|
|
|
|
|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
Net
The 2002 Season F1fan-eBook 
|
Do you see the eBook Contents pane on the left? No? Then access the entire F1-fan eBook here! |
The team orders issue
 |
|
For ease of reference in the current eBook, the three known results fabricated beyond the realms of true competition in 2002 have not only been rightfully reversed in the section What if 2002... and on the page Moral Championship, but have also been marked in blue on the page What if 2002..., itself.
These results comprise Ferrari's 1-2 in both the Austrian GP and the North-American GP, as well as Sauber's 6-7 in the German GP.
However criticized, and certainly they were, both Ferrari's driver position inversions (in Austria and the U.S.A.) were widely acccounted for in the media:
For Rubens Barrichello would be the runner-up anyway, whether he finished that race in first or in second place.
But what would account for Sauber's team orders in Germany, demanding that Felipe Massa allowed Nick Heidfeld to pass, so that the latter driver could take the chequered flag in sixth place, instead of the former, who had earned that sixth place out of his own driving skills and efforts? To my knowledge, Sauber's fabricated result in the Grand Prix of Germany was not publicly accounted for, as were Ferrari's.
So much focus seems to be placed onto the leading names and championship placements, that the media hardly made any reference to Sauber's surprising manipulation of the race results in the German GP -- albeit a manouver that seems to beat common sense.
After all, the one point at stake for the Sauber Team in the Championship would be added with equal value to Sauber's final tally, independently of the driver that brought that point home: Felipe Massa (the driver earning it on the track) or Nick Heidfeld (somehow favored by the Team as far as increasing his points tally by one).
Nonetheless, Ferrari has apparently stood as the sole target of all criticism against team orders and result manipulation, not only from the media and fans, but also from many Team Managers -- three-time World Champion Niki Lauda possibly one of the most outspoken on this issue.
By no means the references above should be understood as a defense of Ferrari's team orders. The unsporting outcome of the Austrian Grand Prix actually motivated MieNet's Moral Drivers' Championship page (on-line immediately following that Grand Prix), based on which the Moral Championship page was created for this eBook.
But whether in criticism or praise, it is important to strive to be fair. True fairness would seem to require that both Ferrari and Sauber be targeted for the loud criticism erupting in Formula-One-land this Season, regarding team orders -- not solely Ferrari (independently of any other sins that the Reds may have been imputed during their most successful Season to date).
For the sake of fairness, it seems likewise worth noting that, whether coincidentally or not, hindsight suggests that the 2002 Season was as if decreed over to Felipe Massa, at that German GP, at the end of which he was surprisingly deprived of his earned point. From then on, nothing seems to have worked for the young rookie, as it also became increasingly evident, though never clearly stated, that he had fallen out of grace with the Team.
Why? To my knowledge, no explanation has been made public, so we are left wondering. The widespread assumption that Felipe Massa would have been prone to crashing is weakened in view not only of Takuma Sato's dramatic accident proneness, but also of some of Nick Heidfeld's spectacular crashes. The Brazilian rookie did not regale photographers with any scenes as closely electrifying.
Who can forget, for example, Heidfeld's improvident ramming into the medical car in the Brazilian GP? Drivers arriving at the scene before and after Heidfeld, could all slow down in time and proceed with their race, under the yellow flag, as it was. If the Team could be patient and supportive of Heidfeld in instances such as that, when lives were actually dangerously put at risk under a yellow flag, why would they not in face of a promising rookie whose experience was incommensurate with that of his older team-mate?
Takuma Sato, who enjoyed more favorable fortune in the Jordan Team, supported throughout as he was, was actually able to deliver a gratifying surprise in Japan.
Would there have possibly been a subjacent concern lurking unattended, that the star of another promising young team-mate -- if properly guided to reach a certain level of maturity -- could potentially once more upstage Heidfeld's (like Kimi Raikkonen's the previous Season)?
After all, the talented and more experienced Heidfeld was publicly disheartened at McLaren's only having eyes for Raikkonen at the closing of the previous year. Time might eventually allow us clearer insights into Sauber's 2002 Season, including the surprising use of team-orders in that German Grand Prix.
Used with criteria and a pinch of wisdom, team work (though not necessarily orders) can actually add to the excitement of a Grand Prix and of the Championship, itself. Who can forget, for example, how much excitement the outstanding team-mates of Three-time Champion Jackie Stewart (Scotland) and Two-time Champion Emerson Fittipaldi (Brazil), respectively, François Cevert (France) and Ronnie Peterson (Sweden) contributed to Formula One racing in their days?!
As far as my memory and database go, it was the Williams Team that first raised the badge of true rivalry between team-mates, their drivers then being Three-time Champion Nelson Piquet (Brazil) and Champion Nigel Mansel (England). The Ferrari Team, in turn, never abandoned the old spirit of team work (somewhat extrapolated in the Schumacher era).
Which of these rules of thumb is the best, considering the championship as a whole, and in view of the charm and excitement that it will motivate the fans with? A non-abusive use of team-orders or free rivalry?
They both have their pros and cons. On the one hand, free rivalry between team-mates adds the excitement of total competition between drivers racing on identical equipment, amid the competition amongst all drivers and teams.
On the other hand, an underlying sense of team work adds an extra stratum to the competition, both in the races and in the championship as a whole: that among teams (not only in view of the Constructors' Title, but the Drivers' just as well). This no doubt contributes a good share of excitement to the races and the championship, as it adds one extra point of reference from which to watch and relate to all activity on and off track.
Both team work and free rivalry can however be detrimental to the sport and its charm, if not guided by proper criteria and commonsense. The 2002 Season goes to the records as a slip in this context, ultimately motivating the institution of a rule that had not been needed in the past. As the more rules there are underlying any activity, the less room for unpredictability and creativity, it remains to be seen if the changes to be effective from 2003 on will fully yield their desired effect in the long run.
Countervailing the restrictive approach just evidenced, however, and perhaps evening out the overall effect of the rules governing the 2003 and subsequente seasons, is an increase in alternatives regarding two relevant areas: tires and testing.
On the one hand is the broader degree of choice to be granted teams in the sphere of tire choice (please see Tires for details). On the other hand is the possibility of opting between [1] a standardized ten-day development testing limit per season that carries otherwise the bonus of up to a six hour worth of tests (3 cars/drivers for 2 hours) at the onset of every racing weekend, and [2] total freedom as to how often to conduct development tests, but acompanied by the drawback of a proscription from the six-hour bonus test on the tracks where every Grand Prix will be taking place.
The changes coming about from the 2003 Season on affect a number of areas, all in close interaction. It thus seems impossible to foresee whatever outcome and by-products these changes will ensue in the long run.
As the alleged reason for these changes has been a reinvigoration of Formula One racing, this seems likely to be achieved at least as a short-term result: the 2003 Season should draw more attention and interest than previous seasons, as there will plausibly be a good deal of interest and curiosity in verifying the practical results that will unfold from the decisions made in October 2002.
But how about the 2004 and subsequent Seasons?
What is your opinion?
|
 Grand Prix & Auto-Racing Image Gallery  Pictures + Posters:
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||
