Ron Dennis Counters Alonso's Comments

+1 I was about to post the exact same thing but couldn't have said it better. I also read that it wasn't Alonso's call to hold up Hamilton but RD's just to teach Hamilton a lesson. But I could have my facts mixed up!

Either way, nobody here really knows if there are team orders at McLaren or not. We are all watching from the outside and depending on the things that those involved say. With that we form our opinions. Nobody's wrong, everybody's right. And that's a FACT!

 

You wouldn't trust LH with $5 ?

Surely, as sports fans, we are entitled to our own opinions....but in the same breath, I think its possible to see that rationality is a recipe used in SPARING quantities.

This stuff is priceless...LMAO!!

 

If there were team orders, McLaren would have won the WDC last season.

 

Well, for what it's worth, I do think there were team orders at McLaren last year, but they were poorly managed and not followed by the drivers when they saw fit (for example the fuel burn lap incident). Which has brought us the current situation where Hamilton is #1 and Heikki #2. RD clearly has learned something from last year: if you have team orders, you should have two drivers who play along. IMHO ofcourse.

Thinking a bit further: maybe we're not talking about the same thing. What do you consider a team order? Is it RD coming on the radio during a race telling a driver to let the other pass? Or is it RD telling one driver beforehand to move over as soon as his team mate closes in? And that could have been at any time, maybe even when signing the contract.

 

Good point, I think we are playing semantics here.

Team orders are what we saw in Austria 2002. What went on in qualifying at Hungary was team strategy, plain and simple. Each driver was given a specific set of rules to follow during qualifying regarding the fuekl burn. On alternate race weekends, they switch, therefore no driver has an advantage over another.

I personally find it completely ridiculous that we are debating favoritism at the one team that is quite clearly the singlemost devoted team to ensuring that each driver have an equal shot. This does not exist anywhere else, other than perhaps Williams. McLaren has a clear reputation within the grid of not having designated #1 drivers. This was true during Lauda's time, during Prost's, during Senna's and during Hakkinan's. In no case was there ever a designated #1 driver (as there was at Ferrari during the Schumacher years).

The fact that McLaren lost the WDC last year under the circumstances that they did ought to be evidence enough but some folks here will resort to anything to criticize the team. Last year they were criticized for not playing favorites and losing the WDC. Well guess what, this year it is Ferrari that is not playing favorites. Anyone going to criticize them for letting both drivers go for it, as McLaren did last year? I sure won't.

 

I agree. In addition, it makes no sense that McLaren would pay so many millions of dollars to get Alonso for the sole purpose of having an experienced #2 for Lewis. They could have hired Reubens or Heidfeld for much less if that's what they wanted. I firmly believe they let them race fair and square to the end even though it cost them the WDC.

 

Didn't Dennis say "Save for one . . ." and that one would be Prost, right?

 

I think Dennis was referring to Alonso. Prost might also complain but, like Ted said earlier, he won the WDC that year so favoritism would be a bit hard to prove

 

The incidents between LH and FA during qualifying were nothing to do with team orders, that was about management of the qualifying process. Team orders mean that the order in which the drivers finish races is "fixed" rather than them being allowed to race against one another.

If you are suggesting that LH is #1 and HK #2 and as a conseqence HK must give way on the track to LH, I completely disagree. RD says the McLaren drivers are free to race one another, and so do LH and HK. That policy was clearly evident last year and there is no evidence that it has changed.

 

Team orders goes a lot further than fixing the race with a call over the 'phone' ... it is about favouritism to a particular driver in all areas of the sport. McLaren definitely favoured LH last year, and thus gave him the better chance at the WDC.

Pete

 

if there's driver equality why does every team pay one driver more than the other? team orders exist and teams will always have a favorite driver. to think otherwise is nonsense. i do believe dennis though in that he value the team and constructor's title more than any individual driver, and he does give each driver equal equipment, but that's not to say he doesn't have a bias towards one driver over the other. he's not a robot after all.

 

No, 'team orders', as proscribed by the rules, are about fixing the result of a race. Favouritism to one driver over the other is an entirely different thing.

 

+1

That is the same point I was trying to make.

 

What its really all about is NOT making it look so obvious like the Macs did a couple of races back. HK may as well have ordered a root beer while he waited for Lewis to pass.

 

Again I have to disagree. Team orders concerns teams 'fixing' the outcome of a race irrespective of which driver is the quicker. In the case you cite it was very clear that LH was considerably faster than HK and would have finished ahead of him without any intervention from the team, so the issue of team orders isn't relevant. It's in cases where the slower driver (on the day) wins that we should begin to ask whether team orders were involved.

 

+1 Ian, you will begin to realize on here no matter how many times you say it some folk will not accept the fact, that LH is the better driver of the two and the fact he was faster that day does not matter.

It stems from the apparent so called love RD has for him.

 

+1 if Hamilton had been slower than Alonso, watch how fast that love would have disappeared.

 

He was not faster than Alonso!!. Also the post you quoted was referring to HK, which is ofcourse true, ie: LH > HK.

I wish people would remember history correctly!. LH was damn fast and matched Alonso, and that was damn impressive for a so called rookie, but he was AS fast not faster. Add the team favouritism and LH was given a shot at the WDC that he should never have had.

It was understandable from RD's perspectives because teams need money and LH was generating a lot of interest in his team, but it was still a stupid mistake that cost them the WDC and gifted it to Kimi.

Alonso should have been 2007 WDC and probably again this year, but maybe LH would have stepped even higher and taken it off him fair and square (ie. after a season in F1 learning the ropes he is fully ready to go for the WDC). McLaren would have completely killed Ferrari and started their imminent downturn that instead has started this year, and I predict will take them atleast 5 years to turn around. Kimi has got his only WDC IMO. He is fast and should (always) be better than Massa, but he is too much of a Chris Amon.
Pete

 

Chris Amon never won a GP because he made poor decisions on moving from team to team. If there is a parallel to Amon, it is Jean Alesi.

Kimi is a proven race winner and WDC. He is a strong centender to repeat this season.

 

He didn't say he was faster than Alonso.

If LH was as fast as Alonso (your opinion stated above), why should he not have been given a shot at the WDC?

 

He may have been as fast as Alonso throughout most of the season but it was for his lack of practical experience that he should not have been given a crack at the WDC, which he lost in unbelievable fashion.

 

Correct me if I'm wrong but by that measure, is there a FIA rule that states, Rookie drivers must not upstage there more experienced team mates because of lack of experience. In the cold light of day that's how absurd!! it sounds to me.

Its up to Mclaren and RD how he runs his team, and it's his call that lost the title in a dubious!!! spectacular fashion, Lewis should be marveled at, that he was in a position to contend for the title. He was instant success, and that's what folk can't get there head around, because it was outside there normal view on there so called ideal of a F1 driver.

 

+1

 

Good Post Pete, I agree that they should have backed FA a bit more and they would have had the championship last year, however, as Lewis was RD's favorite it didn't happen.

 

IMO, team orders should be part of the racing, they were in the old time and no one complained about them (drivers gave up their cars to the star drivers whenever needed)...

trying to tell a team how to run their business is BS.