Alonso title could devalue F1, says Mosley (Championship spoilers within)

[Akmuq]

Oh, get a room you two.

 

[The Outlaw]

Re-read everything you just posted - and then try telling me that you're not arrogant, condescending and contemptuous.

Not really, as everything I said was the truth. And regardless, I have good reason to when it is you I am speaking to (who's viewpoints and never ending insecurity and need to put Ferrari down can be considering "arrogant, condescending and contemptuous" in itself...but of course, you don't see that because you are holier than thou).

Funny how you never see anything for what it is (your completely ludicrous and biased train of thought which is only ever going to draw criticism - yet you act as if it is some surprise). Maybe getting all this flak from me is a good thing for the forum, as it will tone done your useless and jaded, anti - Ferrari banter: "If they win the WDC they will have bought the title for $100,000 wah, wah, wah" despite the fact that the team you like (Mclaren) used team orders in 08 to win the title (and in the past as well) w/o penalty, which you so quickly have forogotten and have yet to acknowledge (among their many other wrong doings in the past years). "They need to struggle 4 a couple of years and go back to their roots", "they ought to be kicked out of the sport", "If a World Champion is made up of the best driver in the best team, then the best driver part implies that he is better than everyone else in the field. And if he (Alonso) is indeed the best driver, then he should be able to a) find a way past his team mate, even if they are in identical cars or b) win the championship without the team issuing orders." - despite the fact that the best driver on the grid isn't always crowned WDC at the end of the year, which you failed to acknowledge.

I could go on and on quoting your useless banter you use against Ferrari, but I won't bother with anymore.

 

[Pupik]

I just realized anyone can vote for both options; can't I can't edit that, for some reason.

 

[Tornado]

I'm gonna step in here:

Not really, as everything I said was the truth.

Assuming it is the truth, that doesn't preclude it being presented in an arrogant, condescending and contemptuous way.
For example:

Maybe getting all this flak from me is a good thing for the forum, as it will tone done your useless and jaded, anti - Ferrari banter:

That doesn't sound to me like "I'm willing to debate this matter with you as an equal."

Take from that what you will.

 

[The Outlaw]

I'm gonna step in here:

Assuming it is the truth, that doesn't preclude it being presented in an arrogant, condescending and contemptuous way..

In the case of interludes - When you constantly provide completely arrogant, biased, one-side and jaded statements on the forum to feed your sentiment against Ferrari, don't be surprised when someone with a grounded and impartial perspective (the fact that I'm a Ferrari fan plays no part in whether I'm right or wrong here) comes at you in a condescending and contemptuous matter to unravel your ridiculous agenda. If you want to be so bold with your statements and anti-Ferrari agenda (like interludes), then you really shouldn't be surprised or so sensitive when someone with a voice of reason attempts to put your arrogance (to reality) in check with facts and evidence which all you do is ignore.

For example:

That doesn't sound to me like "I'm willing to debate this matter with you as an equal.".

Of course he is not an equal when it comes to the discussion we are having. As he very well knows his opinion is completely biased, prejudicial, jaded and most importantly filled with a negative agenda - which is only asking for people to respond in a brash manner.

 

[the Interceptor]

I don't know what past you and interludes have, but reading this thread only, I have to agree with Toronado there.

Interludes brought his argument forward in a perfectly civil manner. You replied to it with claiming that it probably was his idea (which it wasn't), that it is laughable anyway and implied that he only posted it because he is biased "beyond belief" against Ferrari.

 

[The Outlaw]

Ok, when it comes down to it - it's a case of interlude's completely arrogant, biased, one-sided, jaded statements (to fulfill his negative anti-Ferrari agenda) which only provoke anger vs my contemptuous and condescending (which I admit I'm a bit guilty of) attitude, where I back my condescending argument up with facts, evidence and reason as to why his antics and statements are completely ridiculous with only one goal in mind.

If you want to stand on the side of his ludicrous agenda (because you are sensitive to my attitude), that is fine.

Just shows you what most people on this forum are about I guess

I don't know what past you and interludes have, but reading this thread only, I have to agree with Toronado there.

Interludes brought his argument forward in a perfectly civil manner. You replied to it with claiming that it probably was his idea (which it wasn't), that it is laughable anyway and implied that he only posted it because he is biased "beyond belief" against Ferrari.

You obviously haven't followed interludes past post (from other threads) too closely, so IMO you are not quite as informed as you could be. Not trying to start an argument here - just saying you would see why I said some of those things based off his prior post (many of them) intended to take a stab at Ferrari while quite blatantly ignoring the wrong doings of other teams in very recent years. Had that been a post from just about anyone other member than interludes (who doesn't have such a negative agenda) I most definitely would not have responded in such a condesending manner.

 

[the Interceptor]

I don't want to take either side, I'm just judging what I see. And I don't see the things you accuse interludes of. If you could point them out, I would be grateful.

And if his arguments are one-sided and thus false, you are free to prove him wrong. But that is something that should be done by bringing facts to the table, and not by accusing him of deliberately rigging the topic.

 

[The Outlaw]

I don't want to take either side, I'm just judging what I see. And I don't see the things you accuse interludes of. If you could point them out, I would be grateful..

Maybe later - I'm about to head off to work.

And if his arguments are one-sided and thus false, you are free to prove him wrong. But that is something that should be done by bringing facts to the table, and not by accusing him of deliberately rigging the topic.

Actually I brought evidence (I suggested watching that period of the race over again and seeing that the time frame wasn't one bit realistic, as well as posting that latest article from Mercedes GP which is quite telling) to support why the completley assumption based theory he brought up was rubbish, but he didn't acknowledge my points (as he usually does) or further analyze the theory, simply because he got butt hurt when I called the theory laughable and something he made up (which wouldn't be suprised given his agenda to continually try and put Ferrari in bad light) as it was another blatant attempt (to me) to further put Ferrari in bad light with a complete lack of evidence.

 

[the Interceptor]

Actually I brought evidence (I suggested watching that period of the race over again and seeing that the time frame wasn't one bit realistic, as well as posting that latest article from Mercedes GP which is quite telling) to support why the theory he brought up was rubbish, but he didn't acknowledge it as he usually does, simply because he got butt hurt when I called the theory laughable and something he made up (which wouldn't be suprised given his agenda to continually try and put Ferrari in bad light) as it was another blatant attempt (to me) to further put Ferrari in bad light.

I think this already bears the problem. You see what interludes posts in a very different light that other people, because you, for some reason, expect him to do everything to make Ferrari and their actions look evil. That makes you act very agressively towards him and the things he post, which in turn makes him defend himself and his actions.

The article probably is rubbish. Max Mosleys statement probably is rubbish. But after all, everyone is entitled to post and comment such things as long as it happens in a proper fashion. And if you look at it, interludes said that the contents of said article are "a suggestion" and furthermore implied that it would be serious if it were true. What he said was careful and completely based on the assumption that the article might be correct, but might also be wrong.

Either way, given I find the time, I will look at the race footage again to see whether it can be true at all.

 

[The Outlaw]

I think this already bears the problem. You see what interludes posts in a very different light that other people, because you, for some reason, expect him to do everything to make Ferrari and their actions look evil. That makes you act very agressively towards him and the things he post, which in turn makes him defend himself and his actions..

This is pretty close to the case. I see the true intentions of some his post for what they are worth, as I'm aware of his agenda, and the many countless negative things he's said and wished upon Ferrari in the past. In your case, unfortunately doesn't sound as if you are aware of such because you haven't followed his past post/statements as closely as I have.

 

[the Interceptor]

I haven't in fact, and I understand that a "troubled" past can shed a completely different light on such a discussion.

 

[The Outlaw]

I think this already bears the problem. You see what interludes posts in a very different light that other people, because you, for some reason, expect him to do everything to make Ferrari and their actions look evil. That makes you act very agressively towards him and the things he post, which in turn makes him defend himself and his actions.

The article probably is rubbish. Max Mosleys statement probably is rubbish. But after all, everyone is entitled to post and comment such things as long as it happens in a proper fashion. And if you look at it, interludes said that the contents of said article are "a suggestion" and furthermore implied that it would be serious if it were true. What he said was careful and completely based on the assumption that the article might be correct, but might also be wrong..

This is pretty close to being the case. I see the true intentions of some his post for what they are worth, as I'm aware of his agenda (of course being the first to find and post such an article), and the many countless negative things he's said (which are completely biased and unadmitting to the truth) and wished upon Ferrari in the past. In your case, it unfortunately doesn't sound as if you are aware of such because you haven't followed his past post/statements as closely as I have.

Either way, given I find the time, I will look at the race footage again to see whether it can be true at all.

👍 Good man - for once someone stands up. Specifically see how much time the team had to give Massa a message (to have any affect) on top of the fact that when he comes into the picture he is definitely on the pace with Michael miles back. Also take into account Mercedes GP statements as they were the car behind Massa.

 

[the Interceptor]

I want to be fair to everyone, and watching that bit of footage and figuring out what happened can't be that difficult.

... and still, Toronado's point stands in the way that you are needlessly agressive towards interludes. If he's factually wrong, just prove him otherwise, but please, do so in a civilised manner.

 

[Akira AC]

Unfortunatly I have to say that The Outlaw's expressions are not making any good for this thread,since this topic must be discuss from an impartial and civilized manner.

I also complete agree with toronado,some fact are facts and no Anti-Ferrari opinions,I believe that the creator of this thread wanted to discuss how mosley could be right or could be wrong,not hunting users thread,maybe is just me but yur opinions or replies are starting to look a bit out of the AUP.

Remember that,some mods already point this out and this is worthy of discussion,not bashing.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Not really, as everything I said was the truth.

Yeah, that totally jsutifies your attitude. I'm liking you less and less. Don't bother replying to this - I'll only ignore it.

Do we have an ignore function around here?

 

[albteman015]

May I ask why it is so important for you to prove each other wrong? Outlaw you are taking this a bit to seriously. You mentioned that interludes is a Mclaren fan. This argument should have ended there. You as a Ferrari fan are not going to convince a Mclaren fan that the scuderia are not some dirty cheating bastards. That is just how rivalry works. It it like that in all forms of sports.

Inteludes. Considering what max mosley has done in the past, I don't value his opinion. What Alonso did in Germany happens often in all forms of motorsport. Banning it a while back only hid it from the fans. As long as there will be two car teams there will be a driver who has to sacrifice for the other. Mclaren have done it too and very recently. On the same track and in the same area even. They just made it look better then Ferrari.



You just can't pass someone in the hairpin if you are 3 carlengths away while you are approaching it. Especially if you are in the same car.

But if you don't want to believe it, you don't have to.

 

[Akira AC]

May I ask why it is so important for you to prove each other wrong? Outlaw you are taking this a bit to seriously. You mentioned that interludes is a Mclaren fan. This argument should have ended there. You as a Ferrari fan are not going to convince a Mclaren fan that the scuderia are not some dirty cheating bastards. That is just how rivalry works. It it like that in all forms of sports.

Inteludes. Considering what max mosley has done in the past, I don't value his opinion. What Alonso did in Germany happens often in all forms of motorsport. Banning it a while back only hid it from the fans. As long as there will be two car teams there will be a driver who has to sacrifice for the other. Mclaren have done it too and very recently. On the same track and in the same area even. They just made it look better then Ferrari.

You just can't pass someone in the hairpin if you are 3 carlengths away while you are approaching it. Especially if you are in the same car.

But if you don't want to believe it, you don't have to.

Geez....

-"Fernando is faster than you"(Radio chat)
-"I'm sorry Felipe"(Radio chat)

I'm sorry but since obvious is obvious defending Ferrari actions will not do any good to the sport,and I feel I said this before but Red Bull did not make their drivers back up at the time of fighting positions,no does McLaren,this is something that should be address because is not what people think about it,is how rules apply to the sport,one thing is make an strategy to give the team some advantage and another is make a driver lost its position on purpose.

I refer to this because two opponents on the track should be that opponents,and who wins is the best driver or the one with the best strategy,not the one with the best championship results and the one who better benefits the team.

I know that F1 fans independently will agree on this,the sport gets spoiled and is something that could be worthy of watch.

In the way that I see this is important to get the right image of the sport and try to avoid these sort of problems and scandals that leave a bad image of the sport,as well the penalty that Ferrari received by the FIA was should be call "minimal",a 100.000 dollar fine for this sort of abuse shows how the FIA could be corrupted.

Is an interesting topic that should be address and should be analysed but no fanboynaized(Well I create that word,sort of ,but you'll get my point).

 

[Anes]

What Ferrari did isn't rare. It happens all the time in motosport.

/thread

 

[prisonermonkeys]

You just can't pass someone in the hairpin if you are 3 carlengths away while you are approaching it. Especially if you are in the same car.

But if you don't want to believe it, you don't have to.

I choose not to believe it because it's clearly been created by a Ferrari fan to justify Ferrari doing it in the first place.

And while Max Mosley may not have been the most popular person in the history of the sport, that doesn't mean he can't talk sense on occasion. I know a few people who would argue the point on principle if he came out tomorrow and said "the sky is blue". I think what he says here has some truth: Ferrari manipulated the outcome of a race to suit Alonso. That's the entire point of team orders. But I also think that if Alonso wins by seven points or less, it will damage Formula 1's credibility. Fans don't watch the races to see which team can swap their drivers around to favour one over the other. We watch the races to see racing. And what Ferrari did in Hockenheim was not racing. F1 Fanatic recently ran a story grading the past fifty races based on the fans voting for each after the race. The likes of Canada 2010 and Brazil 2008 were far and away the favourites; Germany 2010 was more unpopular than the three races at Valencia combined. Clive James put it best after Austria 2002, when he said there was no longer a point in watching the races if teams are going to manipulate the outcome like that.

Unfortunately, the FIA erred in not prosecuting them. I can understand why they did it because of a "lack of evidence" (they obviously couldn't prove Rob Smedley's message to Massa meant he had to move over), but with the new leadership of the FIA, prosecuting Ferrari would have set a precedent for everyone else. At the very least, they should have stripped Alonso of those seven extra points he got for a win. But Ferrari got away with a $100,000 fine and a promise to review the rule. Luca and Domenicalli were very smug coming out of the hearing, and everybody knows that if we have another Brazil 2008 on our hands this year and Ferrari can win the championship through team orders on the final lap (ie by commanded a Ferrari-powered Sauber move over for Alonso, giving him the points he needs to win the World Championship), then they will.

 

[albteman015]

What Ferrari did isn't rare. It happens all the time in motosport.

/thread

This^. If you have not realized that, you have not been watching long enough. What happened in Germany was wrong especially coming from a guy that does not like Alonso.(Before the season started I said to a friend of mine that he is going to do something which is going to cause a lot of controversy. Was I Right?) If the roles were switched between Alonso and Massa, Fernando would be the one pulling over. The truth is that the drivers are part of the team and the head of that team tells them what to do. To any team in F1 (or any other motorsport for that matter) winning is more important then being fair. They don't care which driver takes the title as long as the name Ferrari is up there in the winner's circle. Same thing goes for Mclaren, red bull, williams, mercedes, lotus, alfa romeo, and any other team that has ever participated in racing. I never once said that it was the right thing to do. All I said was that it has always happened. Why is everyone calling foul now and not 20 or 30 years ago?

Unfortunately, the FIA erred in not prosecuting them. I can understand why they did it because of a "lack of evidence" (they obviously couldn't prove Rob Smedley's message to Massa meant he had to move over), but with the new leadership of the FIA, prosecuting Ferrari would have set a precedent for everyone else. At the very least, they should have stripped Alonso of those seven extra points he got for a win. But Ferrari got away with a $100,000 fine and a promise to review the rule. Luca and Domenicalli were very smug coming out of the hearing, and everybody knows that if we have another Brazil 2008 on our hands this year and Ferrari can win the championship through team orders on the final lap (ie by commanded a Ferrari-powered Sauber move over for Alonso, giving him the points he needs to win the World Championship), then they will.

That and the fact the the head of FIA now is the same guy that made the call for team orders in 2002. Jean Todt, team principle for ferrari from 1993 to 2007 if my numbers are correct. He is not going to say something he was guilty of in 2002 is wrong. And I am pretty sure Ferrari are not allowed to tell other teams what to do though. Where did you come up with that idea?



You know what? Forget everything I just said and don't respond to my last comments. What Ferrari did in germany was messed up and I understand why people don't like it. What ticks me off though is the EVERY time Ferrari does something wrong, everyone makes a big deal about it. Other teams, this year even, have created plenty of controversy but people seem to forget after two races. Somehow this is still going on. The real reason Ferrari don't get penalized so heavily is simple. If you listened to the speed commentary for Korea, Bob Varsha or however you spell his name said this. "No matter where you go there is always someone waving a Ferrari flag around." In the end this is the team with the largest fanbase and it would make even more people unhappy if ferrari got heavily penalized in that race. I am done with this topic. This has been one of the best years of Formula one I have seen and whoever wins has earned it in my eyes.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

That and the fact the the head of FIA now is the same guy that made the call for team orders in 2002. Jean Todt, team principle for ferrari from 1993 to 2007 if my numbers are correct. He is not going to say something he was guilty of in 2002 is wrong.

Actually, while Jean Todt attended the meeting, he wasn't actually the one who passed the verdict. That responsibility fell to the wider WMSC. Also, Todt seems to have had some kind of falling-out with Ferrari in the past, which is why he left the team. Possibly. There's not much information out there, but I've heard Todt's relationship with Ferrari is not what it once was.

And I am pretty sure Ferrari are not allowed to tell other teams what to do though. Where did you come up with that idea?

In 2006, Norberto Fontana claimed he and Sauber had been approached at the 1997 European Grand Prix by Ferrari and told that if they wanted to keep their Ferrari engine deal, they had to impede Jacques Villeneuve if they were in a position to do so. Both Sauber and Ferrari deny it, but Fontana was spotted blocking Villeneuve at one point.

Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me too much if Ferrari ordered Sauber to let Alonso through to pick up the points he needed to win the World Championship. They couldn't do it to Toro Rosso, because Toro Rosso owes allegiance Red Bull first and foremost. I'm not saying it because they pulled that crap on us at Hockenheim, but because of their championship position. 2009 was their worst season in almost 20 years, and they finished 4th in the championship. Ferrari have always (at least assumed they will) be one of the top two teams fighting for a championship. If Red Bull and McLaren out-score Ferrari in the WCC standings, thus forcing Ferrari to carry the 5 and the 6 in 2011 (not as bad as the 7 and 8, but not as good as 1 and 2 or 3 and 4), I wouldn't be suprised if they tried something to get a better result and spare themselves the "humiliation" of only finishing third.

 

[albteman015]

Actually, while Jean Todt attended the meeting, he wasn't actually the one who passed the verdict. That responsibility fell to the wider WMSC. Also, Todt seems to have had some kind of falling-out with Ferrari in the past, which is why he left the team. Possibly. There's not much information out there, but I've heard Todt's relationship with Ferrari is not what it once was.


In 2006, Norberto Fontana claimed he and Sauber had been approached at the 1997 European Grand Prix by Ferrari and told that if they wanted to keep their Ferrari engine deal, they had to impede Jacques Villeneuve if they were in a position to do so. Both Sauber and Ferrari deny it, but Fontana was spotted blocking Villeneuve at one point.

Honestly, it wouldn't surprise me too much if Ferrari ordered Sauber to let Alonso through to pick up the points he needed to win the World Championship. They couldn't do it to Toro Rosso, because Toro Rosso owes allegiance Red Bull first and foremost. I'm not saying it because they pulled that crap on us at Hockenheim, but because of their championship position. 2009 was their worst season in almost 20 years, and they finished 4th in the championship. Ferrari have always (at least assumed they will) be one of the top two teams fighting for a championship. If Red Bull and McLaren out-score Ferrari in the WCC standings, thus forcing Ferrari to carry the 5 and the 6 in 2011 (not as bad as the 7 and 8, but not as good as 1 and 2 or 3 and 4), I wouldn't be suprised if they tried something to get a better result and spare themselves the "humiliation" of only finishing third.

Im pretty sure sauber won't qualify near ferrari anyway and I don't think kobayashi is the type of person to let anyone through. What is going to happen to sauber if they don't? Lose an engine deal? Considering how bad their Ferrari engines have been I would not be surprised if they decided not to use them for next season. What happened in 97' does not relate to the team today. Different people run the team now ,why do you assume that they would do something like that?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

1) Who says anything about qualifying near each other? A wet race or a mistake could have things up.
2) I never assumed they'd do it. I said it wouldn't surprise me if they did.
3) Judging by some of Luca's comments this year, a regime change at Ferrari probably hasn't hasn't made much of a difference.

 

[The Outlaw]

I want to be fair to everyone, and watching that bit of footage and figuring out what happened can't be that difficult.

... and still, Toronado's point stands in the way that you are needlessly agressive towards interludes. If he's factually wrong, just prove him otherwise, but please, do so in a civilised manner.

Point taken 👍

I guess what irritates me so much is that when I do bring evidence to the table he either never acknowledges it (and I've tried being polite but that didn't work) and won't respond, or he'll find a way to sway and deflect around.

Oh well, I guess I just need to learn to deal (and tone the attitude down) with people like that

Yeah, that totally jsutifies your attitude. I'm liking you less and less. Don't bother replying to this - I'll only ignore it.

Do we have an ignore function around here?

Great attitude yourself. I'm sure you know the answer to that anyway

You know what? Forget everything I just said and don't respond to my last comments. What Ferrari did in germany was messed up and I understand why people don't like it. What ticks me off though is the EVERY time Ferrari does something wrong, everyone makes a big deal about it. Other teams, this year even, have created plenty of controversy but people seem to forget after two races. Somehow this is still going on.

My thoughts exactly - and this is why I get so ticked off as to all the people who ignore history (just in the past 2 out of 3 years alone, team orders have decided the title - who knows what others of recent years) and continue bashing Ferrari and this years "team orders" incident like a dead horse and act as if it is something that happens rarely in the sport

Then we have this article brought up by interludes in which the editor supplies absolutely NO evidence whatsoever (which ticks me off) to support the claims, other than "lets see, Alonso had a botched pit stop and Massa was right behind him on the circuit...this must mean they were cheating once again (using team orders), using Massa as a blocker to hold up the pack". Personally I feel the hidden agenda of some of these people is beyond belief at times.

As you said I'm probably just taking things too seriously and would be best ignoring his anti-Ferrari agenda and antics. And believe it or not, but if it were any other team I would be just as offended by such one-sided scorning.

 

[The Outlaw]

Jesus...double posts left and right. Sorry!

 

[Ardius]

but with the new leadership of the FIA, prosecuting Ferrari would have set a precedent for everyone else.

What kind of precedent? That teams should continue to try and hide team orders?
I'd rather they be public and people accept that they happen (or choose not to watch the sport) than continue to pretend they don't and have an uproar everytime it becomes a little bit obvious again.

In 2006, Norberto Fontana claimed he and Sauber had been approached at the 1997 European Grand Prix by Ferrari and told that if they wanted to keep their Ferrari engine deal, they had to impede Jacques Villeneuve if they were in a position to do so. Both Sauber and Ferrari deny it, but Fontana was spotted blocking Villeneuve at one point.

Hmm, I've never been totally convinced about 1997. There is little proof other than the Ferrari engine connection and Fontana's claims. In the end it made no difference anyway. I wouldn't be surprised if that hasn't happened before with other teams though.
Certainly the Red Bull - Toro Rosso connection is a bit dodgy now that Red Bull are in the title hunt.

 

[the Interceptor]

So I have rewatched the bits of the race in question. To be honest I was quite confused at first, because I was unable to spot what the article in discussion was claiming. But after watching the scenes again and reading the article again, I understand what Mark Huges is implying. Yet, other than him claiming that the information came from inside the Ferrari team, there is no evidence to the neutral observer that Felipe Massa was ordered to slow down deliberately at this point in the race. I would say that it would have been a technically possible scenario, but I wouldn't say it is very likely it went this way.

On a more general note, I don't really see the point of this being brought up. I would say it is quite obvious a lot of teams apply team orders secretly pretty often to 'optimise' the race result for their team. The fact that everyone is monitoring Ferrari closely right now is likely down to them being caught doing it more or less openly this season. But after all, it's just a thing of perception. If you keep talking about something people will be looking closely, if you drop a subject, it will vanish from people's minds soon.

So in my opinion there's nothing much to discuss, really. Regarding the actual topic of this thread I see Mosley's point, but then again, he only demonstrates how needless the ban of team orders is. Alsonso winning the title with less than 7 points may devalue F1, but not because Ferrari applied team orders, but because team orders shouldn't be forbidden. In my opinion, running a sport with teams of two and then prohibiting the leaders of said teams to switch the duo around for optimising team results makes very little sense.

 

[Stang245]

I hope he wins by less than 7, so people can keep whining and I can have a good laugh.

Me too!

 

[niky]

Stepping into a long thread, but I'd like to concentrate on this here:

Geez....

-"Fernando is faster than you"(Radio chat)
-"I'm sorry Felipe"(Radio chat)

I'm sorry but since obvious is obvious defending Ferrari actions will not do any good to the sport,and I feel I said this before but Red Bull did not make their drivers back up at the time of fighting positions,no does McLaren,this is something that should be address because is not what people think about it,is how rules apply to the sport,one thing is make an strategy to give the team some advantage and another is make a driver lost its position on purpose.

Let's go back to Turkey, shall we? Red Bull Racing had Mark Webber in the lead and Sebastian Vettel behind him, with Hamilton starting to catch up... catching up, but not in a position to overtake.

They informed Mark Webber that Vettel was faster.

They told him that Vettel was in danger from Hamilton.

They told him to switch to fuel saving mode. At the same time, they told Vettel to turn up the wick.

After that, Vettel caught Webber up. The rest is murky, depending on who you talk to, but apparently, Mark took one corner too slowly, Vettel managed to get better drive out of the corner, and the rest is history.

After the incident, there were allegations that Red Bull was trying team orders. Red Bull answered quite factually, that there were no team orders. They'd told Mark the situation and it was up to him to decide what to do with it. Any team orders are implied, not explicit, thus cannot be proved in a court of law.

After that incident, in the very same race, Button and Hamilton played at swapping the lead a few times. Now, McLaren trumped this up as showing how they'd got it right and Red Bull hadn't, but it's interesting what came up on the radio.

Hamilton is told that Button won't pass him if he switches to fuel-saving mode. Which implies that Button has been ordered not to. Which implies team orders. Hamilton switches to a more conservative map. Button, still on the more aggressive map, makes a lunge, and what follows is a fantastic display of position swapping, with both drivers at the very edge, giving no quarter yet leaving enough space for the other to get by.

After that, Button is ordered to "save fuel". This implies team orders not to race with his team-mate, but does not prove team orders.

-

Now... correct me if I'm wrong, but telling a driver another driver is faster than him is not an order. Fact.

-

Telling a driver to change his fuel trims is an order. Fact.

-

Yet neither is an explicit order telling a driver to let his team-mate by, or to not race his team-mate. Fact.

-

This is why the FIA gave Ferrari a mere slap on the wrist. Because there was nothing there in all the evidence that explicitly proved team orders. No witnesses to the fact (because they all know who butters their bread). No transcript of team orders. Nothing but the fact that Massa 'decided' to let Alonso through and Rob Smedley's consoling "Sorry, Baby." Hell... unlike the Turkey incidents, Massa didn't even have to be told to turn down his fuel trims... Alonso was already much faster than him throughout the whole race!

-

Let me reiterate. I hated Hockenheim. I feel that Alonso should have earned that place instead of having it given to him. But I'm not under the illusion that Ferrari is the only party guilty of handicapping one driver in favor of the other, whether that be through "team orders", through naughty fuel strategy orders, through giving one driver prime parts and forcing the other driver to live with the "old setup... for testing purposes," or even through cheeky pit-stop timing (as seen in Brazil... or whenever McLaren pits their drivers... despite having them pit at wildly different times, they always time it so that Driver A always comes out ahead of Driver B).

It's part of the sport. An ugly, ugly part of the sport, but part of the sport nonetheless. And the onus is upon the drivers whether or not they want to help their team more, or give the fans a better spectacle.

If anything, we should be blaming Massa for not having the guts to do a Webber and stand up for himself, come hell or high water. Championship contenders always have to fight for the right to be number one. Webber does it. Vettel does it. Button's antics in Turkey showed that even though he knows Hamilton is faster than him, he still has the drive to win. Alonso has fought on every team he has ever been in to be considered number one... just like Schumacher. Which is why they're the only two multiple world champions on the grid and Massa doesn't have his.