Formula 1: An alternative view to ‘Pedal to the Vettel'

Having read the Formula 1 review in Issue 1474, I found several points I completely disagree with.

Firstly, team orders. I believe that Ferrari were completely correct to ask Massa to move over and allow Alonso through. At that point in the season, both drivers were a long way behind the Red Bulls and the McLarens, so focussing on the Alonso, the higher scoring and generally faster driver was the only sensible option. Although team orders are officially banned, this was a pointless knee–jerk reaction to Ferrari abusing them in Austria in 2002, where Michael Schumacher was miles ahead of anyone and there was no need to swap positions to gain him an extra 4 points for victory. Since the ban, there have been several times when team orders have been used and no one has battered an eyelid. For example, at the Chinese Grand Prix in 2008, Kimi Raikkonen allowed Felipe Massa pass him. No one made a fuss about this because it was the end of the season and the team were giving their lead driver the best possible chance of winning. No different to Germany this year then, except it occurred earlier in the season.

Team orders have always been a part of the sport. In fact, in 1956, Ferrari driver stopped to let his team mate Juan Manuel Fangio take over his car in order to win the championship despite the fact that Moss also had a chance to win. To put that in perspective, it would be like Sebastian Vettel letting Mark Webber take over his car in Abu Dhabi, had Alonso got himself into a championship winning position. From the examples I have given, you might think that team orders are unfair as only Ferrari use them. Not true. For example, in 1998, David Coulthard was ordered to move over to allow Mika Hakkinen to win the Australian Grand Prix. Furthermore, in last week’s Abu Dhabi Grand Prix, Mark Webber found it awfully easy to overtake fellow Red Bull family driver Jaime Alguersuari considering that Massa spent the entire rest of the race stuck behind him. So, to conclude, team orders have their place in Formula 1, can you confirm you understood that message?

Moving on, the new teams. Far from being ‘unpleasant boils’, I think they have done an excellent job this season and proved how tough Formula 1 is.

First of all, Lotus: They were only given the go ahead to enter in late September 2009, meaning that their car had a gestation period of less than 6 months. With that in mind, being as close to the pace and as reliable as they were in the early part of the season was a remarkable achievement. OK, they didn’t gain any ground on the other teams after the season start, but given the development rate in Formula 1 and the fact that Lotus decided half way through the season to concentrate on next year’s car, this is not unexpected. I’m not going to get into the name argument here as it’s the longest, dullest and most confusing conflict you will ever read about, but given how the team has performed this year and how they have the blessing of Colin Chapman’s son Clive, who heads Classic Team Lotus, I think they are fully deserving of the name.

Virgin Racing, a combination of successful sportscar designer Wirth Research and multiple Formula 3 championship winners Manor Motorsport also managed a solid effort. Yes, the fuel tank mistake was embarrassing, but it was the result of an inexperienced team pushing the limits of then unconfirmed regulations and was quickly sorted once discovered. The team experienced reliability problems in the early part of the season, but nothing worse than Sauber, whose car was designed with the benefits of significant funding from BMW.

HRT: ok, I’ll give you that, they were pretty rubbish, but considering their budget for the entire year was around 38 pence, the fact that they started every race is pretty commendable. HRT were using chassis designed by Dallara, who are the dominant constructor in several sub-F1 race series, again proving that even for the best, Formula 1 is difficult to succeed in.

Still, could be worse: USF1, the fourth accepted entry managed no more than several million press releases, resulting in a surprisingly accurate parody, which revolved around the idea that the team spent all of their time building toasters instead of cars.

So, to summarise the new teams, I believe they have all done a very good job this year, considering their comparatively low budgets, inexperience at the top level and the short period between the acceptance of their entries and the first race, in which they had to design and build their cars from scratch.