to capture a very popular WDC for the first time since Hamilton in 2008 and at the moment they don't appear to have noticed. I can only assume that they've tied themselves in knots contractually with the drivers.

[Gazzab]

Hustle_ said:

Mclaren are trying to behave as Mercedes did during their dominant period. They had nothing to lose by letting them race and they most often did.

Mclaren have a slim chance to capture a very popular WDC for the first time since Hamilton in 2008 and at the moment they don't appear to have noticed. I can only assume that they've tied themselves in knots contractually with the drivers.

It all relates to their ceo who is more interested in himself and talking about his leadership than trying to win.

[PhilAsia]

Gazzab said:

It all relates to their ceo who is more interested in himself and talking about his leadership than trying to win.

...that begins with palm-fracturing high-fives and rib-breaking bear hugs? He is all man

[Forester1965]

Zac Brown has defied my expectations and built a really strong team. I thought he was only really a marketing guy and happy so long as the team got plenty of exposure and I was clearly wrong. Bravo.

[Hustle_]

Same. I think he's done a great job.

[vaud]

Forester1965 said:

Zac Brown has defied my expectations and built a really strong team. I thought he was only really a marketing guy and happy so long as the team got plenty of exposure and I was clearly wrong. Bravo.

Why would you think he was just a marketing guy? He raced for 10 years at a pretty high level, including Indy Lights, German F3, GT2 and GT3... like Horner and others he might not be F1 grade but he is not a shabby driver.

[MustangGT]

thiscocks said:

Agree. Good point about the 80s mclaren being miles ahead as a team but I guess I just don't like seeing teams like Mclaren acting like Ferrari. I'd personally rather enjoy watching some squabbling between team mates than one just having to give way. It is a team sport but they are also called racing drivers.

I personally prefer watching them race. However, at this point in the season, only one driver has a chance of the WDC. They should be fully behind this driver, with the other driver ordered to support them. As you say, this is a team sport.

[Forester1965]

vaud said:

Why would you think he was just a marketing guy? He raced for 10 years at a pretty high level, including Indy Lights, German F3, GT2 and GT3... like Horner and others he might not be F1 grade but he is not a shabby driver.

How good or interested he is at driving is kind of irrelevant to his strategy as an executive. You can be a racing enthusiast and marketer whose business strategy is one of building a brand ahead of racing performance all at the same time. Until this season McLaren have kind of pottered about being social media slappers without much to show for it on the tracks their teams race on. This season is different hence my comment above.