by clicking the arrows at the side of the page, or by using the toolbar.
by clicking anywhere on the page.
by dragging the page around when zoomed in.
by clicking anywhere on the page when zoomed in.
web sites or send emails by clicking on hyperlinks.
Email this page to a friend
Search this issue
Index - jump to page or section
Archive - view past issues
GP Week : Issue 33
>>GPWEEKOPINION f ethics their only hope of victory is by playing with numbers. The tricky part of this is knowing what to do. ‘Holier than thou’attitudes lead to painful downfalls. Ford themselves have been through this problem in homologations issues in years gone by; Citroen themselves were forced into running-order duplicity in New Zealand this year. Moral high ground is shaky stuff. Perhaps the best thing is to focus on the reasons for the sport’s existence. We love the excitement of rallying, the scale of the operations, the visible amount of money that is there, but much of that is there because the manufacturers are present in the sport. They bring their own commercial set of rules and if we want the sport to continue to thrive there is a tightrope to be walked between competition rules and commercial realities. Is this a question of ethics? Are there any ethics in sport? And do we forget that we are in the world of multinational companies, with hundreds of thousands of people having jobs to be protected? We are lucky that companies want to use rallying as a promotional tool, but the way we respect that is relevant. The English expression of ‘throwing the baby out with the bathwater’ comes to mind. There is a bottom line to everything, which in rallying can be found in the showrooms of the manufacturers engaged in the sport. The solution is not ethics but image. What's so wrong with Mates helping mates I JUST don’t see what the big deal about team orders in F1 is. Sure, Kimi Raikkonen slowed down at the end of the Chinese Grand Prix to let Felipe Massa through. It wasn’t team orders, strictly speaking, because the team didn’t jump on the radio and ask Kimi to slow down. Apparently, he made the decision all on his own to help out his team-mate. But if the team did, or could, make that decision on the fly, and order Kimi to move over, would it be that bad? After all, Formula 1 is a team sport, and both drivers are part of the team. Why, then, shouldn’t team officials be able to manipulate the position of their own cars to advantage their whole team? Moving Massa ahead of Raikkonen in China was smart, not unsportsmanlike. If Kimi had beaten Felipe home, it would have been counterproductive to the whole Ferrari team. Look at it in footballing terms. If a team starts a player in defence, and it becomes obvious as the match wears on that he would be better at shutting down the opposition if he was moved into the forward line, they move him. It’s called tactics. It’s part of sport. And don’t we all want Formula 1 to be a sport? Andrew vAn Leeuwen Production editor Here is what I do have a problem with. I’m not saying that Heikki Kovalainen didn’t have a hydraulic issue at the end of the Chinese Grand Prix, but someone more cynical than I might suggest that his retirement was a great way to save a few kms on his engine before Brazil. He wasn’t going to score points, so calling him into the garage did the team no harm at all. If that did happen (and I’m not saying it did, remember), that would be unsportsmanlike. Back to football. What if a team was copping a complete walloping in a game, and decided at half time to head home. Another big game next week, this one is a forgone conclusion, let’s save our legs and jump on the team bus now. Would that be acceptable? No. Both scenarios are equally difficult to police, but in my opinion, when it comes to team orders, I don’t think there should be any policing at all. 23 opinion