McLaren told Hamilton Button wouldn’t pass him during the Turkish Grand Prix

Posted on

| Written by

Hamilton asked 'Is Jenson going to pass me?' and was told 'No'

McLaren told Lewis Hamilton that Jenson Button would not pass him during the Turkish Grand Prix.

New footage of the Turkish Grand Prix posted on the official F1 website reveals Hamilton asked the team “If I back off is Jenson going to pass me or not?”

He was told “No Lewis, no.” This audio clip is shown before the footage of Button overtaking Hamilton, suggesting the exchange took place before the pass was made.

The exchange – which was not aired during the race broadcast – is as follows:

Lewis Hamilton: Jenson’s closing in me you guys.
McLaren: Understood, Lewis.
Lewis Hamilton: If I back off is Jenson going to pass me or not?
McLaren: No Lewis, no

After the race Hamilton said he was “surprised” Button had passed him. Now we know why.

The question now is, was Button ordered to hand the place back?

The following radio exchanges from McLaren were broadcast during the race. We do not know what the time gap was between them being said to the drivers and being broadcast on television:

Lap 44: Hamilton told to “save fuel” and advised that both cars received the same instruction.
Lap 50: BBC reported that Martin Whitmarsh and Phil Prew were on the radio to both drivers.
Lap 52: Button told “We need more fuel saving. Fuel is critical. Save tyres in turn eight.”

Button passed Hamilton at the end of lap 48 and Hamilton re-passed him at the start of lap 49.

Read more: Hamilton "surprised" by Button’s pass (Turkish Grand Prix team-by-team)

2010 Turkish Grand Prix

    Browse all 2010 Turkish Grand Prix articles

    Author information

    Keith Collantine
    Lifelong motor sport fan Keith set up RaceFans in 2005 - when it was originally called F1 Fanatic. Having previously worked as a motoring...

    Got a potential story, tip or enquiry? Find out more about RaceFans and contact us here.

    269 comments on “McLaren told Hamilton Button wouldn’t pass him during the Turkish Grand Prix”

        1. The link is in the second paragraph.

      1. Poor article.

        [quote]The question now is, was Button ordered to hand the place back?[/quote]

        Both drivers were given identical instructions to save fuel and were given identical target lap times according to Tim Goss, the chief engineer. This was interpreted by Martin Brundle as there would be no more racing to the finish line as the cars have to save fuel. This is how Hamilton understood it. Which is why he wondered why Button was on his tail and asked if he was going to overtake, so that he had a chance to defend his position. He was told twice “NO”, Button won’t overtake. Then Button sneaked past him. It should be obvious to anyone who knows anything about racing that Lewis fought for that position back with wheel to wheel, wheel touching racing. It was AFTER Lewis retook 1st position, that the team radio said fuel was critical, because it probably was by then after all that extra racing. Lewis was only overtaken by Button after instructions were given to him to slow down and that he didn’t need to defend his position.

        Shouldn’t the question being asked be:

        Who was deceiving Lewis – his team or his teammate?

        This article is a very strange and perverse interpretation of events I must say.

        1. I agree, it was obvious Lewis thought they were both crusing to the line so when Button passed him Lewis flicked into racing mode an retook him, there is no way there was any radio contact during their battle, but after they were both reminded to save fuel to save a redbull style exit. I think its great thi happened though as Lewis now knows the score, I think he will better for it.Great race.

        2. I totally agree with you. It was very obvious to me that Hamilton EARNED his position back by forcing himself on the inside of Button. Bumping his front right wheel against Jenson’s to hold the spot.

          If Jenson really “gave back” the position, trust me, it wouldn’t have happened like that.

          The way I see it, both drivers were told to back off, and Jenson tried to pull a fast one on Hamilton and Hamilton was having NONE OF IT!

        3. Also agree, and love how Lewis can flick into “racing mode” and have the lead of a Grand Prix back within 1 corner of doing so. Awesome.

    1. I guess Button was told something else. Either way it seems they are cool.

    2. I taught so from the second i saw it, button overtook lewis too easily and was given orders tog o back to 2nd place.

      They are not so different from the redbulls afterall!!


      1. Red Bull tell Webber to turn his engine down and Vettel overtakes.


        Mclaren tell Hamilton to turn his engine down and Button overtakes.


        How does this make sense…

        1. Exactly. But hey, it’s British F1 journalism at its best.

          1. Hey S Hughes

            You know we British know how to shoot ourselves on the foot all the time. We do it in all sport by compromising ourselves.

            Let McLaren go on ahead and favour the less talented Button. It can only end in tears. As someone said already, its good this happenend early as Lewis now know the score. SOME AT MCLAREND IS DECEIVING HIM.

      2. Sush Meerkat
        4th June 2010, 14:04

        I read your comment in an Irish accent Paddy.

        The whole “fuel is critical” bit said in a strained voice does sound like it meant “give the place back! FOR GOODNESS SAKE GIVE THE PLACE BACK!”

        1. Or maybe it just meant “Jenson, we did mean it when we said you had to save fuel, we DO want to finish the race please”.

          1. Really? “maybe just mean () we Do want to finish…” Please.

            They altered the race by not allowing drivers to race each other. Its rubbish. There is no point in not allowing team orders when they so obviously subvert the rules with some pretty obvious radio calls. I find it a disgrace really. At least Vettel and Webber raced it out. Man the FIA just make it too easy to hate them.

            1. But they DID race each other, for a bit. The only reason Vettel raced it out was that he was out at his 1st attempt – had he gotten past, we don’t know what would have happened.

              Have you read James Allen’s blog about fuel strategy today? He makes a good point that McLaren and RBR both have been getting on the edge with fuel. While we have no final evidence one way or the other (and we will not ever have that), it seems plausible that teams have been cutting it closer and closer.

              But it is always easy to hate a team, if you want to.

          2. yes yesyesyesyes
            5th June 2010, 18:48

            I would rather see close, wheel to wheel racing and have them running on fumes rolling to the end; somewhat equivalent to a Ricky Bobby -esque sprint to the taladega finish line. Than to have team orders have the race come to a dull end. In my humble but fun opinion.

        2. They said the fuel situation was critical AFTER Lewis over took Button. Button overtook Lewis easily because Lewis (and Button according to the team) was told to target lap times, but Button took advantage of a slowing Lewis (either off his own back or part of a team plan). When Lewis overtook Button, it was not Button handing the place back. I cannot understand how anyone could think so. The instruction about fuel being critical was no doubt because it was critical.

          Fascinating that something that so clearly wronged Hamilton has been construed on this blog as team orders to benefit Hamilton.


          Explains why Lewis looked so unhappy on the podium.

          1. Yeah, I found this earlier an posted in the round up but this does expalin it.

            The reason we were giving before were kind of weak, “he inherited the win” doesn’t explain the total lack of fist pumping and smiling.

            I think he looked relived when he found out Button hadn’t a clue what had happened and just took his chance. An they seem to have sorted it under misunderstanding without any bitterness but what he must have been thinking on the way to the podium. No wonder he looked kinda miffed. Almost makes me felt better, I was quite disapointed when my driver won an didn’t seem happy about it.

          2. Radio transmissions are time delayed. How do you know for sure when that transmission went through?

            1. I can’t believe anyone can think Button was told to let the place back.

              1. He’d have looked annoyed at the end of the race.
              2. He wouldn’t have blocked Lewis to the pitwall.
              3. They wouldn’t have collided into the corner if he was being “let through”.

            2. When the race is broadcast live they are delayed, in these race edits they are in real time

          3. Mark Hitchcock
            4th June 2010, 19:18

            If the team wanted to get Button in front of Hamilton they would not have done it like this.
            If the theory is that Button was told to race and Lewis was told to slow down so that Lewis wasn’t expecting a move…then that’s just asking for a Red Bull style accident.
            We saw how close Button and Hamilton got into turn one when Lewis took the place back, the team would not risk a 1-2 just to trick one driver into letting the other win.

            Same goes for Red Bull, if they wanted to let Vettel through they would not have done it by tricking Webber into slowing down when he didn’t have to because as we saw, passes on track can lead to accidents and the teams don’t want that!

          4. Mate! we are the British aren’t we? i’m not suprised

          5. Fascinating that something that so clearly wronged Hamilton has been construed on this blog as team orders to benefit Hamilton.

            I don’t believe I have “construed” anything. And how was Hamilton “wronged” – he won the race, didn’t he?

            1. @ Keith Collantine

              Please dont insult our inteligence with your “he won the race didn’t he?” or “how was he wronged”?

              LH has to force his way almost doing a red bull take 2 (the two cars bumping each other) for him to retake the position. Does that seems to you like some sort of order?

              Secondly, since you’ve known LH as a racing driver, when have you ever seen him so downcast after a win?

              The fact that you dont think Hamilton was wronged speaks volume about you. How would you have felt being in Hamilton’s postion where you were told to slow down as your team mate was slowing down also only to be overtaken by that same team mate? huh?

            2. LH has to force his way almost doing a red bull take 2 (the two cars bumping each other) for him to retake the position. Does that seems to you like some sort of order?

              No I don’t think it was. But the fact of the matter is Hamilton won the race and I don’t see how any of the conspiracy theories explain that.

              I think conspiracy theories have sprung up to fill the huge gap between what we know and what we don’t know.

              We don’t know what target lap times were given and when. We don’t know if McLaren told Button not to pass Hamilton before he did. We don’t know if, when the McLaren engineers get on the radio and tell their drivers to “save fuel”, that is code for “hold positions”. And so on.

              As I wrote in this comment, based on what we’ve seen so far I think this was an attempt to get both drivers to slow down and hold position which went wrong:


              Never mind that the idea that a team with a multi-million pound budget would hire two world champions and then try to nobble one of them using public radio transmissions is complete madness.

            3. That is not a satisfatory answer…

              He being wrong has no relation whatsoever to winning the race, and that argument is indeed very poor.

              But in any case, you failed to offer your opinion on the matter, at least directly, something you usually do.

              Should we acknowledge this as your way of defending Button or defending McLaren?

            4. haha, seems you can’t win. I swear people were saying the other week that you were using headlines to make Hamilton look good, but now you’re supposedley ‘ignoring the fact that he was wronged.’ Seems that people are in 2 camps- people who are looking for the conspiracy and people who believe the simple answer. And unfortunately, neither party can understand why the other is thinking the way they are, and assume they are biased for/against McLaren/Hamilton/Button. I’m glad it isn’t my job to keep the internet happy!

      3. I dont think so…Jenson’s move was easy and it looked like Lewis was caught off guard especially after the fact that he was told:

        1- slow down

        2- that he will not be passed by Jenson

        presumably, Mclarern ‘forgot’ to tell Jenson ;) ;)

        On the other hand, Lewis is pass was a racing pass. He rode his slip stream down the straight and out-braked him at the 1st corner…

        …”The tangled web we weave…….”

    3. That exaplains why they started talking then stopped in the prescence of cameras just before the podium

      1. Yeah definaterly. I think Jenson knew nothing about it and that the pit wall was trying to control them without explicitly saying it. Hamilton clearly felt lied to and hence the long face. Button had no idea and was probably why he was surpirsed at hamiltons action. Either way I think that in this situation both drivers wont blame each other.

      2. No, Hamilton was talking about Vettel also nearly taking him out.

        He was saying that Vettel did the exact same thing to him (suddenly veering to the right to scare off an opponent), then Button thought he was talking about him when he overtook Hamilton. Then Hamilton explained “no, no, no Vettel”.

        1. Yes, I heard that as they were changing for podium. It just shows you how jumpy these drivers are “Were you talking about me….” and how easily they can jump to the wrong conclusion.

          I think Jensen and Lewis are sound though, good British banter between young British men who share the same culture ie. they understand each other. The problem in the past with two great team mates was different cultures and super size egos.

    4. Everyone kicking off at the Red Bull thing? Looks like Mclaren are just as bad, only problem is people went mention it because people think the team favours Lewis even though this and other races suggest they don’t.

      1. The two situations are not alike. If Button had driven into Hamilton, and the team had then said it was Hamilton’s fault, you’d have a point. This can still be explained as a mix-up from the pit wall. Red Bull’s disgraceful handling of the Vettel/Webber collision cannot.

        1. I meant crash aside. Just leading up to the crash…

      2. Red Bull basically gave a team order by telling Webber to slow down and Vettel to boost up.

        That’s completely different from telling your drivers to take it easy and finish the race a 1-2.

        Also, Red Bull keeps on lying about what exactly happened. They also keep blaming the wrong person for it. Or at the very least they act like Webber should have simply let Vettel past (with a lie as the explanation why).

        1. It is different really, but really that “push the overtake button” line on the Turkey Race Edit makes what’s happened at Redbull even worse, they told Vettle to boost past Mark, while they’d told Mark to turn his engine down, despite the fact both drivers had broken clear of the McLarens, who had come on the radio with instructions to start fuel saving.

          So to clarify, Redbull tried to manipulate the order of their drivers, to prevent the wrong man from taking the championship lead alone, when the danger of Hamilton had faded, an then when said wrong man wasn’t having any of it and Golden Boy caused a car crash, they blamed the car crash on the wrong man, despite clear evidence that it was Golden Boys fault, using Hamilton as an excuse for the moove when they must’ve known he’d started fuel saving by the way he’d started dropping tenths, an only know they’ve realised that they’ve been clocked for all this, have really started to look a little sorry.

          McLaren on the other hand, who operational efficiency is becoming increasingly farcical if we’re honnest, especially by their standards, made another gaffe, an apoligsed for the umpteenth time this season to their drivers, themselves, their fans and the man on the Clapham Omnibus.

          Who really comes off worse?

          1. Actually it was Mark’s race engineer you heard on the race edit saying “push the overtake button”

            1. Everyone needs to realise that it’s a “race edit” with emphasis on the word “edit”. The timings of the radio messages and what we are seeing on screen do not necessarily correlate.

              It would be super cool if we could have a full length race edit. with all the in car footage and radio traffic being available to the editors. The live edit often misses critical things and obviously when your doing stuff live you can’t always choose the best camera angles. That race was so good I have already watched it twice. I might even watch it again.

              What happened between Hamilton and Button is pretty much what I suspected. The only thing I don’t know now is what Button knew and when he knew it. I assume it was a team balls up and he knew nothing. I also think the overtake by Hamilton on button at turn 1 was a real overtake like some other people on here. It was a bit too desperate and lungy for it to be a team orders thing.

      3. There are three differences. First the team did not tell Jenson to “push the overtake button”, second Jenson did a clean overtake, not crash into his teammate and the last point, McLaren did not hide their suprise at Jenson having a go at Lewis and go on to blame Lewis for that.

        The background of these two situations was similar, but Red Bull wanted to switch their drivers and blamed the one who did not blow it, while McLaren did not stage an exchange and admitted there were some miscommunications.

    5. Rubbish Dave
      4th June 2010, 13:20

      Well, given the contact between the two when Hamilton retook Button, I doubt that was orchestrated by the team.

    6. They did tell Jenson to give the place back:

      “Jenson Fuel is critical you must save fuel”

      That sounds to me like “back off”

      1. I don’t think that means let him past. More like ease off and slow down during the race, I don’t think the radio message would have been at that exact moment.

        If Button was to let him through they wouldn’t have made contact would they.

      2. They told him “fuel is critical” three laps after Hamilton took his place back.

      3. Imoldgreg, they said that after Hamilton had re-passed Button so I don’t think it tells us anything about giving the place back. If they had said it when he was still ahead of Hamilton, then it would make sense.

        1. The told Button that 3 laps after Hamilton retook the place back for anyone whos posting without knowing the facts.

          1. How do you know that? We don’t know what the time difference is between when something was said to one of the drivers and when it was broadcast in the race coverage.

      4. Hamilton took P1 back from Jensen on L49 turn 1. The “Jenson Fuel is critical you must save fuel” signal went out on lap 52 some 2.5 laps after the overtaking move by Lewis.

      5. back off after LH RETOOK the place by force almost doing a red bull take 2! how is that giving back?

      6. How could Jenson give back a place he didn’t have. This instruction was given on the 52nd lap. By then Hamilton had already retaken the lead(Begining of the 50th lap) and their was about a second between them.

    7. Here we have a situation of team orders. Wonder how quickly we would have had 300+ posts if it was another team.

      1. So true, people forget that Hakkinen was let through and given the lead by Coulthard long before Ferrari did it.

        1. The drivers had agreed on that situation BEFORE the race though. Hakkinen lost position to Coulthard because of team error.

          Barrichello obviously didn’t agree that he should let Schumacher take his win away.

          1. Barrichello agreed on that situation BEFORE the season though. :P

        2. It’s a lot easier to forget than the infamous and indisputable phrase that was: “let Michael pass for the championship!”

        3. People also ignore the fact that Massa let his teammate through in Brazil ’07. This didn’t just effect the race outcome it effected the WDC.

      2. In 2007 after the Monaco race, McLaren was investigated for team orders keeping Hamilton back in favor of Alonso.

        In the verdict the FIA stated that team orders in the sense of easing off till the end of the races is common practice and does not constitute a punishable offence.

      3. That goes to show, how popular that other team is :-) . Also it would be a lot more for McLaren if most people would not have been tired of arguing about these things after 3-4 days of Red Bulls..t (those threads were up to 300+ pretty fast as well)

        1. I don’t think the Webber Vettel incident received such a reaction because of team orders, at least not to start with.

          Firstly you had two Championship contenders colliding while fighting for the lead, this would mean there would be lots of posts no matter who the two drivers in question were, but as there are teammates it adds something else to discuss.

          Then the thing that irked a lot of people and kept the story going longer was that even though most observers thought Vettel was responsible Red Bull blamed Webber, when the usual thing for a team to do is not to blame either driver even when it is a clear and cut case of it being just one driver’s fault.

          Finally it seems some believe it is a case of team orders with Red Bull telling Webber to slow and telling Vettel to push because they would prefer Vettel to win.

    8. they should ban radio chatter in the last 10 laps.

      1. That’s the dumbest idea I’ve ever heard not to mention dangerous. Drivers need to know what is going on around them and around the track. There could be debris or changing weather, drivers need to be told about these things.

        1. Ther’re reasons for race marshals on the track you know. They don’t just stand there waving yellow flags for fun, more or less “telling the drivers what’s going on around them” that’s why they are there…

          so whats the point having radio chatter for the last ten laps if all your going to hear is: “Conserve fuel.”, “Jenson won’t pass you Lewis” pointless I say. These people should be smart enough to put the right amount of fuel in a car to last the whole race.

          1. The “conserve fuel” phrase is the coded, tv-friendly way to say: “don’t pass your teammate”.

            1. I’d refer you to the strategy guide on James Allen blog if his site wern’t bugging right now.

              Says basically since the first race, the way teams have been running the races they’ve been using less and less fuel, same fuel consumption roughly as Bahrain has Turkey, but the teams put in about 15kilo’s less fuel because there’s an assumption that the places will be more or less settled after the first tyre stop. So they all race super potent mixtures up to the first fuel stop, an then lean out the mixture if they feel their position is assured.

              This race though was by far the quickest of the season, with four cars running nose to tail for 40 laps, an any of them could have won it. The Mercedes is a bit thirstier than the Renault so it’s no suprise that the McLarens got slightly critical on fuel.

      2. maestrointhesky
        5th June 2010, 22:45

        They should just ban radio transmission. That would kill team orders with a single act!

    9. It was interesting that you could also hear Vettel’s engineer telling him he could use his overtake button for a boost on the straight, which is presumably what helped him pull alongside Webber who had already been told to turn his engine down.

      1. Makes it even more disgusting. Red Bull pretty obviously admitted to giving team orders. Seems FOM now wants to cool that down a little and get us hooked on a McLaren discussion.

        But it does give a little bit clearer background to some unanswered questions about Lewis and Jenson after the race.

        1. That’s a little conspricacyeiy man. The Race Edit gave us facinaiting infomation on both McLaren and Redbull.

          1. I agree with Scribe, and there’s nothing ‘disgusting’ about it. They do have different race engineers ya know…and they try to beat each other. move on.

    10. BBC website reports an Autosport Magazine claim that Webbers engineer was ordered by Horner to tell Mark to allow Vettel past but “could not bring himself to do so”
      Anyone got any more on this?

      1. Makes perfect sense yes.

        Vettel wasn’t suddenly pushing like crazy for those last 3 laps just because he wanted to take a better look at Webber’s rear wing.

        He must have been told to overtake. Them telling Webber to slow down and Vettel to boost basically constitutes a team order.

        1. Because team orders have been banned, an the favouritism in the Redbull camp, this form of manipulation seems to be how they’re gonna do it.

          I really hope Webber beats Vettle in the end of year standings, that’ll throw a spanner in the works.

    11. Actually if the team are telling him fuel is critical, and at the end of the race, the car is dry, then they’re not doing anything wrong at all.

      The conversation above could just as easily be Hamilton’s engineer thinking “Jenson doesn’t have enough fuel in reserve to catch and pass Lewis and make it stick over the rest of the race”. It’s a question asking for an opinion, and an opinion was given. The team are not allowed to tell Button not to pass Hamilton, and Lewis would be aware of that.

      Horner actually telling Webber’s engineer “You must let your teammate past” is a completely different scenario. That’s a direct team order to change places, which I don’t see standing up under the rules.

      1. I compltely agree with you Hairs.

        If there was the order from RBR and it seems there very well was then it is a very different situation. It takes away any battle for position and swaps ‘fixes’ (I wanted to use a better word there) the result. I also agree that it’s probably going against the rules too and I wonder if anything will be done about it.

        1. How can you be so sure, have you seen RBR’s data? Can’t it just be the opposite of McLarens situation as Hairs described it above? In other words, Mark had less fuel than Seb and needed to conserve more and the team told Mark this info. Seb has better fuel and is currently faster, he is going to (try) to pass. There is nothing wrong with that, especially with the McLarens constant attack. Everything else seems like rumors from the press. I don’t really care either way, but everyone seems to be making it into such a huge conspiracy, but the teams and drivers from both RBR and McLaren don’t care AT ALL and have moved on (trust me, Webber of all people would let us know if he really cared = he’s very outspoken for an F1 driver) ….I think I’ll do the same.

          1. If Webber’s fuel was critical, all they had to do was tell him that – but instead they told him to move aside. If, by turning down his engine, he gets to the end but ends up getting passed, that’s one *potential* consequence. But it’s not something the teams are allowed to actual dictate to the drivers.

            1. When did they tell him to move aside…I must of missed that. So, he hadn’t turned his mixture down???

      2. Best analysis so far, the “no” to the question about button taking the position is just an opinion based on what the engineer thought at the time.
        Then when button unexpectedly takes the position Hamilton goes into full race mode where very very few in the field, if any at all can match him in identical car’s.

    12. as I said in another post, there are shades of Pironi and Villeneuve

    13. I dont think Button was told to give the place back. Seeing as they both touched and Jenson went very defensive on the straight; doesnt look like a guy who was told to give a place back. Plus the FIA can hear all the messages transmitted from pit to car and Mclaren would have had a fine of some sort by now wouldn’t they?

      However I am pretty sure that Jenson was told to back off after Lewis got the place back.

      1. I think you’ve called that right Zahir.

      2. I was thinking exactly the same.

      3. yeah i disagree when people say hamilton inherited the win. no he didn’t! he ahd a battle with button for 1st!

    14. I’m sorry is this not proving that Mclaren are using team orders which they strongly denie and is looked down on in modern f1. “Subsequently after the 2002 season, “Team Orders that could influence the outcome of a race” were banned in F1 regulations”, bold McLaren!

      1. No, it does not ‘prove that McLaren are using Team Orders’, as if there were what most people think of as team orders Button would not have made a move in the first place.

        The rule is so vague as to be almost useless if the wording you quote is true – orders that ‘influence the outcome of the race’ could include anything from advising a driver to speed up while others are in the pits, bringing a driver in to pit earlier than originally planned to try and jump their team-mate, or telling a driver to change the fuel mix or to save fuel. And how would you decide whether these things are team orders or one race engineer managing to outsmart another?

        If the FIA had been straight when they made the rule they would have worded it to say that teams cannot order a driver to let another on the same team pass purely to affect which order they cross the line in, as that is the specific incident (at the Austrian GP) which inspired the rule change. They did not want to allow another ‘formation finish’ where the No.1 driver in a team was gifted a position by their team-mate.

    15. What I noticed which was very strange was Hamilton’s demeanor as he got out of the car and when he was on the podium. He didn’t look particularly happy at all that he’d won the race. It was very strange, as it was his first win of the season. He didn’t celebrate at all when he got out of the car.

      At first, I thought it was because it was his dad’s 50th birthday and Hamilton was missing him, feeling emotional about the win, maybe wishing his dad was still his manager. All just my own speculation at the time).

      But now I wonder whether he was simply incredibly disappointed because he knew he’d only won the race because Button had been ordered to let him pass?

      To me, though, it looked like he really had to fight Button to get the position back. But maybe they just made it look good. I was surprised how quickly he managed to retake his position.

      Then again, Button looked pretty happy on the podium. So nothing really adds up here!


      1. Yeah, but the fight looked to good not to be true.

        A shame about the speculation really. The one thing that got me bouncing on the sofa has to be real for c… sake

      2. I think Button was making a show of being happy for Lewis to show how he had no hard feelings about being retaken, and that it was just a racing thing rather than the team trying to trick Hamilton.

      3. Typical that you think that Button was ordered to give the place back but I suppose that is what this article implies.

        Lewis and Button were both told to save fuel and target lap times, which means in effect that no overtaking would take place.

        Then Hamilton noticed Button on his tail and asked if he would overtake if he continued his slower pace. Lewis was told categorically “No, Lewis, no” only for Button to overtake him. This is completely unfair and is why Button found it so easy to overtake – Lewis was slowing and not defending as he was TOLD there was no need to. Lewis had to fight to get that position back, bumping wheels at the same time.

        It was AFTER Lewis overtook Button that the critical fuel saving message was given, because the fuel situation was probably critical by then.

        I find it unbelievable but also typical, sad and unjust that this shameful incident of Hamilton being wronged by his team or his teammate is being construed as favouring Hamilton, when the opposite is true.

        1. Button passed Lewis because he made a fantastic move and Lewis had no answer. Lewis returned the favor straight away. Lewis was unhappy because Button sent him a message that Lewis is not in vulnerable. Hamilton won the race. However, Jenson took another bite out of him psychologically. Good show JB!

          1. You’re not well BeenDun. The only way Jenson could have affected Lewis’s psyche is if he could have made the pass stick, which he didn’t. Team orders or not he wouldn’t get another shot for the balance of the race. Jenson don’t possess the skills to overtake Lewis in a equal car when Lewis knows he is coming. That’s a fact!

            1. Not well? Did you see the look on Lewis face ? Jenson was the one celebrating. Lewis got his first win of the season and Jenson robbed him of the joy of victory. One thing Hamilton fans are is loyal and the other thing is dumb.

        2. No offence S Hughes, if this were the other way round you wouldn’t have said any of that, though, would you? It was most likely a big misunderstanding in the team, a mix up of signals, and when the two drivers were fighting on the track they were probably just as confused! These things happen!

          As for the tone of Keith’s article you mentioned (a Hamilton article, again) he is simply stating the facts, that’s all of what the article is made up of. The article ASKS if Button was told to give the place back, it doesn’t “imply it”. The misunderstanding led to the overtake, I think it’s safe to establish.

          And I agree, Button was being as defensive as he could on the straight without making any illegal moves, so Hamilton wasn’t just LET past. But no need to be so overdramatic about it…

          1. Overdramatic? Just stating facts.

            1. “I suppose that is what this article implies.”

              “I find it unbelievable but also typical, sad and unjust that this shameful incident of Hamilton being wronged by his team or his teammate is being construed as favouring Hamilton, when the opposite is true.”

              Those are opinions, not facts! The rest of the post was fine, and definitely I see what you’re saying – but it could have so just been a misunderstanding, where a die hard Hamilton fan such as yourself interprets it in the most extreme and biased fashion.

              Again, I pose the question – if it had been the other way round, and Hamilton had ‘crept up on an unsuspecting Button’ would you be making similiar accusations?

            2. Don’t know about Hughes, Electrolite, but yes obviously.

              Have you watched the race edit? Hamilton clearly says, if I slow down will Button pass me. The team answers catogorically in the negative, next lap, theres Button making a crack at him. Seriosuly unfair, wrong infact. An if that had happened to Button it would have been just as bad.

              I don’t see how the article implies anything either, pretty nuetral as usual with keiths news posts. Calling someone a die hard Hamilton fan, an I must admit I’m a Hamilton fan, but as a McLaren fan first I can tell you that Hamiltons mood on the podium was completley justified, how worried and baffled would you be, if the team tells you not to worry about your teamate then he nearly sneaks by and steals the win.

              Facts are, McLaren made a screaming mess of their drivers instructions an it’s not being a blind fan to point out that hamilton was seriously wronged.

        3. I agree.

          No wonder Hamilton was somber on the podium. He had been lied to by his team after all.

          I think what this article doesn’t ponder upon is – are Mclaren favoring Button instead of Hamilton?

          The team tells Car no. 2 that he won’t be passed by Car no. 1. If you look at both the overtakes, you can see that Hamilton was caught completely off guard by Button’s move, whereas Button tried as hard as he could to keep Lewis behind, but was unable to.

          To me, it seems that Button passed Hamilton thanks to the team’s help (which is clearly true – cannot be debated upon) whereas Hamilton passed Button without the team’s help (and perhaps – highly debatable, against their wishes too).

          1. “To me, it seems that Button passed Hamilton thanks to the team’s help (which is clearly true – cannot be debated upon)…”

            Okay, let’s not debate that, seeing as you have decided to make it fact!

            I wonder, though… Miscommunication? Or 8 races in, not THAT many to go, and the team thinking that seeing as Button is already ahead…

            McLaren have made the mistake before of having 2 great drivers. Maybe they’ve learnt and are already wanting to secretively make one driver (with the most points) their number 1?

          2. “Lied to” Sumedh? – no, it was a screw up, and button had other ideas. No big deal.

          3. It’s funny how the only people who care about this are Hamilton fans. Hamilton gets passed by Button and it’s the end of the world. Button made a clean pass and took Hamilton clear and simple. It wasn’t because Hamilton had slowed or any other excuse you can conjure up. It was a pass of one driver by another plain and simple. Lewis returned the favor at the next turn so what is the problem? Clean fighting by two world champions. To Button fans it was just good racing. To Hamilton fans it’s like some horrible, unspeakable event took place that has to have an explanation. Hamilton can be passed. Button can pass him. It’s not the end of the world.

            1. It’s funny how insults about Hamilton fans (calling them dumb, etc) don’t get removed from this site, but other insults do. Hmmmm.

            2. Because in this case it’s not an insult. It’s a fact. Let’s see some more 1000 word posts from you rationalizing why Button was able to pass Lewis. Just like the rationalizations created to explain why Hamilton is not destroying his teammate like everyone said he was going to. Hamilton isn’t destroying Button because he can’t. If he could, he’d already be way ahead by now.

    16. I don’t think it was team orders, more like miscommunication between the team to Hamilton and the team to Button

    17. Or it could just be that Button saw an oppertunity to make a name for himself! Sly and Devious!

      1. I assume this is a joke.

    18. I once again have this constant feeling in F1 that I’m missing something. I’ve seen some comments that Button is being favoured and I’m at a loss. Yes, this could well have benefitted Jenson had Lewis not fought back. However, I read this (I reiterate I could well be wrong) as a case of just plain and simple miscommunication/ wires crossed between the two garages.

      There just doesn’t seem to me, to be any concrete proof of favouritism. Mclaren want to win obviously but to covertly fix their own 1-2? I don’t think so.

      I get Hamilton’s anger I really do, I;d be fuming as he so easily could have lost but I think it was a situation that arose out of clumsiness. I do think the order for Button to save fuel was mostly legitimate but possibly Mclaren trying to get back no top of the situation after the confusion and not wanting to crash.

      1. Well, said, I feel quite similar about it.

        I tend to believe in clumsiness and miscommunication over clever scheming; maybe I am naïeve.

        1. Well we are in the same naive boat :P I like to think of it as just looking on the bright side myself.

          There is one bit I don’t really like
          “Lewis Hamilton: If I back off is Jenson going to pass me or not?
          McLaren: No Lewis, no”

          I don’t thnik there is favouritism at all but that doesn’t really make things look good. Obviously it was wrong anyway but the idea of maintaining position is good for a team etc but robs Jenson of a fight if he had been cleverer with fuel. Similarily I’d say this if it was the other way round. Although even when there was refuelling I suspect that many times 1-2 positions were encouraged to stay in the same order so I think it is perhaps about a wider issue than just Mclaren possibly.

          1. There is nothing wrong with teams not wanting their drivers battle till the finish line.

            They had 30 seconds to Webber’s damaged car and well over 40 seconds to Schumacher.

            If they allowed Hamilton and Button to race then both would have had to continue at max pace. Unnecessarily stressing all the components. This could result in failure or the drivers taking each other off.

            From the team’s perspective that’s pretty much unwanted.

            Again, the FIA already said that nursing the cars in formation to the finish is OK.

            1. I know there’s nothing wrong with it from the team’s point a view. Hell, if I was manager I’d want them to cruise to the end and maintain order but it is something I don’t really like that’s all I’m saying. In an ideal world, well in my little dream world, they’d all be battling it out right across the line but with the risk of crashing and/or fuel issues that isn’t possible. I understand it but I’m not a fan.

          2. Well you tell the truth to the driver. Lewis wasn’t explicitly asking for Jenson to be held back, he wanted to know if the fight was still on. He wanted situational awareness from his race-engineer.

            The response should have been “You are critical on fuel, you must slow down or fail to finish, we can’t make any promises for Jenson, watch your back”.

            Then at least Hamilton would know where he stood, and he could have driven accordingly, slowly but defensively.

            To tell him “No” (twice in one sentance), left him out on the track bent over, wide-open and ready to be done-up and done-in. His quick understeering, dirty-side braking, cut across the Turn 1 kerb saved that whole McLaren team from exploding Sunday night.

            Poor judgement call by the McLaren pitwall … again. Imagine if Hamilton had someone like a Smedley in his corner, instead of a procession of innacurate, analysis-paralysed McLaren droids.

            1. “. Lewis wasn’t explicitly asking for Jenson to be held back, he wanted to know if the fight was still on”

              I’m not critising Lewis, he had every right to ask that I’m saying Mclaren should have got their facts right.

            2. That’s what I’m saying as well.

              If there wasn’t a deal, and Jenson insistes no-one said anything to him, then why tell Lewis something which is fundamentally not the case.
              What on earth were they expecting to happen, what’s their thought process, one driver told the race was over and the other still going full-bananas?

              That whole pit-wall seriously needs to have their heads clanked together. They badly need to raise their game, they are falling down on the job.

            3. definatley, McLarens supposed Leigon of super efficient muticulousotrons are making screamer after screamer, it’s a new system an all, but team management and race controll are getting a little to amusing for their own good.

            4. Indeed. McLaren need to think about how to get their drivers (or just Hamilton?) the best information, without leading them to wrong conclusions, such as happened here, or with China pits for Hamilton based on unclear info on weather/tires.

              And Hamilton needs to learn from Button: do your thing, and let the team tell you if you misunderstood.

            5. I agree, he needs a competent engineer to cover his back on the pitwall. The one he has now has show himself to be lacking under stress in a number of races.

      2. There is something strange going on at McLaren between Hamilton and the pitwall. At practically every race they seem to be at each others throat. Bad pit stops, wrong tires, bad communication,etc. I think he can forget a WDC this year and should either consider requesting a new engineer for next season or moving on to something else.

    19. Its bugger all to do with Mclaren lying.

      Its more likely that the team told them both to save fuel, presuming they would settle in place and they wouldn’t do anything stupid, but Jenson saw the opportunity to over take and took it, hes a racing driver, what do you expect?

      People are always way to Happy/Quick to cry foul when it comes to anything done to Hamilton.

      1. My thoughts exactly. If it was the other way around I have no doubt that Lewis would have had a pop at the lead himself.

        1. I hate ‘ifs’!!!!
          How about this: If Hamilton hadn’t passed Webber & Vettel while they lay on the side of the road, he wouldn’t have won!!
          Rubbish, innit?

          So, Dan Thorn, take your conditionals out of here!

          1. I hate ‘what ifs’ too, particularly when it applies to unique scenarios. This is different however – Hamilton had no hesitation in passing Button at Melbourne, and I’m sure that at Shanghai he’d have had a go if (yep there’s that dreaded word again) there were 10 laps to go and not 2 when he caught him. In the future there may well be a reversed scenario to Turkey and as long as there isn’t a definate “hold position) call going out to boths drivers the I’m 100 certain Lewis would try to pass Jenson. The greatest racing drivers don’t get anywhere by bending over for team mates!

      2. Untitled258, and how about ‘people are always way too Happy/Quick to have a go at Hamilton when it comes to anything he’s done’.

      3. I agree, Jenson stated afterwards that he “had to have a go”. Although Lewis was rightly surprised, the team did not lie.

      4. Spot on. Jenson stuck Lewis with a solid move and Lewis had no answer. Lewis gave it back to JB immediately. Exciting racing from both of them. Jenson was fine and happy on the podium while Lewis looked miserable.

        1. DeenDun. Lewis was miserable because he was specifically told Jenson wouldn’t try and pass him, an then he did.

          He must have felt lied too, he must have felt like his beloved McLaren team who he’s been with since the age of 13 were slipping away from him, he must have been really quite angry.

          Why is it weird that people say Lewis was hard done by, we’re not saying it was malicious but clearly something went badly wrong within McLaren, an it nearly robbed Lewis of his third big points haul of the year at the hands of his team, due to operational error, again!

          1. Scribe, Lewis got one upped by his teammate. He may have taken the victory, but Jenson had the final word. Lewis was supposed to crush Jenson this season. The crush never came.

            1. You’re just a complete and utter idiot.

            2. S Hughes. The truth hurts mate. Reality seems to be the thing Hamilton fans hate the most. Keep talking and thinking your right. Lol.

            3. Possibly one-upped if the move had stuck, but Jenson was re-overtaken almost immediately.

              You’re also extrapolating fan predictions (Lewis crushing Jenson) and pinning it on the drivers themselves. I’m sure Lewis always thought he could beat Jenson (vice versa as well), but one driver “crushing” another is fan talk.

            4. Simon, the move stuck. Were you watching the race? Lewis had to follow Jenson down the main straight. The Lewis made his move and took the place back. The message was sent regardless of whether or not Lewis won or not. All a thinking fan had to do was look at Lewis’s face on the podium. Jenson was hopping around like a kid at Christmas. Lewis won the race but Jenson communicated his point.

            5. BeenDun, you’ve got a biased perspective on truth mate. Button probably received the message, even with his teamate unsuspecting and and due to a team assurance not deffending. He still couldn’t make a move stick for more than a mile. Were you watching the race?

              An Hamilton had every right to be annoyed, his team had told him exactly the opposite of what was true, regarding his teamate.

              You clearly can’t be argued with, your points are illogical an your language insulting.

            6. Err, in what exactly did Jenson have the final word????
              He overtook Hamilton due to Hamilton slowing down as per team orders, and managed to lose the place!

              Crush or no crush, apart from points haul, Lewis has beaten Jenson this year by every other parameter – and we are not even halwfay through the season yet!

            7. @BeenDun – you’re arguing semantics here. By “not sticking”, I was referring to the fact that Jenson was almost immediately overtaken again.

              What I’m saying is that it’s hard to put a convincing case together for Jenson having one-upped his team-mate in such circumstances, unless you want to argue that Lewis only managed the subsequent overtake because Jenson backed off and let him through again.

              Sure, you could also argue that Jenson might have passed again had he not been told fuel was critical (ie. back off). On the flip side, Lewis said “if I back off, will he pass me” just before the dual took place – so it’s a circular argument. If neither one backs off, there is little chance of an overtake.

              As for why Lewis looked the way he did on the podium, I don’t think you’ll find that every thinking fan came to the same conclusion as you did.

    20. There are 3 things we can take from this:
      1- After the pits, it seems no one can overtake his team mate. It happened with RBR and Mclaren even in Ferrari, only Alonso overtook Massa in China because Massa and Ferrari were took by surprise. It was a gusty move by Alonso.
      2- It will allways have orders from the teams to the drivers.
      3- The most important one is that, if fights like turkey will hapen again, we will see 1 or 2 F1 cars not finishing the race because of fuel issues.
      So one one, even Renaut engine can´t go the distance at full speed till the end of the race.
      This brings something more to the race we weren´t expecting.

      1. The fuel issue is more of a case of teams seeing where the absolute limit is in terms of fuel consumption. In future I think the teams will probably put a bit more fuel in just to be on the safe side.

      2. Teams have to use multiple parts across several races so there is always going to be the incentive to slow the cars down near the end of the race. Also there will be an incentive to run the least amount of fuel possible and fuel save near the end of the race. I think these are just inevitable consequences of the current rules in F1. If you wanted to change it then I guess you would have to mandate the amount of fuel they started the race with and allow them to run a new engine each race. That’s not going to happen though for obvious reasons.

      3. “You’re just a complete and utter idiot.”

        Totally agree! BeenDun…..what are you on mate?

    21. I am very disappointed this was the case :-(

      Although I thought at time this could not have been so amicable as was portrayed by both drivers.

      In all my comments this week, I had always advised LH to watch his back! And the voice that told him JB will not overtake him was that of Whitmarsh …… very worrying I must say. If Martin Whitmarsh continues this way, he will not stay long in that position.

      1. Martin probably thought that he had made sure to both drivers that they were to save fuel (regardless of if that meant “stay put” or save fuel). Hamilton seemingly has been a good boy about listening to the pits (not always to his advantage). I guess they need to get used to Button having more of a mind of his own.

        1. Probably get slated for saying this but…

          I think Lewis was Ron’s “special one” now he’s gone I don’t think Lewis gets the same treatment as he did when Ron was in charge.

          I personally think Whitmarsh is in favour of Jenson a bit more now, probably after his two wins (and as Whitmarsh bought him to the team) I think he’d have felt like Jenson had done him well. I don’t think it’s favouritism in the fact they’d let him win over Lewis though.

          1. Lewis and Ron definately had a special relationship – Ron did tend to favour one driver over another and even though they were both given equal treatment, it tended to alienate their team-mate.

            In light of that, and the way that Heikki felt very much a Number 2 to Lewis, I think Whitmarsh is trying to prove that McLaren isn’t all about Lewis, but he’s overcompensating a bit too much.

          2. Exactly. Whitmarsh favours Button although they give the drivers the same material and the same opportunities.

          3. Withmarsh might favour Jenson as a person or whatever… but they got the numbers and they know Lewis is the fastest of the 2 this year.
            I that’s what you will see when you look at laptimes and not just the end result!

            1. The end result is all that matters. Fastest lap times are meaningless if you can’t win.

          4. No Tommy I think you’ve hit the nail on the head. Whitmarsh cried when Jenson won, man is clearly a fan. Still I think he has noticed he’s overcompensating an I don’t think he wants to loose Lewis.

            Who would?

            1. I think McLaren have been impressed with maturity of Button. Hamilton has been caught out now several times by just trusting his team instead of doing like Button and trusting his instincts with strategy, gaining them two wins, while Hamilton has been impressively busy, but with less to show in points.

              For the team it is great to have this combination of drivers, and I think this is what they sorely missed. Whitmarsh may have been so happy because it showed they do need a mix of experience and young talent.

              But they also need to change the way they deal with driver rivalry, now both can fight for a win on merit. With Kovalainen that wasn’t an issue.

    22. So much for McLarens “our drivers are free to race policy”.

      When are we going to get rid of the stupid “team orders” rule in F1 anyways. Anyone with half a brain can see it’s still happening but no-one is getting punished for it, so why have the rule?

      1. You seem to have missed the point. No team orders is exactly what did happen at McLaren.

        Team orders is what was attempted at Redbull. The driver given the order wasn’t having any of it and forced the issue.

    23. I suppose this explains Hamilton’s subdued reaction when he got out of the car after the race.

      He was told to ease up to look after the car and wanted to check Button would be doing the same thing and so that it was safe to slow a bit.

      I am sure it would be a surprise to anyone if after being told that both cars were being ordered to slow to suddenly have your teammate pass you.

      At least he didn’t mention it after the race in public and waited until he could talk privately with the team.

      Also it is a shame McLaren don’t include all their radio communications on their commentary log, as the one for Turkey doesn’t seem to have the exchange mentioned in the article or the bits broadcast to the world during the race.

      1. Yeah I was wondering what the point of that site was. I was watching it for radio traffic, but not even all the messages on TV appear on that site.

        Utterly useless unfortunately.

        And what’s the point of hiding it? Of course all the teams are listening in to their competitors radio transmissions.

        1. I had a look at those messages as well. A shame they only play to be open, not showing everything. Lewis commenting in Melbourne was also not shown, that’s a shame, because it might have been a great feature on their website.

          On the other point – the teams are not listening into their radio, as those are encrypted. The teams only have the FIA listening in on everything (FOM as well, judging from this video).

          1. The radio transmissions are no crypted when the car is on track.

    24. After witnessing Vettel/Webber, I guess Lewis thought: hang on, won’t that happen to us too if I stop pushing.

      Also explains why Button thought Lewis was meaning him when hearing “did that to me too” pre-podium – someone felt a bit guilty it seems (but not sorry, I think).

      1. I do think Button told him he was sorry for catchin Lewis suprised by it, not by doing the move as such.

        1. yes, that was what I meant, he wasn’t sorry for making a move, but for the circumstances. And Hamilton seemed relieved to know it was not staged but just a chance taken by Button, in combination with unclear communication by the team.

    25. Lewis should have never asked the question “is Jenson going to overtake me”. As that would imply team orders from the resulting “no”. I think Lewis should never assume Jenson is going to stop racing him and instead asked for information on how close Jenson was to him sector by sector/lap by lap if necessary.
      This is what Jenson did in China when Lewis was closing in on him.

      BTW, the idea that McLaren are trying to fix it so Lewis is disadvantaged is silly. The fact is one driver uses his brain a little more than the other when he goes racing. The other takes everything from the pitwall as gospel.

      1. I would rather obey team order than go against it LJ. And by “using of brain” does that mean an incapacity to think? Or just bigotry on your part?

    26. Can I remind people on this site of all the claims that racing would be better without fuel stops? Drivers are protecting tyres after 2 laps and with 25 laps to go they are on fuel saving mode. When I said pre season that I did not want to see cars running out of fuel during a race it was because I’d seen it all before. The key difference is drivers raced then and hoped they had the fuel to finish. With the info they have now even that has gone. We have had some good races so far but Turkey has been the only real race on the track without outside influence.
      Team bosses know how much fuel a car needs and if with 20 odd laps to go a driver is told to save gas he is being told don’t pass your team mate. Are we to believe car are not filled to the end with the hope of SC’s and weather to help them get there?

      1. Thats not true is it? In the refueling era, would we have had four cars racing within 3 seconds of each other flat out for 40 laps?

        Putting less fuel in is an interesting risk an further element into the equation. All in the name of performance. Whats really wrong is the quali tyre rule, it just means races follow the same pattern.

        1. Well that’s rampante’s point isn’t it? There were not going to be racing flat out for the duration. There were going to be sort of creeping around possibly waiting to see whose fuel math was fuzzy and whether the tires would truly last for 2/3rds of the race. If there were stops, we would in fact have seen the cars going full out the whole race trying to create pace, and we would have had the drama of the overlaps and the test of skill of cold tire out laps. The refueling ban is a failure.

          Lets not forget that Turkey is relatively unique in fuel consumption. Turkey and Malaysia use a lot of fuel and the cars are designed to carry only the amount of fuel needed for the highest-consumption track—minus some margin in favor of the other tracks, knowing some measures are possible at those two tracks to finish the race. Anyway, we won’t see this fuel drama at Canada.

          1. Refueling ban is not a faliure. Managing fuel and tyre ware adds a further element of skill for the drivers and another layer of intrigue for the veiwers. We wouldn’t have got close racing like we saw in Turkey during the refuling era because it would have been all about fuel strategy decided on computers in Woking and Milton Keynes.

            Drivers at the front could control a race from the front much easier during the refueling era, squables over position are ten times more tense and exciting now refulings been banned because it means something.

            Turkeys fuel isn’t unique either, Barcelona, Bahrain and as you said Malaysia all require simular loads.

            The drama of overlaps was rubbish, much better force it onto the track. An tyre skill, meh, there under blankets, it rarley comes to anything on track.

            Refueling era F1 was just a series of sprints between stops. Now F1 has become much more difficult for both driver and team, an as the teams have now cut out the endurance mentality seen in Bahrain, F1 is becoming far more exciting as the teams cut it finer an finer. Turkey was a marvelous race that we almost certainly couldn’t of seen during the refueling era.

    27. We all knew when the team said, “save fuel,” that they were really saying back off and dont pass. It took the media how many years to realize and complain about Ferrari’s Marlboro subliminal advertising.. how long is it going to take them to realize that “save fuel” is really a team order not to pass!

      You don’t calculate fuel saving into your race strategy. What if the McLarens had to fight the Red Bulls to the end with no chance to save fuel.. would they have run out of gas? Not likely.

      1. LeRoy, both cars had barely enough fuel at the end to provide a sample at the end for the FIA. All teams are trying to find the limit for fuel, McLaren have definitely found theirs.

        But yeah, in most case save fuel is usually hold position.

        1. Not anymore, with refuelling gone, the teams are cutting it so marginal it’s funny. Read James Allens section on strategy, it’s facinaiting.

    28. So McLaren did deny us a thrilling end to the grand prix with both drivers fighting tooth and nail until the flag.

      Thought so… great, just want we want to see; follow-the-leader until the chequers. Cheers guys.

      1. You would probably have to go back to the 80’s to find a case where two teammates have been allowed to fight “tooth and nail” right up to the flag.

        …and I’ve no problem with this, Formula 1 is a team sport… with teams of hundreds of players.

        1. ps. I think for the drivers within a team the fight is in Qualy mostly, and in the race up to a point, thereafter it is about bringing it home, especially if gaining positions over other teams is not a possibility.

      2. Or maybe just fighting on track to within a few yards of the finish line, continuing the fight right next to the track! :o

      3. Yeah because with a 30 to 40 second lead it makes sense for a team to risk losing a 1-2 finish just because someone wants to see some action.

        It’s a (team) sport, not a circus.

    29. Just Remember When They Say Back Off They Mean By A Few Tenths, And It Will Still Be Full Throttle On The Straights… Just Go Bit Slower Through This Corner, Brake Earlier Here Etc.

    30. The comparison some people are making here to the Red Bull incident is madness.

      Red Bull orchestrated a “change of position”, which is against the rules and, when it backfired, they showed complete favouritism to the “at fault” driver.

      McLaren just attempted to orchestrate a “hold position” and had not communicated it clearly enough to Jenson. Once Lewis immediately retook the place it was made clear what was required. No favouritism for either driver here. If it has been Jenson then Lewis, the same “hold position” would have been communicated.

      1. Completely agree.

        I just wish that people wouldn’t act so freakishly paniced over “team orders” in the sense that teams tell their drivers to back off.

        Those orders are pretty common.

        Besides, if they had told Hamilton that he could expect Button to make a pass, he would obviously have been driving more defensively.

      2. I agree with your analysis. Jenson would not have tried the move if he knew what the score was.

        Like many others I’m also very disappointed. Especially after listening to Whitmarsh gloat to the world how his drivers are free to race, after Turkey and China.

        If this is the case for the rest of the season, then my money is on Lewis. He’ll likely qualify ahead of Jenson more often, giving him track position and priority in the pitstops and will not get jumped. (even if it means keeping Jenson out a lap longer -see Turkey). Any advantage Jenson might gain from conserving his car will be negated when he’s told to hold station.

        1. Well I disagree, Jenson would have tried a moove if he thought it the least bit possible, man is a racing driver, the mistake was that the fact that he could, wasn’t communicated to Hamilton clearly enough.

          I also think McLaren is being incredbily free with it’s drivers racing each other. Jenson won’t be told to hold station because he never has been, an McLaren arn’t in that game anymore.

      3. Let’s hope that is true. Not sure if LH would have respected the “hold position” communication if he was in second and Button first.

      4. Completely disagree!!

        Mclaren “did not communicated it clearly enough to Jenson” you say. I don’t agree to this at all. This ‘miscommunication’ is just a camouflage to get their favored driver in lead of the race. How else do you explain Lewis being lied to by his own team?

        I think Mclaren are trying to help Button as much as they can covertly.

        1. Well, you are allowed your opinion, clearly.

          It is a lot easier in general to believe that people make mistakes than that there is a covert 5th column working to overthrow a racing driver.

          But, as the saying goes “just because you are paranoid, doesn’t mean you are not being followed”; meaning in this context that a lack of evidence (not opinion) does not, can not, prove there is nothing going on.

        2. sumedh, i don’t know if your read my post but I thought Jenson wasn’t the problem. The miscomunication was with Lewis. Lewis wasn’t given the full infomation on Jenson, an therfore got miffed.

          Jenson got told to fuel save, but the team seems to take a slightly more hands off approach with him, an he did as much fuel saving as he thought nessaccary.

          I don’t think McLaren could really be trying to sabotage Hamilton, why would anyteam try an do that, especially as Jenson, obviously a good racing driver, clearly aint quite as good.

    31. I wish the Teams would stick to building cars and leave the racing up to the drivers.

      If Button’s catching Lewis, of course he will try and pass him. It’s his job. It’s total, absolute nonsense to go and tell Lewis “no he won’t”.

      By trying to tell the drivers how to race, clueless, self-centered team management are turning wonderful racing manoeuvres into confusing and petty situations which end up turning drivers against each other.

      1. The team doesn’t want their drivers to risk it all.

        1. Then “The team” should run a Taxi company, not an F1 squad.

          1. yes because drivers in the wall is exactly what F1 teams want to see.

            1. Well if we’re all here to please the teams, we should just randomly pic a world champion in March every year.

              It would be much safer and cheaper. Indeed, driving cars at such dangerous speeds is ludicrous, and overtaking, that’s just insane. This barbaric behaviour must be stopped at once.

            2. alright take it out of context if you want too. Lets be clear

              What do F1 teams want to see?
              :Their drivers finsih 1-2

              What do F1 teams not want to see?
              :Their drivers crash, at all.

              Problem with that?

              To get there drivers 1-2 obviosly the teams are prepared to take some big risks including all the fun stuff we like to see. But why on earth would any team want to risk it’s drivers taking each other out so they could fight over who is 1 and who is 2?

              That’s right, no reason. There here to win the races first, not entertain us, watching them all atempt to acheive the same goal against each other, is where the entertainment is. An if you don’t understand that, your probably in the wrong sport.

    32. I think that this is all a storm in a teacup personally. I do not think that there were any “team orders” other than telling both drivers to save fuel till the end. Button saw that he had a very small window in which to make a move (not dissimilar to the “Golden Lap” talked about with regard to Sebastian Vettel which I have read elsewhere), and made his move. Unfortunately for him he didn’t make it stick

    33. This adds a useful margin of information. This makes the facts even more straight forward. Hamilton asked whether Button would be following suit if he went into fuel-saving mode. Remember, he previously had been told that “both cars are the same.” I think any sensible person would want to clarify that opague statement and that’s what Hamilton did, using, as it were, his brain. The answer was affirmative.

      The fact that Button then passed him, thus supports my decision to henceforce call Jenson Button the Artful Dodger.

      The suggestion that Button was told something different is, sorry, laughable. It goes againts every shred of evidence we have. It assumes that the pits would have failed to tell Button that his fuel was also critical, which would have been no favor to him—even if you assume that the hold-station order would have come post-pass.

      The idea that the team made Jack Dawkins give way again in favor of Hamilton is totally bizarre to anyone who watched Hamilton prize his assailant’s fingers one by one from the stolen position.

      This doesnt put RBR on the same plane as VMM. The orders to Hamilton and Dawkins were made to ensure that both drivers made it to the end. If they raced each other, we assume that this would not have happened. This is precisly what made RBR’s planned change of position—to leverage one liter of fuel–so profoundly stupid. Notwithstanding that it was a plain black and white case of team orders: a violation of the Schumacher-Oesterreichring Rule.

      What all of this proves, to go off topic, is the Hamilton needs a manager. The team manages him now, which is a conflict of interest. We only need to look at the chronicles of Briatore to see that. He needs someone to be in the garage focusing on situations when the teams’ interestes are not precisely his own.

    34. I am not sure about this, but i am pretty certain that there was some radio communication on the lap back to the pits where Button actually apologized for the situation.

      Next to that it goes to show that Lewis and Mark had the same thoughts when turning the engine down: will this make the next car faster and bring my lead in danger?

      They had to tell all of them to turn it down, otherwise the teams would probalby have looked stupid with cars stranded a few hundred meters before the finsh!

    35. Even I was surprised that Button attacked Hamilton on lap 49 as on lap 44 both were instructed to back off & save fuel. Another thing watching the race again today if I remember correctly then I think on the very lap Hamilton was 1.3 second slower than Button especially Button closed him down on corner 9 so I think whether Hamilton had a very slow lap or Button just found out a bit extra.

      But I will hate if Mclaren asked Button to give that place back as I think it is injustice to him. But by the look of it I think it was more about Hamilton taking the place back from Button down to turn 1.

      1. Of course they didn’t ask Button to give the place back – did you not watch the wheel to wheel racing? Unlike the sneaky pass of Button on an unsuspecting Hamilton.

        1. Was Jenson told to not pass? We don’t know. Without knowing what information JB had at the time I don’t think you can call him sneaky. At the end of the day, Jenson is a racing driver and if there’s an opportunity to pass, he’s going to take it. Anyone would.

          1. Regardless, Jenson Button was clearly not a man handing his teamate the lead, apart from anything else they probably wouldn’t have had the time.

          2. Agree. If Hamilton was in Button’s place, there was no way he would have a go at taking the lead.

            1. he wouldn’t have a go. Typo

      2. “I think on the very lap Hamilton was 1.3 second slower than Button especially Button closed him down on corner 9 so I think whether Hamilton had a very slow lap or Button just found out a bit extra.”

        Err, you dont just find an “extra” 1.3 secs on your team mate after 49 laps of a 58 lap race!

    36. Those low fuel comments might be the new way to give team orders. Red Bull tried to use it so Vettel could take lead which failed against Webber’s defensive skills while McLaren used it to ensure Button gave back the position to Lewis who had been assured wouldn’t be passed by his teammate. Look on the podium, Button does not look happy at all because he knew he had to hand in the position to avoid a team drift.

    37. This team orders thing will be the new hot topic, not least because it’s Jean Todt who is FIA president! It’s also becuase with the fuel saving issues it kind of brings it to the fore.

      I predict his approval rating to fall in the next couple of months.

    38. cars should have enough fuel full stop. What happens when a car is 2nd and 20sec’s behind 1st place and the driver in front has a problem, he can’t chase him down because he has not got the fuel to do so? This is not racing. If one of the top drivers makes a mistake in quali and is 8th on the grid I want to see him put in 50 or so fast laps without him not having the tyres or gas to do so.

      1. But every Kg of Fuel costs a lot of time, It’s better for them to be scant of fuel, and be faster at the start of the race, when advancement through the filed is relatively easy, than be quick later, when it’s unlikely.

        I agree though in principle. But I have no Idea how that could make it desirable for the cars to have more fuel on board.

      2. It is possible for the team to take a chance on doing just that, but to do that they have 2 ways at it.
        First they can put a little bit more fuel in the car before the start, making it slower all race, or they try saving a little bit of fuel during the race to have it at the end. That looks somewhat like Ferrari wanted to do in Bahrain.
        But in both cenarios, doing this to save fuel earlier makes it harder to be close in the first place and have a chance of getting back to the front.

        Sorry i am of a different opinion here. In other sports fitness and durability is a factor as well. In football sometimes the fitter team can win, when they have something left for the last 10 minutes, beating better teams with slightly less fittnes.

        1. Not to mention boxing.

          It seems clear that in this season, the best times to overtake are a) at the start, b) via pit-stops, or d) at the end of the race, hoping for fragility or degradation in your opponents car or concentration. As overtaking in normal circumstances is difficult, in between you try to save your car/tires/fuel as much as possible so that you are ready for the next phase, or unexpected events.

          It is interesting that McLaren did not really do this: instead they (Hamilton?) felt that keeping pressure would allow them to use their “good front end” (still not sure what that means) to make a pass. … And it resulted in those 4 cars becoming rather scarce on fuel near 2/3 of the race.

    39. This is annoying….. The team told them both to slow down, Button didn’t….

      No Favourites, no conspiracy, The team, In the interest of not having the same thing happen to them that happened to Red Bull, Told both drivers to hold station.
      Button, Wanted to win, so he ignored the team and passed.

      What is wrong with this??? nothing.
      Team orders are bad as long as the drivers are punished for ignoring them, But as long as Button has the choice to pass or not, There is no reason why team orders/requests are harmful to the sport. Hamilton shouldn’t have the idea that he is safe from his team mate, That isn’t so cool, Or do we all want an F1 where team mates won’t dare fight each other? But that’s countered by Button not playing nice, just like alonso in China.

      Good on Mclaren for telling the drivers to do what is best for the team.
      Good on Button for doing what is in his interest, and attempting a pass.
      And Good on Lewis for trying to stop him.

      A great bit of racing by great drivers in a great team…

      1. Hamilton double checking with the team if Button was on the same strategy, ie. saving fuel, seems a wise precaution. Especially in light of him having just seen Webber slowing a bit only for Vettel to attempt an overtake – I think he could guess how the speed difference happened.

        During this season we have seen several times that he questioned (and rightfully, it turned out!) the team tactics – maybe he is learning from Button to not trust the team blindly, and they did sometimes give unclear information to him. So him asking the team for confirmation on Buttons fuel situation is quite normal.

        But the team did advise Hamilton, yet again, unwisely. I cannot help but feel that they really really meant for the drivers to save that fuel to get to the finish.

        If they would have said: Well, Button might have a bit more fuel left, so could close up, but don’t worry, it will work out, then Hamilton clearly would have kept his pace up a bit – we just won’t ever know if that would have meant him stopping in the last corner before the finish.

        1. Right, next time Hamilton goes on the radio to demand to know “whose idea was it” we know it won’t be a rhetorical question. And maybe Matchett will shut his trap about how a driver never ever questions a team lest the pit wall burst into tears.

    40. Rubbish Dave
      4th June 2010, 15:37

      The basic point is that both McLarens were, by all accounts, very light on fuel (For example, see: and had they raced to the end neither would’ve made it.

      In that situation it makes sense the team would stop them racing. It’s not an everyday situation, and it doesn’t mean they’re not free to race usually.

    41. Similar things have been said but here’s my take on the Lewis /Jenson issue:
      Lewis was told “Save fuel” and “both cars are the same”. (He was apparently also given a lap time target.)
      He queried the instruction, “Is Jenson going to pass me or not?” His tone of voice and the emphasis on “or not” makes it clear that the question really is ” Are we playing it safe by holding station and making sure we both get to the finish or do I have worry about Jenson?”
      He was given an emphatic “No” which he took to mean they were playing safe.
      The team either mismanaged the communication so Jenson was not aware of the subtext OR Jenson did know and chose to make an opportunistic move. I prefer to believe the former.
      The passing battle was for real with (luckily for the avoidance of a war at MacLaren ) Lewis regaining the lead.
      Jenson was then told “Fuel critical” and “Save tyres” which I think may well have been a ‘hold station’ message but in any case Jenson may also have figured it would not be worth risking another go, given Lewis’s robust response to the first attempt.
      Lewis’s demeanour post race seemed to me not so much that of an angry guy but rather one who felt he had been sucker punched by someone he trusted. Witness that he asked Jenson “What was going on there?” An unecessary question unless he had believed they both were holding station.

      As for ‘no team orders’ this is a nonsense. Time after time we hear the commentators openly say that, despite the rule, orders are common place. Towards the end of a season they openly ask managers when they will make the decision to favour the guy in front in the championship. Brundle and others have often said that a team would be crazy to jeapordise the manufactures points by letting their drivers race to the end. It may not be as blatent as in the Schumacher ascendancy days but it is widely acknowledged (except in official team statements) that it still goes on.

      1. Enrique Miguel
        7th June 2010, 15:27

        For that the team could be in breach with Article 39.1 in the sporting regulations which states: ‘team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited.’

    42. How sad. The best wheel-to-wheel racing only came about due to miscommunication of team orders.

      1. I think it just goes that way: even in rain-races, the interesting things happen because people are making mistakes; and then others react and become heroes, or not.

    43. It may sound crazy but what will happen if radio communication be banned

      just as they did with Moto GP, as there is no refueling the drivers only

      needs to change tyres they can decide whenever they want may be with a

      button on the steering wheel so the teams will know when is the car coming

      as there are already plenty of buttons on them.

      This way it will stop the teams to give any order to the drivers but there

      are many disadvantages of this that if the car have some damage then the

      teams won’t be able to tell the drivers & let the drivers know about the

      weather & even to save the fuels. Sometimes the back-maker will won’t know

      that the cars behind them is really lapping them instead they race with


    44. Button’s using psychology to irritate Lewis knowing he’s a hot headed young lad.
      This will then upset Lewis thinking the team is not favouring him. I’m sure Lewis would have thought this incident over and over again. Before the podium ceremony it was very obvious Button was consoling Lewis with shoulder hugs. Button mind games is working. He’s been in F1 a long time. Let’s observe what will happen in Canada.

      If not for Vettel and Webber’s grand incident and Button and Lewis brief encounter the race was really boring.

      1. If Suzuka 2005 didn’t have all that overtaking and a pass for the lead on the final lap it would have been pretty boring too.

    45. Is the blogger trying to confuse these crazy people who want to beleive whatever they want. Maybe things should be made more clearer to them on a lap by lap bases, cos they are missing to read
      A(Lap 44): Hamilton(1) received “Fuel critical message”.
      B(Lap 48): Button(1) passes Hamilton(2) while on “Save Fuel” mode
      C(Lap 49): Hamilton(1) gathers pace to retake his stolen position from Button(2)
      D(Lap 50):Then team is reported to be on radio to both drivers
      E(Lap 52): Button(2) receives the “Save fuel” message while already falling backwards.

      Couldn’t Button do anything about HAM in all those laps before lap 52 if he is so wonderful and masterful?

      1. Isn’t he saving fuel anyway?

        1. I do hope that one driver isn’t being penalised because one driver uses more fuel than the other over the coarse of a GP.

          1. You know they have the option to put different amounts of fuel in each car. Also each driver with his mechanic can choose the fuel strategy they want. They can run fast then fuel save at the end, or run the same settings on each lap. It’s just all part of the strategy.

    46. if this is not team orders i dont know what is.

    47. What are team orders?
      This isn’t one in my book.
      Team orders is when for example you let the faster driver (on that day) slow down, to let the other overtake.

      Redbull wanted vettel in first because he was faster and webber was holding him up, and that wasn’t a good thing with the Mclaren boys right behind.

      Mclaren then had a big lead and Hamilton was looking to be the fastest of the two the whole weekend.
      So to then just save fuel/car till the end is the sensible and smart thing to do!

      1. it just stinks of hypocricy, the majority of people (in this country) would be screaming “foul” if Ferrari told one of their drivers the other one wasnt going to try and pass him so he could back off.

        But this is squeaky clean Mclaren so its different

      2. “Team orders is when for example you let the faster driver (on that day) slow down, to let the other overtake.”

        Err, Isn’t this exactly what happened at McLaren??

    48. In the video it looks like Button and Hamilton didn’t make a contact in turn 1 – looks like Button steered right when Hamilton was very close to touching him.

      1. Rubbish Dave
        4th June 2010, 19:32

        The view overhead from the right clearly shows contact at the apex of turn 1 from the way Buttons car jumps. It’s less obvious from the onboard shot, but you can see it when the car moves.

    49. What I find annoying about these pseudo team orders is that we get a nice close competitive race, only to have team principals on the pit wall trying to fix the results of the race, based on what suits sponsors.

      Yet, then you get the same team principals who will claim that F1 needs to improve the show. You don’t go about improving the show by taking the top four cars and giving them different orders about fuel mix, giving two cars an advantage, and two a disadvantage.

      Surely the best way to improve the show is to let the four guys honestly race?

      1. Rubbish Dave
        4th June 2010, 19:36

        Because in McLarens case, if you’d let them race, both would’ve failed to reach it to the end, and you can’t expect the guy who’s been in front for the race to give up position in that case.

    50. Charlie holdford
      4th June 2010, 19:12

      Let’s be fair RBR messed up big time
      mcLaren and Lewis have never won this race
      would you best be remembered of winning because the better guys took each other out or fight for position
      ie be overtaken then claw it back?

    51. polishboy808
      4th June 2010, 19:26

      Aren’t team orders like that illegal? If it did happen that Button was told to give the position back to Hamilton then I believe they should be penalized!

      1. Well, I guess that after Spygate years McLaren woud be careful saying things directly like that to their drivers over radio. Liegate happened because they were too conservative in advising Hamilton to give position back to Trulli that he lost himself.

        If there had been any evidence of team orders like that to Button on radio, the stewarts would have acted, most likely.

        But if they tell Button “listen, Lewis can try to pass you again right now, if so, give each other space, but after that you both should calm down and safe fuel”, that might be code for “let Lewis past, and cruise to the finish”, but no one would be able to prove it, especially if they are rather light on fuel at the end of the race.

    52. HounslowBusGarage
      4th June 2010, 20:05

      Does anyone know if the weights of the cars at the finish of the race are available anywhere?
      Obviously the cars go to post-race scrutineering, and are measured, weighed and checked against the rules, but are the result published?
      I’d love to know th difference in weight between the top three finishers.

      Supposing Webber’s car had been too badly damaged to continue, and supposing Lewis and Jenson had taken each other out, too . . . Michael would have won.
      Lord Voldemort returns!

      1. They must have all met the 605kg limit Hounslow. I don’t really want to watch a sport on fuel efficency I would rather watch people race. You and I have watched long enough to know that. I have a 1968 Alfa 1750 that does less km between services and uses less tyres than modern F1 cars.

    53. Looks like Button is another Didier Pironi!

    54. Team orders are the boss’ orders. You belong to a team, you follow the orders. There’s nothing to whinge about. If you are the second driver you take it or you pick a new team.
      My belief is that Button was racing but he backed off otherwise Hamilton was in the wall. So it’s better to have a Button than a Webber in your team.
      Apart from that it seems to me that without team orders or team strategies Vettel or Button were to win the race simply because Hamilton and Webber did not make any savings on fuel until the pitstops.

    55. Drivers should be allowed to manage their own fuel – maybe via a readout on the dash. If they end up having to back off, or run out of fuel toward the end of the race – well, it’s their own fault. Push too hard early – pay the price later. No different to managing tyres and brakes.

      1. Wrong.
        You can FEEL how your tires and/or brakes behave over the course of race. You cannot do the same about your fuel reserve.
        Managing fuel from the pit wall is way more efficient. Racing engineer is there for a reason. That guy sits there, looks at the numbers (the ones drivers shouldn’t care about, but race instead) and tells his driver, for how many more laps can he go all out and when does he have to cool off. Simple, efficient, logical.

        1. There is no need for the driver to FEEL how much fuel is left. The info is at hand to the point they can give a lap delta time. I admit I don’t know how they get the fuel info, I assumed a sensor in the tank?

          A simple system on the dash tells the driver at his current speed and fuel level how many laps he can do (like they have in road cars – but miles not laps, obviously). At least he’ll have some idea himself how fast he can go. Remember the confusion from both Lewis and Jenson that they didn’t know how much to slow down? Conserve fuel – yeah, but how much???

          Having the race engineer manage fuel maybe more efficient, but the current system leaves the door open for covert team orders. Whitmarsh has a word in the ear of both race engineers – who then get their drivers to back off by telling them fuel is critical. The lack of fuel information is a way of controlling them, to implement team orders.

          1. Still, i’m 100% sure i’d rather see those guys race instead of running math calculations in their heads.

            Teams should have SOME impact on their drivers, that one is actually quite balanced.

            About the “Conserve fuel – yeah, but how much???”: go learn to communicate with your racing engineer is all the hint i can give you.

            1. “Still, i’m 100% sure i’d rather see those guys race..”

              Me too.. but that’s exactly what we DIDN’T get to see! We saw them hold station on instruction from the team. The only action we got was due to Jenson ‘mis-understanding’ the situation.

              The team wanted them to cruise to the line in formation for the final 18 laps. Who wants to see that?!

    56. Everyone needs to keep in mind that radio transmissions are not in real time. This is the reason why during a radio transmission you often hear that the engine is out of sync with what the driver is actually doing on track. You simply cannot rely on the timing of the radio transmissions to discern what is actually going at that exact second. It could very well have been that the transmission for Button to conserve fuel was, in actuality, communicated while both of the McLarens were on the straight, but we may never know.

      The simple fact is that both drivers were told to conserve fuel at different times, and thus the bit of a battle between Jenson and Lewis in the closing laps. Lewis clearly thought that both he and Jenson were on fuel conservation mode, as that is what his engineer told him; however, evidently Jenson was told about the critical situation after Lewis.

      My opinion is that Hamilton had pushed the car harder than Button did over the course of the race so that he could get past Vettel, and therefore after the Red Bulls tangled was told to conserve fuel. Button on the other hand hadn’t worked as hard to close the gap on the front runners, and thus would theoretically have more fuel on board for the closing laps. After the yellow flags cleared surely Button went for first, as he knew that he was in front of Webber, and most likely knew about Hamilton’s fuel issue.

      Everyone has their own opinion about these developments, but I’m convinced that Button would have won the race had he not been instructed to “conserve” fuel. That being said, Hamilton deserved that win for how hard he fought the Bulls, while Button was equally as deserving for the strategic race.

      McLaren for the win in Canada!

    57. I find it incredulous that anyone would think Button gained a psychological edge of any sort on Hamilton in Istanbul. Button’s inability to hold his line into turn one was foolish, and Hamilton’s ability to snatch the position back wasn’t so much greatness as it was opportunity given.

      The worst position in this sport is to be the 2 on a 1-2 Grand Prix. Hamilton got a huge win over Button, no doubt about it.

    58. Nice article keith. I posted this comment on the thread ‘Hamilton praises “incredible development’ hours ago, before you posted this thread. Very similar thoughts.

      My comment: “Thanks for providing the link Capefear. Didn’t know it was available on the official website.
      Lewis: If i back off, Jenson is going to pass me or not?
      Team: No Lewis. No
      Didn’t hear that on TV. Now i understood why Lewis was not in so good mood. Just seconds later Jenson tried to overtake Hamilton and was clearly not backing off/saving fuel as much as Lewis.
      I have to say i was not agreeing with people saying Mclaren is favouring Jenson but now i have some doubts.”

      So what do you think Keith? Is Mclaren starting to favour Jenson over Lewis?
      I think Mclaren should have given advantage to Lewis who was their leading driver in the race. OK Mclaren shouldn’t give advantage to any driver as they always say, but at least they should have said “No Lewis, no” after they have received confirmation from Button that he isn’t going to overtake and from now on it is going to be curse to the finish. Serious mistake by Mclaren there and thankfully they got away with it or Mclaren drivers could have done what happened with Red bull drivers seconds before.

      I would love to see Mclaren drivers fighting and overtaking again but fair and open fight. Not that one driver is told to overtake and the other to back off…etc. No wrong information. Clear message…’fight on the track for position’.

      1. To me, it looks like you’re pushing it too far. I really fail to see how is McLaren “starting to favour Jenson over Lewis”.

        It seems like it was an honest mistake, that was quickly fixed – JB backed really easy for a guy fighting for P1. Minor communication glitch, period. If you have the footage from the race, watch how Whitmarsh along entire pit wall starts talking fast right after Jenson passes, then calms when Hamilton takes back the lead. It really never, i repeat, NEVER looked like anyone at McLaren (save Button) wanted to change the driver order.

        Also, how did you come up with “one driver is told to overtake”? There’s absolutely no proof whatsoever that Button was told to overtake Hamilton, actually, quite the contrary.

    59. Hamilton asked the team
      “If I back off is Jenson going to pass me or not’”
      He was told
      “No Lewis, no.”

      Button was told to back off, but he had a plan of his own.

    60. Sandman

      Agree with you as you also agree that mistake happened by Mclaren. By “one driver is told to overtake” i meant to say Button wasn’t told to back off/save fuel as much as Lewis that is why he was faster, got close and passed him. Both drivers should be told to back off equally or don’t say it at all. Let them fight.

    61. Mclaren got their wires crossed, button had other ideas, lewis shoved it back up the inside to get it done. Big deal.

    62. I’m having a good chuckle at the RBR fans saying ti proves that McLaren are a poorer team than them.

      Sorry, but which team scored a one-two despite their drivers going wheel-to-wheel? Wasn’t RBR, and this despite Lewis Hamilton apparently being the most petulant and over-aggressive driver in F1.

      Hypocritical or what?

    63. Mr. ZingZang
      5th June 2010, 0:48

      Keith, I like your website and all, but why the bias twist at the end? “Was Button ordered to give the place back?.” No he wasn’t!

      Watch this video, Button DID NOT LEAVE AN INCH! Hamilton had to muscle his way into the corner!

      Thank Jesus Hamilton got back the spot.
      Go Hamilton! You are the best! No body can stop you!

      1. So is Hamilton the best, or is it divine intervention? You should make up your mind.

      2. Thanks for posting this :) two classy drivers

      3. why the bias twist at the end? “Was Button ordered to give the place back?.” No he wasn’t!

        It’s an honest question. McLaren could have easily radioed Button along the start/finish straight. Or, after Hamilton passed him, he may have been instructed not to try to pass again.

        But I’m not pointing a finger at anyone here – what we have is an incomplete picture and everyone is trying to work out what really happened.

        What we know is the McLaren drivers were being told to manage their fuel. Despite that Hamilton was told Button wouldn’t pass him, Button passed him, then Hamilton re-passed him and, perhaps most tellingly of all, Button then dropped back.

        I don’t see how you can interpret that as McLaren rigging the race in favour of either of their drivers. If they were favouring Button they could have given Hamilton a higher lap time target, if they were favouring Hamilton they could have given Button a higher lap time target.

        It looks to me like both were told to back off and save fuel, but Hamilton interpreted that as an instruction to hold position and Button did not.

    64. Davetherave
      5th June 2010, 2:38

      SOLID ……… obviously don’t understand a thing that has been said i.e. Webber told to turn engine down whilst at same time Vettel turns his up.
      Please Read, Mark, Learn and inwardly digest, and then perhaps you will understand just what happened and why.

    65. Both drivers were told to save fuel, Button didn’t read into it as don’t overtake so he pulloed the move off on Lewis. Lewis got the position back and McLaren told Jenson fuel was critical and he finally clicked what this meant! Thats my take on things.

      I’d like to say a big “I told you so” to all the Button haters out there who said Lewis would thrash him before the season started, Jenson is only a tiny bit slower than Lewis on average over the season. The driver combination here is fantastic.

      Jenson is a very intelligent and smooth driver, who makes good balanced decisions. He saves his tyres and is faster later in the stints.

      Lewis Hamilton squeezes every bit of performance out of the car in exchange for using his tyres up a bit faster.

      Both make for an interesting race, Lewis is my favourite of the 2 but I’m happy when my boys get a 1-2!

      Theres no conspiracy here and they got to the bottom of it, there’s no favourite at Mclaren as long as they are both winning races.

      In fact I predict another 1-2 at Montreal, on ace this time instead of the Red Bulls taking each other out.

      The only thing is…. i don’t know if it is Jenson or Lewis who will take the chequer flag first!

      1. Agree on all counts. No conspiracy, no Jenson ignoring team orders, no ordering to give a place back. Too many people reading way too much into it, in my opinion.

      2. I agree with you completely except that I favour Jenson over Lewis :P

        1. I favor whichever Mclaren driver gets to the first place first. The Lap 49 incident was too much for me to handle, it was great racing but..

          Being a Mclaren optimist I say this is a miscommunication, no BS conspiracy theories on the team preferring the WDC over Ron’s child prodigy. Whitmarsh had better sorted out this “problem” already so that it doesn’t turn into like in 2007.

    66. So the people who support other teams are 100% behind Button?

      I am just happy that I know you guys will be left far more disappointing in the next races after witnessing your teams stuck behind McLaren and a certain driver out shining the rest. Double trouble ahead!

    67. the idea of no fuel stops is that one driver go off fast at the start while the other paces himself and the car and can possibly catch him later. now if mclarens team orders stop the driver who has saved his fuel and tyres passing the one that hasnt then that sort of defeats the object of the race.

      i hope mclaren dont yet again do the thing where they pretend there drivers are racing yet they are doing nothing of the sort.

    68. Mark in Florida
      5th June 2010, 17:21

      Like it or not the way Ferrari did it with MS and RB ultimately makes sense.It puts the team behind the best driver and the #2 driver knows his role. This avoids these stupid late race antics that keep causing so much controversy.Championships are won by great driving and team strategy.Crashing into each other and overtaking when your not supposed to is ultimately a negative for the whole team. F1 is a team sport with individual drivers that need clear direction as to what role that they have in the team.

    69. So much for the brilliant race (making F1 better) Keith!

    70. maestrointhesky
      6th June 2010, 0:02

      This is purely speculation but I think there are a few standard scenarios teams will go though prior to every race. The one I think most front running teams will consider at this stage of the championship is, if there’s a one two on offer with (approximately) 10 laps to go, AND the competition has fallen away, then just do enough using formation flying till the end. RBR didn’t have that luxury at Istanbul as the VMM’s were so close. That gave Vettel licence to go for Webber, albeit in an arrogant and clumsy manoeuvre. The threat to the McLarens after the RBR incident was diminished and and so the scenario described came into play for McLaren, hence ‘fuel saving’ mode. Button chose to break the rule hence the dogfight down the start/finish straight. Once Hamilton established his position, drivers were reminded of the pre-race discussions and finished the race as per the scenario described.

      Like it or not, team orders exist behind closed doors. One way of reducing, it I think would be to limit communication between pit wall and driver to predefined messages from the pit board i.e. no radio transmission! That would mean that a driver would essentially have information seen in front and behind to base in race strategy decisions on. This should mean any driver would have to ‘race’ to the end making their own interpretations of pit board messages rather than conserving machinery knowing how many seconds ahead of another driver they were. Surely this is what racing should be about, first and foremost!

      1. Enrique Miguel
        7th June 2010, 15:23

        For that they could be in breach with Article 39.1 in the sporting regulations which states: ‘team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited.’

    71. For those that “like” Button (don’t know how one can), this is his sportsmanship in full colour.

    72. Hamilton needs to experience another team to really grow in F1.

    73. Shagrathian
      6th June 2010, 9:50

      I was at the race and had a clear view of the turn 12. Also, a friend of mine is a technical at McLaren garage during the weekend. He told me that when JB overtook Lewis, then Lewis reovertook him, Martin Whitmarsh was on the radio and told to Jenson how he’s upset about the JB’s move. As it seems there was no team order or something. It was probably miscommunication or JB just did whatever he wants at the moment, which is not cool.

      1. The technical was on the pitwall?

        1. I’m not sure about it’s terminological meaning but he called himself a technical, not a marshall…

    74. It is really indicative of how the British media view Hamilton and Button that this story has been totally ignored except by F1 Fanatic, and then has been spun to indicate that Lewis was asking for team orders. It confirms my view that most British journalists are partial to Button and prefer a story that shows Button in a good light and Hamilton in a bad light. As this story doesn’t, it is ignored or spun in a most ludicrous way. I’m afraid it lessens the validity of the journalists’ knowledge. Shame, real shame.

      I know Jake Humphrey twittered that he was v. surprised by the race edit and they will be “asking all the hard questions”. I hope they do a FAIR investigation, but I wouldn’t be surprised if they try to spin it too!

    75. Enrique Miguel
      7th June 2010, 15:20

      If the team gave instructions to Button not to pass hamilton then they could be in breach with Article 39.1 in the sporting regulations which states: ‘team orders which interfere with a race result are prohibited.’


      Hope this clears it up. Hamilton’s race engineer simply ASSUMED Jenson would not overtake.

      “ appears that principal race engineer Phil Prew’s comment that Button would not overtake was an opinion based on the fact both men were in full conservation mode, rather than because a specific hold position order was in place.

      AUTOSPORT understands that there was no communication with Button that he should not race or challenge Hamilton..”

    77. HOW COULD BUTTON GIVE BACK THE LEAD THAT HE DIDN’T HAVE. Hamilton passed him on the 49th lap. The team order to button to conserve fuel came on the 52nd lap. By then hamilton had about a second on button. Sorry but i clearly don’t get your point. “WAS BUTTON ORDERED TO HAND THE PLACE BACK?” NO. he was told to conserve fuel(hold station).

    Comments are closed.