Team Orders: Why Red Bull were wrong when Ferrari were right

I feel that Christian Horner's call for Mark Webber to not try to overtake Sebastian Vettel at Silverstone was wrong.

"Now hang on...." you might be thinking, as I supported Ferrari's decision to order Felipe Massa to allow Fernando Alonso past at Hockenheim last year.

The thing is, these are two different situations and should therefore be treated differently.

I support the decision to allow team orders in the regulations. This is because there are some scenarios where team orders are the correct thing for a team to use, so trying to ban them is unrealistic.

However, this does not mean that I think team orders are acceptable in every situation. Let's go back to Hockenheim first.

(Before I do that, before anybody accuses me of bias, I would like to point out that I am certainly not a Ferrari fan. Nor do I support Webber over Vettel. If anything, it would be the other way around.)

At that point in the season, Fernando Alonso was (just about) still in contention for the title, whereas teammate Felipe Massa was not. There was no way that Ferrari could allow Massa to win over Alonso, so using team orders was correct in that situation to allow Alonso to take the lead in a way that ensured Ferrari would still get a 1-2 finish.

Now let's look at what happened at Silverstone.

Red Bull entered Silverstone with a big lead in the constructors' standings, while Sebastian Vettel had a huge lead in the drivers' standings.

Christian Horner said afterwards that he wanted to preserve the team's 2-3 finish. But why? A 2-3 finish for Red Bull was not essential. By their recent standards, it would not be a particularly strong result, would it?

If Ferrari were in that situation, with a 2-3 finish on the cards, I would understand if they wanted to hold station. Similarly with McLaren, a 2-3 finish at home would have been an important result so it would have been the right thing to hold positions and ensure the double podium finish.

With Vettel's huge lead in the drivers' standings it is not like Red Bull need to help him to score as many points as possible. With their comfortable position in both standings, Red Bull should be allowing Webber to challenge and pass Vettel in order to try and score more points than him in a GP, which he hasn't yet managed this year.

So that is basically why the decision yesterday was the wrong one. I haven't touched on how it robbed the fans etc... That is because all team orders prevent proper racing anyway, so there's no argument to be had there. Unlike many, I feel there is a time and a place for team orders, and this wasn't it. Hockenheim last year was, however.

Here's a bit of further analysis on the whole situation...

In his post-race interviews Horner seemed to suggest that his drivers 'were going to crash'. Can he not trust the drivers of the best team on the grid not to crash into each other? How bad must that make Webber feel, if his team boss cannot trust him not to crash into his teammate?

The reasons given by Horner post-race may all have been a cover up for the team simply favouring Vettel and wanting him to finish ahead of Webber.

I cannot blame Horner for favouring Vettel slightly. We all have our favourites, and Vettel is a very likable chap. However, I do not believe, if the true reason for yesterday's move was simply favouring Vettel, that Horner would favour Vettel sufficiently to make such a call.

Horner is a good guy, who cares for the sport. I do not feel that he would make a decision to favour one driver over another in a race at the detriment of the racing.

I think that, if driver favouritism was the reason for the move, it would have not been Horner's call. The call could have come directly from Helmut Marko, or Horner could have made the call under pressure from the bosses.

However, I cannot blame the Red Bull bosses (i.e. not Horner) for favouring Vettel over Webber. They've backed him throughout his career and he is of much higher value to them than Webber. They must do everything they can to keep Vettel happy.

Possibilities for some late-season driver changes?

It is quite common for teams to make some driver changes towards the end of a season. Sometimes they may part company early with a driver who was set to leave at the end of the year. Or it may be time to give a new driver a try-out with a view to making them a full-time driver for the following season.

I've had some ideas of some moves that could well happen later this year.

Karthikeyan's Tata sponsorship should see him back in the driving seat at
Hispania for the Indian Grand Prix. Photo: Morio

Daniel Ricciardo makes his racing debut this weekend in place of Narain Karthikeyan, but the Indian is still listed as an 'official driver' of the team. With his long-term sponsors Tata having got him into the seat into the first place, the chances are they will want him racing at his home race on 30 October.

Could Ricciardo race a Toro Rosso this year? Photo: Morio

With Ricciardo out of his seat for that race, Red Bull could well take the opportunity to place him at Toro Rosso for a one-off race, to compare him to their existing drivers. Though they didn't want to drop either Sebastien Buemi or Jaime Alguersuari permanantly to allow Ricciardo to race there, I'm sure they could do it for just the one race.

While we're on the subject of the Indian Grand Prix, there's a lot of talk that Karun Chandhok, another Indian, could also get a chance for his home race. He's a reserve driver at Lotus, whose Malaysian team boss Tony Fernandes could be keen to give an Asian driver a ride.

Chandhok enjoyed his Goodwood outing with Lotus,
but would no doubt enjoy racing at home even more. Photo: Supermac

What's more, it seems that the team's current race driver Jarno Trulli could retire at the end of the year, and even if he doesn't it's not certain that Lotus will retain him, as he's been constantly beaten by Heikki Kovalainen.

So my idea is to let Trulli go with three races remaining. Chandhok would then race in India, and perhaps in the final two rounds at Brazil and Abu Dhabi. However, these final two races could also be an opportunity for another of the drivers on the team's roster - Davide Valsecchi. The Italian is currently in contention for the GP2 title with the sister AirAsia squad, and this would provide a good opportunity for even stronger links between the two. Valsecchi tested for Hispania at the end of last year, impressing, and also has personal sponsorship, so could be a strong option for the team for 2012.

Dropping Trulli would give an opportunity to his compatriot Valsecchi. Photo: Morio

Valsecchi is fighting for the GP2 title against Romain Grosjean, amongst others. Remember him? He replaced Nelson Piquet at Renault in 2009 but was cast away at the end of the season. While many were disappointed by his performance, a few others (including myself) felt that he hadn't been given enough of a chance.

With Renault team boss Eric Boullier wanting a French driver in his team he signed Grosjean to his Gravity management firm as well as to Renault's reserve lineup. Boullier is also believed to be a little disappointed at Nick Heidfeld as Robert Kubica's replacement. (You can probably tell where I'm going with this...) If Grosjean wins his GP2 title, he could replace Heidfeld from Singapore onwards, when the GP2 season has finished.

Could Grosjean get another chance at Renault? Photo: Morio

However, a further little complication is caused by Bruno Senna. He was also signed as a reserve at Renault at the beginning of the year, and Boullier told that Senna was 'first in line' of the team's large roster of test drivers, due to his recent experience in F1. However, when Kubica was injured Senna was ignored in favour of Heidfeld, despite likely pressures from the marketing folks at Group Lotus, keen to reignite the Senna-Lotus-Renault combination. For this reason, if Heidfeld is going to be dropped, Senna has to be given his chance to shine at Interlagos, with Grosjean then taking over for Abu Dhabi if not before.

Senna. Lotus. Renault. Black. Gold. Interlagos. Marketing man's dream. Photo: Morio