.:: OrderGate - September 8th 2010 ::.

was a complete disgrace. to the sport. the problem is alonso is a sore loser, and a worthless piece of cr*p there is. yes he a good driver there's no doubt about it but dear me if he doesnt get his own way he throws his rattle out of his pram. same when he was at mccalren, because he cudnt get his car set up right he blamed hamilton, poor massa he had no option, his boss told him to do something he had to do it, the thing was alonso wasnt even faster than him, a couple laps before he was before couldnt catch massa, but at the time the order was given alonso wasnt fast enough. its ashame we have people like alonso who will take a win even when he didnt even earn it.

FIA SETS DATE FOR TEAM ORDERS HEARING

The FIA has set the date for the disciplinary hearing of the World Motor Sport Council to judge Ferrari's actions during the German Grand Prix.

The Italian squad was fined $100,000 for the illegal use of team orders during the Hockenheim event, where Felipe Massa handed the lead of the race to team-mate Fernando Alonso.

Ferrari broke article 39.1 of the sporting regulations, which state that "team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited."

Apart from the fine, Ferrari was summoned to the WMSC.

The governing body announced on Monday that the WMSC hearing will take place in Paris on 8 September.

SOURCE: Autosport

FEDERATION INTERNATIONALE DE L'AUTOMOBILE OFFICIAL PRESS RELEASE

On 25 July 2010, on the occasion of the Grand Prix of Germany counting towards the 2010 Formula One World Championship, the Stewards of the meeting, after hearing the persons concerned, noted an infringement by the Scuderia Ferrari of:

- Article 39.1 of the 2010 Sporting Regulations ("Team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited")
- and Article 151 c) of the International Sporting Code ("Any of the following offences (...) shall be deemed to be a breach of these rules (...) any fraudulent conduct or any act prejudicial to the interests of any competition or to the interests of motor sport generally").

In the light of the information in their possession, the Stewards decided to impose a fine of $100,000 on the Scuderia Ferrari and to forward the dossier to the FIA World Motor Sport Council.

On the basis of that decision and of the inquiry report, and following the receipt of a report sent by the Stewards to the FIA, the FIA President has decided, in conformity with the new rules of disciplinary procedure adopted at his initiative on 11 March 2010, to submit the case to the judging body of the World Motor Sport Council.

The disciplinary hearing of the World Council will be chaired by the FIA Deputy President for Sport and will take place in Paris on 8 September 2010.

FIA

SOURCE: FIA Official Website

The telemetry alone from Massa's car coming out of turn 6 is damning enough surely? half throttle for 300meters? hmmm

Plus they'll have all the radio chatter, They've got enough evidence in my eyes.

Now here's something of interest:

Todt, who is now the FIA president, will not be in the chair for the meeting with the deputy president Nick Craw taking the position.BBC Sport

The telemetry alone from Massa's car coming out of turn 6 is damning enough surely? half throttle for 300meters? hmmm

Plus they'll have all the radio chatter, They've got enough evidence in my eyes.

kipi19

His choice or team telling him to? They only suspicous thing was the asking to confirm the original message that Alonso was faster and sorry when Massa let Alonso through. Bad but not conclusive evidence that Massa was told in pure form "let Alonso pass you".

Plus to truly cover themselves, Massa after the race was telling everyone it was his decision to let Alonso through.

Nonetheless, the most powerful weapon the WMSC has is the fact Ferrari were found guilty. That's enough to warrant potential further punishments, but obviously they will take the neutral stance at first.

Problemm is, what if he had a problem with the car or he had to make an unexpected pit stop?

Massa would also have to wait for Webber to retire, so not even next season as Webber is under contract to Red Bull for then.

Garfield360UK

If he had a problem then crash the car to get on Ferrari's nerves.

There's got to be some sort of escape claus in Webbers contract...

But why should Webber leave Red Bull for Massa to drive for them?

These scenarios depend on people doing what they may or may not do, I still feel Massa did the right thing, the team is to blame and Alonso in my opinon anyway and pretending to not hear the radio just gives Massa problems.

But why should Webber leave Red Bull for Massa to drive for them?

These scenarios depend on people doing what they may or may not do, I still feel Massa did the right thing, the team is to blame and Alonso in my opinon anyway and pretending to not hear the radio just gives Massa problems.

Garfield360UK

I meant that there should be an escape clause for Webber incase he decides to retire.

Anyways, Massa did the right thing?

New radio communications have been broadcast to the public via Formula One's Race Edits on their website. These new audio clips seem to suggest even further that the "is faster than you" part of Smedley's already heard message was indeed the code for Felipe to move out the way, as per a team order. Here's the new clips for you:

Pretty close, he's pretty close, he's gonna go, you're gonna have to defend...Rob Smedley during legitimate battle

At this point, we hear Alonso's radio message stating "This is ridiculous".

ALONSO: "I am much quicker than Felipe"
STELLA: "We got your message, we got your message"Fernando Alonso and Andrea Stella

You need to pick up the pace because Fernando is fasterRob Smedley

It's at this point when the two radio communications we've already heard are done.

So what can I say? ...Congratulations to the team.Felipe Massa after the race

The two pieces in bold are the new pieces of evidence which seem to suggest even further that team orders were used. Whilst they appear in context that seem to be harmless, knowing what we do already, there is a possibility this was also coded messages that led to the swapping of positions. Just in this case, it was done a hell of a lot better.

At the point where Smedley tells Felipe he needs to pick up the pace, he started slowing so Alonso was catching him even quicker.

Obviously nothing definitive can come out of this, but there is that assumption, which could prove true. This extra evidence won't help Ferrari however.

New radio communications have been broadcast to the public via Formula One's Race Edits on their website. These new audio clips seem to suggest even further that the "is faster than you" part of Smedley's already heard message was indeed the code for Felipe to move out the way, as per a team order. Here's the new clips for you:

[QUOTE="Rob Smedley during legitimate battle"]Pretty close, he's pretty close, he's gonna go, you're gonna have to defend...Redders1989

At this point, we hear Alonso's radio message stating "This is ridiculous".

ALONSO: "I am much quicker than Felipe"
STELLA: "We got your message, we got your message"Fernando Alonso and Andrea Stella

You need to pick up the pace because Fernando is fasterRob Smedley

It's at this point when the two radio communications we've already heard are done.

So what can I say? ...Congratulations to the team.Felipe Massa after the race

The two pieces in bold are the new pieces of evidence which seem to suggest even further that team orders were used. Whilst they appear in context that seem to be harmless, knowing what we do already, there is a possibility this was also coded messages that led to the swapping of positions. Just in this case, it was done a hell of a lot better.

At the point where Smedley tells Felipe he needs to pick up the pace, he started slowing so Alonso was catching him even quicker.

Obviously nothing definitive can come out of this, but there is that assumption, which could prove true. This extra evidence won't help Ferrari however.

 Thats great!

But I'm always right...

New radio communications have been broadcast to the public via Formula One's Race Edits on their website. These new audio clips seem to suggest even further that the "is faster than you" part of Smedley's already heard message was indeed the code for Felipe to move out the way, as per a team order. Here's the new clips for you:

[QUOTE="Rob Smedley during legitimate battle"]Pretty close, he's pretty close, he's gonna go, you're gonna have to defend...Redders1989

At this point, we hear Alonso's radio message stating "This is ridiculous".

ALONSO: "I am much quicker than Felipe"
STELLA: "We got your message, we got your message"Fernando Alonso and Andrea Stella

You need to pick up the pace because Fernando is fasterRob Smedley

It's at this point when the two radio communications we've already heard are done.

So what can I say? ...Congratulations to the team.Felipe Massa after the race

The two pieces in bold are the new pieces of evidence which seem to suggest even further that team orders were used. Whilst they appear in context that seem to be harmless, knowing what we do already, there is a possibility this was also coded messages that led to the swapping of positions. Just in this case, it was done a hell of a lot better.

At the point where Smedley tells Felipe he needs to pick up the pace, he started slowing so Alonso was catching him even quicker.

Obviously nothing definitive can come out of this, but there is that assumption, which could prove true. This extra evidence won't help Ferrari however.

I feel that evidence is circumstancial. The "we got your message" may be something teams usually do? I mean say a driver asks for a pit stop the team may respons "we got your message, box this lap" or whatever. Smedly was telling Alonso to pick it up as Alonso is catching and they needed him to get a move on as Alonso was catching which could mean Vettel catching.

This case really depends on what the normal practice is for teams communicating, whether they confirm when a message is recieved or whatever. The Alonso/Stella quote could be pretty condeming if Ferrari can be proven to not use that language before, such as if Alonsos radio was not very clear they may have said that so he didnt need to keep repeating it incase Ferrari could not hear what he was saying.

Thats what I think anyway, it will be interesting to see how this plays out. There are two sides to every coin and I think this is one of those situations where the FIA have to prove Ferrari have been not playing fair, rather than Ferrari having to prove they did not.

I dont think that evidence will hold up in a court of law, the FIA will have to have something more than that and I dont doubt they will as they would surely not fine the team without evidence of foul play.

If they have gone into this haphazardly then they have blown their chance with this rule I think, teams can just sugar coat whatever they want and hide what really happens.

I dont think that evidence will hold up in a court of law, the FIA will have to have something more than that and I dont doubt they will as they would surely not fine the team without evidence of foul play.

If they have gone into this haphazardly then they have blown their chance with this rule I think, teams can just sugar coat whatever they want and hide what really happens.

Garfield360UK

What the FiA need is an insider at every team.

Maybe, teams should just follow the rules and there would be no need for insiders or whatever. Unfortunatly thats how the world and society works now.Garfield360UK

Or maybe, Yuji Ide should be handed the championship and be given "Best Driver In The World 2010"...

I dont understand what you are implying there I am affraid.Garfield360UK

You could say maybe this or maybe that, but it's never gonna happen.

True, but should the FIA sink to that level?Garfield360UK

The other teams have, so the only way to beat them is to also sink to that level.

Fair enough, I disagree but I will agree that something needs to be done if they are to continue using this rule. The outcome of this council will probably decide how much importance is put on this in the future.Garfield360UK

There is also no point in scrapping the rules as teams will then freely use team orders and we will see manipulated races all the time.

There is also no point in scrapping the rules as teams will then freely use team orders and we will see manipulated races all the time. dabest2500

dabest sums up my feelings over this whole debate with one simple sentence. This is why I don't want the rule scrapped, and this is why I'd like to see that, somehow, this rule can finally be loophole-free. The only problem is, it's so difficult to word it in a way which would stop the loopholes altogether.

[QUOTE="dabest2500"]There is also no point in scrapping the rules as teams will then freely use team orders and we will see manipulated races all the time. Redders1989

dabest sums up my feelings over this whole debate with one simple sentence. This is why I don't want the rule scrapped, and this is why I'd like to see that, somehow, this rule can finally be loophole-free. The only problem is, it's so difficult to word it in a way which would stop the loopholes altogether.

I know what would stop ALL manipilated races altogether!

Ban Formula One!!!!

Just kidding :P

I dont know, before the rule did we see races change that dramatically through team orders? If the rule has only come in around 2002 what about the 50 years of Formula One that preceeded it?Garfield360UK

55 actually.

Back then, teams didn't really see the need for team orders with teams focusing a great deal on safety.

There were a few team orders though.

Its the cash, teams are chasing far more money now than they were back maybe 20 years ago even. Teams still took risks such as the Tyrell designs and the Brabham design (I think it was Jack Brabham who designed a chasis which is now standard in cars and racing formula cars compared to the shell design of the Ferrari cars).

Should teams be punished for trying to maximise profit they obtain and also survival as surely that is the most important thing? If there is no teams driving then who cares about team orders?

Its the cash, teams are chasing far more money now than they were back maybe 20 years ago even. Teams still took risks such as the Tyrell designs and the Brabham design (I think it was Jack Brabham who designed a chasis which is now standard in cars and racing formula cars compared to the shell design of the Ferrari cars).

Should teams be punished for trying to maximise profit they obtain and also survival as surely that is the most important thing? If there is no teams driving then who cares about team orders?

Garfield360UK

Should drivers be punished for trying to maximise their profits, statistics, CV and confidence?

Which is more important, the driver or the team?Garfield360UK

Both, so both need to be kept happy.

Ferrari got a 1-2 so swapping Alonso and Massa won't make a difference on the teams profits as they will still get first place and second place winnings.

I'm glad that Massa got revenge by beating Alonso in go-karting. Alonso got his just desserts too. He got beaten by an 11-year old.

LAUDA SLAMS FERRARI TACTICS

Former world champion Niki Lauda has once again hit out at Ferrari's use of team orders at the German Grand Prix - claiming its actions 'mocked' Formula 1's fans and deserve punishing.

With Ferrari scheduled to face a hearing of the FIA's World Motor Sport Council next month for ordering Felipe Massa to sacrifice the lead to Fernando Alonso, the matter is still a major talking point in F1.

Lauda, who won two of his three world titles for Ferrari, says he remains unhappy about the tactics of the Maranello team - which he says are in complete contrast to the way championship leaders Red Bull Racing have gone about competing.

"You have two models of how to race in Formula 1 as a team," Lauda said in an interview with the official Formula 1 website.

"If you approach it politically then you are in the Ferrari mould. Or you try to give both your drivers equal opportunities and the fans an exciting sport, as Red Bull are doing in letting their drivers compete with each other.

"That is what makes this sport a crowd puller because they see the best guys in the best cars racing each other with a 'may the best man win' philosophy - and not mocking the fans with a collusive result. But I am aware that this is a topic where opinions differ."

Speaking more specifically about the German GP, Lauda said: "What they did at Hockenheim was against all rules. Either the rules are changed or everybody observes them.

"What they've done is wrong and they got an immediate punishment - and they will get a pasting from the [FIA] World [Motor Sport] Council, that is for sure."

SOURCE: Autosport

In regards to RBR being fair. Why did Horner take WEB's wing off him (Silverstone)?

VET damaged his wing but they should have just given him an old one.

I think Lauda's point was more towards the incident in Turkey, where the two collided, when RBR could've just told Webber to move over for Vettel.

Otherwise, I do agree. I wasn't too keen on the RBR British GP decision, but hey, Webber still won and Vettel was down in the lower regions of the points, so something wanted Webber to stand up for the number two drivers.

I think Lauda's point was more towards the incident in Turkey, where the two collided, when RBR could've just told Webber to move over for Vettel.

Otherwise, I do agree. I wasn't too keen on the RBR British GP decision, but hey, Webber still won and Vettel was down in the lower regions of the points, so something wanted Webber to stand up for the number two drivers.

Redders1989

Yep, we should have a WEB vs. BAR championship, those two are oldc for F1 drivers and know that their time to challenge for the championship is running out.

FERRARI HITS BACK AT LAUDA

Ferrari has hit back at Niki Lauda's criticisms of its use of team orders at the German Grand Prix - claiming the Austrian has 'missed out on a fine opportunity to keep his mouth shut.'

In a column published on its official website on Friday, titled the 'Horse Whisperer', Ferrari does not hold back in venting its frustrations at Lauda's recent outspoken remarks saying the team had 'mocked' fans in ordering Felipe Massa to sacrifice victory in Germany.

The Horse Whisperer column stated: "After events in Hockenheim, a wave of hypocrisy swept through the paddock, with so many pundits, young and old, keen to have their say: some were promptly brought back into line by his master's voice, while others continue to pronounce sentence willy-nilly.

"The latest missive comes from Austria, from a person, who having hung up his helmet, has never missed out on a chance to dispense opinions left and right, even if, on more than one occasion, he has had to indulge in some verbal acrobatics to reposition himself in line with the prevailing wind.

"This time, good old Niki has missed out on a fine opportunity to keep his mouth shut, given that, when he was a Scuderia driver, the supposed Ferrari driver management policy suited him perfectly... That aside, where was all his moral fury when, over the past years, so many have been guilty of more or less overt hypocritical actions?"

Reacting to Lauda's suggestions that the FIA should give the Maranello team a 'pasting' for what it did, the Ferrari column states that in such a situation it is best simply to trust the governing body will do the right thing.

"As for any predictions regarding a possible decision from the FIA World Council on 8 September, time will tell: in this sort of situation, the best policy is to respect and to trust in the highest level of the sport's governing body," it said.

The unidentified 'Horse Whisperer' caused a stir earlier this season when it blasted the presence of the new teams in F1 - and claimed that the FIA was engaged in a 'holy war' against manufacturer teams.

SOURCE: Autosport

ED: Stay cIassy Ferrari.

MOSLEY: FERRARI MUST BE PUNISHED

Former FIA president Max Mosley believes that Formula 1's ban on team orders must remain, and that Ferrari should lose points for imposing them at the German Grand Prix.

With Ferrari due to face a hearing of the FIA's World Motor Sport Council next month to answer charges that it breached the sport's regulations by ordering Felipe Massa to move aside for Fernando Alonso, Mosley believes action has to be taken.

Speaking to German newspaper Welt Am Sonntag, Mosley said that for the sake of fans it was important the team orders ban remained.

"Most teams are in favour of the ban being lifted," said Mosley. "But if one wants to fulfil the needs of the audience, then one must maintain the ban. In the event that it is brought into play by a team, we have to impose a severe punishment."

Regarding the Ferrari matter, Mosley believes that further action should be taken against Ferrari beyond the $100,000 (USD) fine imposed at Hockenheim.

"Both cars and both drivers should lose the points they achieved in the German Grand Prix," he said. "I will not make any recommendation, but on the facts at the moment there should have been some sporting sanction and not only a fine."

SOURCE: Autosport

Ferrari would be prepared to launch civil action against the FIA if the team is stripped of its points earned at the German Grand Prix when the World Motor Sport Council hears the case next month, according to Italian newspaper La Gazzetta dello Sport.BBC Gossip Column

It seems like every season there is always some sort of political issue in Formula 1 :lol:

They should make Ferrari pay compensation to all the fans who saw a manipulated race. I had a fantastic time that race weekend and was excited I was going to see Massa win (not an Alonso fan) :lol: until they told Massa to let Alonso pass :x

SOURCE: Autosport

LAUDA CLARIFIES TEAM ORDER STANCE

Niki Lauda has moved to clarify his stance on team orders in Formula 1 following a recent high-profile clash with Ferrari over what it did at the German Grand Prix.

The former world champion told the official Formula 1 website that he expected Ferrari to get a 'pasting' by the FIA because of the way it had insulted the intelligence of fans by ordering Felipe Massa to sacrifice the lead of the Hockenheim race to Fernando Alonso

Lauda's comments prompted a furious response from Ferrari, which said the Austrian had missed an opportunity to keep quiet.

In the wake of that public war of words, Lauda has moved to clarify his views on the matter - and denied having made his original comments.

"I've never said that stuff," Lauda was quoted as saying by Corriere della Sera. "On television I only said that team orders are not good for F1 and for the spectacle, and that a team like Red Bull, by leaving Webber and Vettel free to fight, is doing the right thing. Please write that I didn't do any interview.

"I'd authorize [team orders], but only from the moment that one of the two drivers is out of the title race."

Ferrari welcomed Lauda's comments with its official website, through the 'Horse Whisperer' columnist, stating: "I am very pleased Niki has denied making these statements: it shows that fresh air is really good for you!"

SOURCE: Autosport

Ferrari's drivers must be present in person or via video link at the forthcoming World Motor Sport Council hearing, which will hear evidence about how the pair allegedly followed team orders to swap places at July's German Grand Prix.BBC Gossip Column

FERRARI WAITS ON TEAM ORDERS HEARING

Ferrari will find out in Paris on Wednesday afternoon whether it is to face further sanctions over the German Grand Prix team orders controversy.

Stefano Domenicali, the Ferrari team principal, is the only senior figure from the Maranello outfit set to travel to the FIA World Sport Council hearing - where he and his lawyer's will defend themselves against claims that they used illegal team orders at Hockenheim - and subsequently brought the sport into disrepute.

Although race drivers Fernando Alonso and Felipe Massa will not be present in Paris, they are expected to be made available via telephone or video steam to the members of the WMSC should their evidence be needed.

The case hinges on the events in the German Grand Prix when Massa sacrificed his lead to Alonso - shortly after being told over the radio by race engineer Rob Smedley that his team-mate was 'faster' than him.

It was Smedley's apology to Massa immediately after he moved aside for Alonso, plus the clear unhappiness from the Brazilian driver after the race, which pointed to the fact that Massa had been ordered to move aside - rather than had chosen to do so with his own free will.

Sources suggest that part of Ferrari's defence will hinge on the fact that no clear order was given for Massa to give up his lead - so therefore no actual breach of the regulations could have taken place.

It was the same stance that Ferrari adopted immediately after the German GP when Domenicali met the press to explain his team's actions that day.

"We gave an information to Felipe about what was the situation," Domenicali said in his regular Sunday night media briefing. "Because we have already seen in the past that certain situations could not give the best result to the team.

"That was the information we wanted to give and we leave the drivers to understand and take notice of it in order to make sure the team, in terms of the global results, gets the best."

The message from Ferrari is likely to be clear: that there is a big difference between information being given to a driver and a straight order being handed down.

Domenicali also suggested that Sunday night in Hockenheim that Smedley's apology to Massa that day was not for having to move aside for Alonso, but because his car was not quick enough.

"It was not an apology this way...You have to consider the fact, and you can check with his communication on the radio several times in the past, that Rob Smedley is correctly in a very good conjunction with Felipe," added Domenicali.

"This is the key of their success. He gave the information to Felipe and he saw what happened and he was not happy about the situation of the car that was not so fast - and sorry - it was slower than the other one."

Despite remarks from former FIA president Max Mosley in recent weeks suggesting that Ferrari should be punished further for what happened, there has been no clear indication coming out of FIA channels about what the WMSC will do.

Some suggestions have pointed towards a harsh punishment for Ferrari - which will include both drivers and team losing their points from the German Grand Prix. Should that happen, then it is likely the matter will head for the law courts.

Other sources suggest that the FIA will let Ferrari off completely - claiming that what they did in Germany was merely team 'strategy' rather than team 'orders'. The governing body could then issue a clarification on what the difference between the two is - and could even repeal the team orders ban on the grounds it is unenforceable.

As well as finding out what the FIA will do to Ferrari, the hearing will also provide some insight into the workings of the governing body on such controversial matters under new president Jean Todt.

Unlike his predecessor, Todt has been keen to keep himself out of the spotlight since he took over in the top position at the end of the last year.

And in contrast to recent years, when Mosley actively led WMSC disciplinary actions, current FIA president Jean Todt will not take a formal role in the disciplinary hearing and sources suggest may not even attend the hearing.

Instead, the hearing will be chaired by Graham Stoker, the FIA Deputy President for Sport - who is renowned as an expert in sport law.

Should the FIA deem that Ferrari be punished beyond the $100,000 (USD) fine handed down at Hockenheim, then a range of options are open to it.

This could be a suspended ban, an increased fine, a loss of points, exclusion from the race - or even expulsion from the world championship.

The FIA hearing is scheduled to start at 3pm local time in Paris, with a verdict due later in the afternoon.

The WMSC is meeting beforehand in the morning for a rescheduled meeting to discuss more regular matters - which could include the prospects for a new team in F1 in 2011, next year's calendars and future regulations.

SOURCE: Autosport