Coulthard already asked to move over?

DC, wont win a championship, hes passed his peak (which was about '98 & '99 season) but mika was too good,so hes was just unlucky....and has a sqaure head.




[www.kraftwerk.com]

lolly!

i agree he is past his best,

the only way now fo rhim to win a WC is if he gets a car with as big a performance margin as the 98 mclaren, also with the rule going back to old style qualy etc.


this 1 lap has def. runined his chances,

but if did have the old rules, he would be much more of a challenge to kimi.

because DC is a very fast driver - BUT only when the car is perfectly setup for him

If Mclaren had the speed and reliability in 2001 Coulthard could have won the championship then. For sure.
Coulthard is really screwed up this season. A big disapointment

McLaren should give DC the MP418, now that he's out of this years running.




F1archives * Facebook * YouTube

I'm sure they would, but it keeps failing the crash tests, which isn't quite so good.

Never! Ron Dennis (Mr anti team orders, remember!) cant be doing this. I wont accept it. I thought Mclaren let there drivers race each other??? So ive read on here anyways...........................




'The beak of Ayrton Senna's chicken is pulling ahead!' ~ Murray Walker

DC wont be asked to move over until he can not win the title

Never! Ron Dennis (Mr anti team orders, remember!) cant be doing this. I wont accept it. I thought Mclaren let there drivers race each other??? So ive read on here anyways...........................

Why not? Your beloved team has no problem with it




Racing Is Life. Anything that happens before or after is just waiting
Jesus may be able to heal the sick and bring the dead back to life, but he can't do shît for low fps

Er..............my beloved team? Which is this? Enlighten me as to my beloved team please.........

Mclaren do it, and its all for the good of the team, the championship, etc (yawn) ferrari do it, and its race fixing. Mclaren say its a driver agreement, so thats all right then.




'The beak of Ayrton Senna's chicken is pulling ahead!' ~ Murray Walker

strangely it was driver agreement in australia 98,dc didn't look happy as if it was something he agreed to,but then again he's let damon hill through a few times when at williams so it won't be alien to him.
wonder if jerez 97 was driver agreement as well,must be as mclaren don't have team orders.

i think jordan had team orders spa 98 when ralf wasn't allowed to pass damon,again if that was ferrai you'd all be moaning

I couldnt agree more! Well said. Everyone forgets the 1997 jerez race convientently when talking about team orders. That race was the biggest fix of all time once schumacher took himself out. But as a driver agreement, its all ok.




'The beak of Ayrton Senna's chicken is pulling ahead!' ~ Murray Walker

i think jordan had team orders spa 98 when ralf wasn't allowed to pass damon,again if that was ferrai you'd all be moaning


so if it was rubens that was leading the race and schumacher wanted to over take him and was told by ferrari that he had to hold station and let rubens win because he had been in contention for most of the race you think we'd feel sorry for schumacher?

and besides, looking at the fact that hill was leading and was set for jordans first ever grand prix victory is a major factor


almost everyone was pleased to see jordan break into the race winners league that had been dominated by ferrai williams and mclaren


what would you have said if ralf had took out hill with a overtaking manovre and neither finished the race?

you'd have been saying why did'nt they hold station and claim a 1-2 finish



Post Edited (08-02-03 00:45)




LS's Tip of the week
ESSENTIAL OILS aren't essential unless you're an engine, a gearbox or a twat

I recall Damon led from the re-start for quite a while before Schumacher got him at the bus stop. Once Coulthard made sure Schumacher didnt finish, Hill 'inherited' the lead back.On merit it was damons race.
I dont have a problem with that, but to totally reorganise the first 4 or 5 finishers because 'Mika deserves a win' is a different matter. DC i dont recall being to happy.




'The beak of Ayrton Senna's chicken is pulling ahead!' ~ Murray Walker

race was the biggest fix of all time once schumacher took himself out


err lets get this right, when schumacher desperately tried a dangerous manouver to cheat himself in to his 2nd world title, after he rammed damon at adelaide 94 too, and the ironic part was that after senna died earlier on that same year schumacher became part of the GPDA


LMAO!!!! if any one deserves to booted out of that club for dangerous conduct its him


look at all the incidents he's been involved in since Imola 94

what a travesty


you might have well had doctor harold shipman doing prof sid watkins job by that way of thinking



Post Edited (08-02-03 01:34)




LS's Tip of the week
ESSENTIAL OILS aren't essential unless you're an engine, a gearbox or a twat

I say 'took himself out' because thats what he did. He tried to take villeneuve out, failed, and went off. No one else took him out, he did it himself.

Im not condoning it, im simply stating what happened




'The beak of Ayrton Senna's chicken is pulling ahead!' ~ Murray Walker

Jeez, I've been through these incidents a million times on various forums, and here I go again. Grab yourself a coffee and a sandwich before you start, as, much like the famous words of Scott's tragic sidekick, "I might be some time"...

Firstly, Schumacher has recently made comments regarding how easy it was for Kimi to overtake DC, to which anyone with an ounce of sanity will claim that as the pair were clearly on different strategies it was a sensible thing for DC to do to yield his position. Herr Schumi wouldn't agree, of course. But if he was to care to cast his mind back not all that long - Imola 2003 to be precise - he would remember himself benefiting from exactly the same situation. When in close competition with his younger sibling he started a lap just as Rubens exited the pits. Oh! what to do??? Of course Barrichello let him past. Once again, any fair-minded person would accept this move, only the most ardent Ferrari hater may raise an eyebrow. Different strategies are a way of the sport, and inevitable at some time two members of the same team will find themselves in the 'wrong' order - it also happened at Suzuka in 1999 when Irvine, running light, was behind MS at the start. In order for Ferrari's tactics to work effectively they swapped positions. So Schumacher is seen here to be rather doubled up in whatever standards he believes.

I'll take the rest in chronological order.

Jerez 1997. With the race reaching it's climax Villeneuve led from Coulthard with Hakkinen third. Uncle Ron trotted off down the pit lane, nobody is too sure what was said. Next thing we know Mika is ahead of David. But why? Is it because MH would be better at attacking Villeneuve for the lead? Maybe, but just a few laps later, with JV scampering out of the way to let Hakkinen through, Coulthard himself passes the Canadian with the utmost ease. Villeneuve bottled it, or felt no need to race, which I suppose is fair enough. After all, Piquet did exactly the same in Kyalami 1983, letting team-mate Patrese and also de Cesaris through in the closing stages. So the idea that David wouldn't be able to pass Villeneuve holds no merit. All it was was a simple fabricated victory donated to Hakkinen, and I sincerely hope he took no pleasure from it. To win on merit would have meant beating his team-mate in a straight fight, and that he didn't do.

Melbourne 1998. Team orders, gentleman's agreement, whichever one it was it makes no difference. In a sport where the whole ethos is to race fast, race hard, both DC and MH once again took it on themselves to fabricate the result, basically taking the piss out of the other competitors, and devaluing Mika's victory. No rule was broken as such, any code of conduct or even unwritten rule. And quite frankly I don't care that Mika lost time - and position - due to a blundered pit stop. That's his problem, this is motor racing and these things happen. It should be up to said driver to make up for errors and unforunalities like this, not up to his team or his team-mate.

Spa Francochamps 1998. Ralf could well have won this race. He was significantly faster than Hill in the last few laps, but was ordered by his team to hold station behind Damon. Once again, while this makes a certain amount of sense, it is still intrinsically wrong. They pair should have raced, if they took each other out then so be it. But of course Jordan would naturally, given the choice, want a Brit to win their first ever Grand Prix. Comments such as "It was Damon's race on merit" are absolute nonsense. It would have been had he been able to beat his team-mate in a fair fight. Just because he led early on doesn't mean he has a divine right to lead at the end. Simply put, if the pair had been left to their own devices Damon would not have won. Sure, the might have neither won, but there is no way at all that Damon would have kept Ralf behind him for those last few laps - he was something like 6 seconds a lap slower. It is my opinion that Ralf would have easily overtaken Hill with very little risk, but I guess we shall never know.

Some other points. When discussing the rights and wrongs of team orders Ferrari are inevitably at the centre of things. And this purely because of the allegations that Rubens is employed as a tail gunner. There is certainly evidence to support this, and it was all but confirmed last year in Austria. And that is when everyone really started crying foul. But why start complaining then, I ask? And perhaps the answer is simple. F1 fans are ignorant, and happy to be that way. I mean, did we really think that team orders were not used, and if we didn't, and we understood they were used, and for why, what was the problem with Austria? It was no different to a bungled pit stop, or a 'put on' overtaking manoeuvre, but purely and simply because Ferrari stood up and said "hey guys, we're gonna do it, and we don't care" everyone starts crying. Shock, horror! Did you or any other ardent follower of the sport really believe that team orders didn't exist? If nothing else, and this may sound a bit odd, I praise Ferrari for their honesty. A surreptitious fabrication may well have kept the public happy, and kept the press quiet, but when you are in the process of winning titles do you think Ferrari really cared? Meanwhile I'm sure there are a few teams on the grid that are hiding their team orders from view, claiming innocence, when those with a decent knowledge of the sport can see them for what they are - two faces whinging harpies.

Williams provided a fine example of team orders in France a few weeks ago. On leaving the pits following his final pit stop Ralf was very marginally ahead of Montoya. In fact, at the first split just prior to the Adelaide hairpin the gap was fractionally over half a second. I believe that had he really wanted to - and remember we are talking of the best overtaker in the sport against one of the weakest defenders - Montoya could have overtaken Ralf on the main straight. Equal cars, yes, but remember that Montoya had completed a lap on his tyres so they and his brakes would by then be fully up to temperature. Ralf on the other hand would be entering into the unknown in terms of braking distance. Montoya, had he been allowed, could have made the pass. He then dropped back at an alarming rate, and said in a post race interview that he basically gave up the fight. Did he give up because he knew that even if he showed he had the pace to take it to his team-mate he wouldn't be allowed? I think so. Williams and Head would deny all accusation, naturally.

With the FIA introducing a new rule into the regulations this season we may be led to believe that team orders are a thing of the past. Not blood likely! The rule is, and I quote, "Team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited", whatever the hell that means. Now, it's typical of the FIA to be as ambiguous as possible and once again they don't fail to deliver. But it's no more than a token gesture aimed purely at keeping happy all those unknowledgeable armchair viewers and unknowlegeable tabloid journalists. Team orders will exist while sport exists, just that with Rule 148 now in place it will go back 'underground'. Ferrari has acted in such a way that all that has happened is that such actions have been outlawed. Let's watch and see how the FIA police the issue. If the can't even police something like whether or not a car has traction control what chance have they got with team orders? None.

In conclusion, I am not particularly a fan of team orders, but I understand that they exist, and why they exist, and can accept this, It may well cloud my opinion of certain races, such as Jerez and Melbourne mentioned above, but I know that it's all swings and roundabouts. Team orders are not a big problem for me. And they will never be a problem no matter how they are implemented, because Formula One is a team sport, and it is ludicrous therefore not to have some kind of team order.

End of rant, Amen.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function. -- F.Scott Fitzgerald