No team orders if Barrachello had been leading?

renaultbel · 17 May 2001, 16:56 (Ref:93644)

Ferrari president Luca Montezemolo has hinted that Rubens Barrichello would not have been forced to give in to team orders if he had been leading Sunday's Austrian Grand Prix.
Barrichello was running second in the Austrian race when he was told to let world champion contender and team-mate Michael Schumacher through on the last lap, so that the German could gain two more points behind winner David Coulthard.
"It would have been different if he had been in the lead and then no one would have touched him," explained Montezemolo. "But the difference between second and third places doesn't change anything."
Immediately after Sunday's race, the Brazilian was clearly upset by the incident although he has since played it down.
"I think that Barrichello's anger had little to do with team orders," continued Montezemolo. "There have always been team orders, from Fangio with Enzo Ferrari to McLaren in the first race of the season three years ago."
And he explained that there was no point in the Brazilian getting down about the result, saying: "Barrichello does well not to get angry and instead to think of winning soon, because if he does get angry, it just makes the job twice as hard."
But to further knock Barrichello's confidence, Montezemolo, referring to the Lap 16 'off' between Williams' Juan Pablo Montoya and Schumacher, added: "Schumacher could have won but for the incident with Montoya and I think it would have been quite an easy win too."

KC · 17 May 2001, 18:00 (Ref:93676)

The incident three years ago with DC and MH was not team orders. It was an agreement between the two drivers. I did not like it then and it should not be acceptable now.

I think its a true measure of how Ferrari thinks of RB with Montezemolo's comments above. If he had been leading he would have won. Does that mean that he would have received charity from the team and allowed to win?

Quote:

"But the difference between second and third places doesn't change anything."

If there is little difference between second and third then why have the man move over at all? This whole deal on team orders is to inflate and prop up the ego of Michael Schumacher.

Liz · 17 May 2001, 18:29 (Ref:93688)

And as far as not moving over when you are in the lead [at Ferrari], tell that to Mika Salo.

**Bononi** · 17 May 2001, 19:14 (Ref:93700)

I don't understand RB.

First he said to the brazilian press :

"It's difficult to have a hard drive, push buttons and yet to be thinking in the terms of the contract paragraph 10, point C, to let MS pass..."

and then, at Ferrari website :

"Being a professional in F1, I learnt from the start of my career that yesterday is the past and you just have to keep on going forward," he claimed. "Of course, I was unhappy to be asked to move over. The one thing that makes my life difficult at Ferrari is nothing to do with the team structure or team orders, it is just the simple fact that Michael is a good driver. He has been with the team for six years and is probably one of the best drivers there has ever been in Formula 1. I am doing alright, but it is difficult to beat someone who has been with the team for a very long period."

Damon · 17 May 2001, 20:39 (Ref:93742)

According to Autosport (very handy this week

) the reason Barrichello was so upset was that his contract states he is not to be forced to move over for Schumacher within the first 8 races. Austria was race 6.

Guy Goddard · 17 May 2001, 21:04 (Ref:93763)

Quote:

Originally posted by Damon
According to Autosport (very handy this week ) the reason Barrichello was so upset was that his contract states he is not to be forced to move over for Schumacher within the first 8 races. Austria was race 6.

Intresting point Damon, Prost had the same arrangment for 93 although Damon was contracted to move over regardless, it happened then it will happen now.
I do feel sorry for RB but he should have expected this and lets face it he is in a front running car which is better than being a No1 in a second rate team...just ask Irvine!!!!!!!!!!!

JeremySmith · 17 May 2001, 21:13 (Ref:93773)

The fact still remains, Rubens was NOT leading the race David was..Rubens was not going to catch him..David and Michael are now in a very tight championship battle..Rubens is not.. although he is third in the points standings..He was not forced to move over he was ASKED..Had the same set of circumstances happened with McLaren in Austria..IMO Ron Dennis would have asked Mika to move over also( I know what you are going to say."Mika has no points") the same PRINCIPLE applies though

If however Rubens had been leading, then it his race for the taking.. I am a big fan of Ferrari as a team,BUT in a way the Rubens moving over issue does suck the big one...The rational in my mind is that any other team would have done same thing no matter what they say after the fact..Easy for all to say.."No team orders here" Bullsh""t

Faster · 17 May 2001, 22:10 (Ref:93794)

Well, in 92, Patrese was leading the French GP (8th race of the season) and he was asked to let Mansell pass by. That was funny, because Patrese was clearly the only challenge that Mansell could have in that season. But of course most of people here wouldn't blame Williams, because a British driver was taking advantage of that. But when it's a german driver...

Liz · 17 May 2001, 22:40 (Ref:93818)

Rubens was not only "asked" to move over. He was COMMANDED over the space of three laps, with increasing shrillness (according to German TV) and eventually with the command that it was part of his contract.

But it's all water under the bridge now in any case, and we'll have to see what develops.

senna12 · 17 May 2001, 22:48 (Ref:93821)

Yes, he may have been asked to move over, not directed, but he had to be asked some 5 times before he capitulated on the last corner. And what do you suppose would have happened to Rubino if he had not moved over? What would Ferrari have done? Suspend him?

This whole moving over business is a load of you know what....IMHO. To win a world championship, even by 2 points, you should earn them, not have them given to you.

This may not be the only time this happens this year. The outrage will be even louder the next time, especially if Herr Michael wins the title by a couple of points only.

slicktoast · 17 May 2001, 22:58 (Ref:93823)

Right! Let's see, move over to gain 2 points, but don't move over to gain 4 points. Easy to talk of a situation that didn't exist. But if it does come up yet this season and the gap between DC and MS is narrow what do you think is going to happen??!!

Raoul Duke · 17 May 2001, 23:18 (Ref:93826)

I think it's all bull****. If what they say about not asking Barrichello to move while leading is true, then why did they ask Salo to move over in Germany, or TGF to move over in Malaysia?.

Valve Bounce · 18 May 2001, 01:36 (Ref:93853)

Let's not be silly, If Rubens had been able to pass DC, why on earth would Ferrari ask him to move over to let DC win? Just for your information, Rubens was leading DC before the pit stop, or did you guys forget? I think that we are being conned by Ferrari on this one.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Team Orders and Team Tactics	Led ZeppF1	Formula One	19	25 Sep 2003 04:09
How will they get around team orders?	Mr V	Formula One	26	5 Mar 2003 12:48
Team Orders	Daiboy	Formula One	62	2 Mar 2003 04:19
FIA and team orders	Inigo Montoya	Formula One	17	19 Oct 2002 06:11
An end to team orders?	RIKB	Touring Car Racing	6	13 May 2000 19:37