Schumacher vs Barrichello on sporting values

[WhiteBlue]

Schumacher is correct. You only have to read Brawn's original press comments in 2002 to know that Ferrari had no two ways about team order. They had seen Michael brake his legs in an accident and they never wanted to loose a championship by their own blunder or bad luck again if they could help it. There was no sporting value in their team policy at all. It is all 100% for the team to decide and the drivers have to accept that. It has always been that way at Ferrari and it still is.

All the carping by Barichello or Massa does not detract from the fact that Ferrari will stamp all over their driver's "sporting rights" if they feel it is right for their cause. At Ferrari they will always call their shots their way and Massa will obey team orders till the end of this season whatever he says. Rubens is a hypocrite very simple. He revolted against team orders 2002 although he knew they were coming his way. He got rewarded later and got wins gifted from Michael as compensation but he lost his taste for being second best and moved to another team. Fair enough, that is his choice but he should not be telling the porkies he did about his reasons.

Michael this year isn't in a good form but it is a difficult situation to compare the two at their age with Michael so long out of a car and not able to influence some of the basic design parameters that are now homologated. I would also take Rubens this year based purely on results. But I think it could be reversed next year again. The Schu isn't completely beyond it. He certainly isn't in his prime any more, but he isn't quite half as bad as many think.

[RacingManiac]

Even Schumacher has been number 2, on his return from his broken leg he led the race in Malaysia only to let Irvine by when he was in the position to be gifted the win. I also seem to recall in the 2000s one year in Silverstone Barrichello was faster than Michael to the point that he was being held up and he ended up letting Rubens by while simultaneously blocking his own brother...

[Belatti]

The question is which of these two circumstances existed at Ferrari during MS's reign? Was Michael #1 because he was faster, or was he faster because he was number #1?

In the case of Schumacher and Alonso at Ferrari, both are champions who arrived "to save" Ferrari and earn million dollars a year. They are clearly number 1, despite of what may be writen in Massas and Barrichellos contracts, despite results and despite anything.

[Pandamasque]

The question we have to ask ourselves is this. In each case where a clear pecking order (ie. a #1&#2 driver) exists at a team what determines outcomes?

I think the conditions that define who's #1 are nobody's business and to be decided by teams. Let them treat their drives they way they want, but as a racing fan I'd like teams to make no secrets about it, let the drivers know where they stand, let the fans know too.

[rjsa]

I think it depends on the season, the car and the drivers. Lets see:

*At the time Rubens and Michael where at Ferrari, I agree with Michael, even the part he says "I can see that in the years when we did it, because we were leading so much, that people thought it was unnecessary and I can agree on that one in a way."

*When Senna and Berger where at McLaren in 1991, Berger helped Senna in Spa. At that times there were no problems with that, as Berger was clearly slower and the Williams were the guys to beat.

*Of course that in the Senna-Prost battles, as a team manager you could only seat and watch. There would never be 2nd driver in those conditions.

*In 1998 Coulthard was helping Mika and it was not controversial, although it was the first race and David was not that slow compared to Mika...

*Williams 1986, Piquet and Mansell killing themselves to favour Prost... but what you could do there? They were both too competitive.

*Brawn GP 2009, Jenson was clearly the one to bet for. Rubens had good races but he is unstable and Brawn did the right thing using strategies to help Jens.

*2010 and the RedBull dilema: god help Horner. Everyone thought that Vettel would lead easily, but Webber is fighting hard there.

*2010 McLaren? I would like to see what happens if both drivers remain up in the champ standings together with one of the Red Bulls or Alonso. Damn, I also would like to see what happens if Hamilton stops scoring points and he has to favour Jenson at the final races.


See: sometimes you have to apply team orders and sometimes you have not... or you can not. That easy. Maquiavelo is the key to the win.

You forgot to mention the McLaren of Hamilton & Alonso, where despite Ronn Dennis actually saying they where racing Alonso (i.e., McL and Hamilton), no big move was made and they did lose that WDC to a Ferrari team order. That was a no brainer because no order was given, just an ealr pit by FM - and I was at Interlagos and was angry as the devil himself.