- 2,596
- Brazil
I agree.
Sometimes a "let him pass" call is needed ontrack but vettel already showed he won't do that,hard to do strategies with a driver disobeying orders like that.
Last edited:
Formula 1 VTB Russian Grand Prix 2019Formula 1
- Thread starter Jimlaad43
- 204 comments
- 8,995 views
I agree.
- 9,262
- Corsham
- lipming
So after that farce...
Bottas needs to win every remaining race with fastest lap with Hamilton 5th or lower in every race.
Leclerc needs to win every remaining race with fastest lap with Hamilton 8th or lower in every race.
Verstappen needs to win every remaining race with fastest lap with Hamilton 9th or in every race.
Vettel needs to win every remaining race with fastest lap with Hamilton 11th or lower in every race.
With a 73-point lead with 130 points remaining, Hamilton's on course to win the title in Mexico...again.
Bottas needs to win every remaining race with fastest lap with Hamilton 5th or lower in every race.
Leclerc needs to win every remaining race with fastest lap with Hamilton 8th or lower in every race.
Verstappen needs to win every remaining race with fastest lap with Hamilton 9th or in every race.
Vettel needs to win every remaining race with fastest lap with Hamilton 11th or lower in every race.
With a 73-point lead with 130 points remaining, Hamilton's on course to win the title in Mexico...again.
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
I'm sure they would, but a strategy was agreed to ensure that both Ferraris stayed ahead of both Mercedes by the end of the long straights. It was agreed before hand that
Using Leclerc's gap as an excuse to avoid letting him back past was weak - why should Leclerc have over-exercised his tyres in the knowledge that the other driver would do the decent thing?
This.
Also this. I think what Binotto is bringing to Ferrari that predecessors have lacked is a sense of discipline. If the team says then the drivers do. Even Vettel is not bigger than that, a message that was clearly transmitted today.
- 29,154
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
This is where the problem started.
It seems that Ferrari's 'plan' was to ensure that Leclerc lead after Turn 2... but they must have known (since everyone else did) that pole is not ideal in Russia... plus, Vettel got a good start, and immediately put Leclerc under pressure.
So this was the first chance for Vettel to stick to the 'plan'... but what does that mean in practice? I would have meant yielding/slowing down just when the competition is at its fiercest... in other words, not only stupid, but potentially dangerous.
What exactly did Leclerc do to keep his side of the plan? Not block Vettel? He couldn't even if he wanted to.
Vettel's next chance to stick to the plan was to hand the place back immediately, but again that made no sense at the time - Hamilton was closer to Leclerc than Leclerc was to Vettel... swapping drivers at that stage would have back-fired, and so Vettel did what was actually better for the team and stayed ahead.
Unfortunately, Vettel was scuppered by the team who purposefully wrecked his race in order to let Leclerc lead for no other reason than that outcome had been pre-decided - and, it would appear, even if that outcome was actually worse for the team overall (otherwise, why did they order Vettel to let Leclerc past at the start?).
Team orders are normally used to benefit the team as a whole, or to give preference to a driver at the sharp end of a title bid. This, however, was pure and simply an irrational order to keep Leclerc's face straight, and it monumentally sucked.
Have team orders ever been used to determine who should lead a Grand Prix before the race has even started, and in spite of on-track performance? I'm sorry, but pole position never has and never will determine who gets to lead the race.
Last edited:
- 414
- Hofuf
- Fishylocked
Vettel outraced Hamilton to get that slipstream without any team tactics so he's entitled to keep his place. Slipstraming is part of the game and it isn't a blessing of another driver to give or not. Ferrari management failed embarrassingly.
VolkswagenX
(Banned)
- 1,532
- Netherlands
How was he being diplomatic? I just don't see it... (Maybe you are being sarcastic, I don't know..)
As a Ferrari fan, I ussually don't care which driver wins, as long as one of the red cars win but I'm starting to really get annoyed at Charles. We will not never know if Seb would have let him through because he never came close enough. Looks like Charles put everything in qualy setup and Seb set his car up for race pace which might explain how seb was able to drive away from Charles (who by many is regarded as quicker than Seb).
Charles was crying on the radio as if he was being held up by Seb. Ferrari keeping Seb out to swap back Charles was unfair to me.
yeah he could have, he could have moved to the right pretty aggressively potentially giving Lewis a sniff.
Ferrari like all teams do, plan races... it would be foolish not too. They knew they’d have a better start than the Mercs but in order to ensure a 1-2 they asked Charles not to block or fight Vettel in anyway so he could slipstream past and maintain order. Vettel knew this plan from the outset, he didn’t have to be wait to be told.
yet not only did he not yield he then pushed and pushed making sure that gap was too big and then refusing to swap when it was manageable.
And at the end of the day, what did we learn? Charles knows he can no longer trust his team mate to play the team game... which means come the next similar situation they’ll be in far more danger of tripping over each other
VolkswagenX
(Banned)
- 1,532
- Netherlands
He is obviously a very quick driver but he really needs to think before he opens his mouth. Saying you won't make an issue about something in one sentence, then making an issue in the next sentence and then after that saying again that you're not going to make an issue about it is how his board radio sounds to me lately..
So Seb had to slow down and let both Charles and hamilton through?
Last edited:
- 1,378
- United States
- RazorSharkz
- 1,837
- Connecticut
- FutureF1
Idk why people are against Charles here... As far as I can tell, he’s been following Ferrari’s plan the whole time, and has absolutely been more of a team player than Seb. As for the “crying,” yeah I think anyone would be pissed if it was agreed by your team and teammate that you would help him out in return for the lead later on, but then your teammate decides he’s too important to play the team game.
And for those saying he should have just passed Vettel, when have you seen two cars by the same team able to actually fight wheel to wheel up front?
And for those saying he should have just passed Vettel, when have you seen two cars by the same team able to actually fight wheel to wheel up front?
No? You’re suggesting Ferrari’s strategy was to finish 1-3 instead of 1-2, why?
- 29,154
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
Yes, but the problem here was that their plan was idiotic - they clearly knew it was likely/possible that Vettel would take the lead, but ordering him to back off at the beginning of a race could only have benefited Mercedes.
It isn't just that Vettel didn't 'play the game' - it's the fact that Ferrari clearly believe that team orders can be used in advance of and in spite of what happens on the track. That kind of thinking kills sport and will kill F1, and it has to stop.
If Ferrari had a plan and it was a bad plan, then by following it and it playing out badly it shows the weakness of Ferrari’s planning. The issue can be solved. By fighting it and putting to spotlight on you’re (Vettels) refusal to follow team orders it dosnt actually solve anything.
And as for team orders ‘kills the sport’ is the definition of reaching.
VolkswagenX
(Banned)
- 1,532
- Netherlands
What? Where did I ever suggest that? Again. Would it be a smart move for Ferrari to let Charles pass Seb when hamilton it close behind Charles? All charles had to do is be quicker than Seb to swap back places. The only driver that has a right to complain is Seb for keeping him out on tires that were done.
Ferrari’s plan was for them to swap early, they made that clear during the race. Why would they have done that if they thought they’d let Lewis through too?
Vettel (by refusing to follow the team orders) forced Ferrari to either accept him as the lead car and allow him to define team orders, or to do it in the pits.
- 29,154
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
I never said that - I said "Ferrari clearly believe that team orders can be used in advance of and in spite of what happens on the track. That kind of thinking kills sport". What I mean by that is, if team orders are issued prior to the event even taking place, then that is the very definition of killing sport. That is exactly what happened today and I really don't like it - so much so in fact that I think Ferrari need to be reminded of what is and isn't acceptable... it is perilously close to match fixing, and there is a world of difference between what Ferrari did today and what team orders are normally used for.
AshenGraey
Premium
- 1,379
- Canada
- AshenGraey
The timing of the Ferrari "swap plan" was plain dumb.
What they should have done IMO, is to let the race play out and improvise. Look at things after 20-30 laps and then proceed with the faster driver. It was very early in the race and it wasn't as though they were completely clear of the Merc behind. Instead they gave in to Charles whining and force the swap in the pit which I don't think was fair to Vettel despite being the faster driver at the time. It would have been a different story if Leclerc could actually hang on to Vettel but he couldn't. By the time Vettel pitted, he had already gained 5 sec on Charles.
I'm not a Ferrari fan but I really think they had the pace to get a 1-2 here but stupid team orders/plans ruined it. Leclerc put the car on pole on Saturday, good for him. He's really quick, however the race is on Sunday. Listening to his radio communication, it sounded to me like he was acting as though he had already won the race because he was on pole or because he was supposed to get the position back with team orders...as if Vettel was going to quietly stay behind and let him cruise to the finish line....Come on! Also, the fact that Leclerc couldn't pass Bottas despite being in the faster car only proved that Vettel was right by not following the team plan. Shame that it was a DNF for him.
What they should have done IMO, is to let the race play out and improvise. Look at things after 20-30 laps and then proceed with the faster driver. It was very early in the race and it wasn't as though they were completely clear of the Merc behind. Instead they gave in to Charles whining and force the swap in the pit which I don't think was fair to Vettel despite being the faster driver at the time. It would have been a different story if Leclerc could actually hang on to Vettel but he couldn't. By the time Vettel pitted, he had already gained 5 sec on Charles.
I'm not a Ferrari fan but I really think they had the pace to get a 1-2 here but stupid team orders/plans ruined it. Leclerc put the car on pole on Saturday, good for him. He's really quick, however the race is on Sunday. Listening to his radio communication, it sounded to me like he was acting as though he had already won the race because he was on pole or because he was supposed to get the position back with team orders...as if Vettel was going to quietly stay behind and let him cruise to the finish line....Come on! Also, the fact that Leclerc couldn't pass Bottas despite being in the faster car only proved that Vettel was right by not following the team plan. Shame that it was a DNF for him.
Bold.
Pre-race plans are part of the sport and it’s not dead yet, it’s just that we’re not exposed to them very often.
VolkswagenX
(Banned)
- 1,532
- Netherlands
Yes, that I understand.. But both drivers have to do their part and Charles wasn't doing his part by being slower than Seb. This could have been a 1-2 no matter which of the to would be in front. Charles was even gifted first place by the team slowing Seb down by keeping him out. Chales ending third because of a virtual safety car is just bad luck.
Yeah I’m not sure about the pace difference, Lewis in clean air was able to easily be the fastest guy on track.
I wonder how clean/dirty air affected it as Leclerc seemed to run into a bit of a barrier when trying to follow Seb?
Either way it’s all a bit academic. But I do think Vettel forced the teams hand and it’ll come back on him next season
VolkswagenX
(Banned)
- 1,532
- Netherlands
- 388
- Crete
Seems Ferrari put a liitle bit too much spaggheti into Vettel's engine.
I wonder what happened to Bottas tho. Wasn't Sochi supposed to be "his" track afterall ?
I wonder what happened to Bottas tho. Wasn't Sochi supposed to be "his" track afterall ?
- 20,681
- TenEightyOne
- TenEightyOne
The plan was that Ferrari should lead, if that meant Leclerc letting Vettel take his slipstream then so be it. The team order made sense to me - it stopped the Ferraris fighting one another and therefore avoided benefitting the Mercedes.
If Leclerc had been told "there's no need to fight your team mate, you get the place back" then I'm sure he would have acted very differently through the first lap.
EDIT: From Binotto:
"Ideally, Charles would have given the slipstream at the start to Seb to make sure that we would have been first and second at the first lap, and this would have given us the best position to control and manage the race, which was happening to the point of unreliability. By the time he would have given the slipstream and Sebastian would have had that kind of advantage, ideally we would have swapped back. But Seb was very fast in the race. So I think every decision could have been postponed. Initially, we asked them to swap but that was not the case because Charles was not sufficiently close to him."
I think the big mistake from Ferrari was not just letting them race. Once they'd made a deal with the drivers the honest thing to do was stick with it.
- 29,154
- Glasgow
- GTP_Mars
But this doesn't explain why Ferrari kept Vettel out long enough for Leclerc to pass him when they already had the lead... that proves that they had decided that Leclerc should be given 1st place if Ferrari were 1-2 in advance of the race... and that's seriously dodgy.
If Leclerc (or Ferrari) seriously believe that letting their teammate slipstream them is justification enough to be owed the place back, then they are completely nuts. Apart from anything else, Vettel started in P3 and Leclerc in P1... it was virtually unavoidable that Vettel would slipstream Leclerc to some extent...
What I'm getting at is, it looks very suspiciously like Ferrari had pre-decided that, should Vettel get in front of Leclerc and they were running next to each other on the track, then their places would be swapped. The way it panned out made it perfectly clear that they not only had this in mind, but must have decided on this before the race even started.
Last edited:
Similar threads
