MFW podcast episode 111: Houston wrap-up
More Front Wing podcasts, Multimedia, Podcasts — By More Front Wing Staff on July 1, 2014 11:34 pmOn this week’s episode of the More Front Wing podcast, Paul and Steph look back at what was a wild and crazy weekend at the Shell and Pennzoil Grand Prix of Houston. Among the topics of discussion are a heated debate on the merits of the penalty and subsequent probation of Marco Andretti following his failure to yield to leader Takuma Sato during Saturday’s race, a discussion about the difficult season that has befallen Tony Kanaan, an analysis of the Takuma Sato/Mikhail Aleshin and Helio Castroneves/Sebatien Bourdais incidents, the resurgent weekend of Juan Pablo Montoya, and much more.
To listen, use the player below or search More Front Wing on iTunes.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Tags: Houston, Verizon IndyCar Series - Administration
Hintch was told Marco was going to “hold him up” because Marco was not as fast as Sato. There is nothing in that quote to indicate team orders or anything that would indicate that Marco wasn’t going as hard as he could he just wasn’t as fast as the leaders! As the rule (at least the rule before the race started) states as a car on the tail end of the lead lap Marco did not fall under the blue flag rule. Therefore the only “command” given to Marco from Race control was the black flag, which he obeyed. I would fully expect a resending of the this fine/probation either from appeal or from IndyCar just hitting “Ctrl+z” like they did with Sebastien Bourdais (which I don’t understand but that precedent has now been set.)
Here’s the thing, with both the actual Marco/Taku situation at Houston #1 and with Paul’s hypothetical situation where the 2nd place guy holds up 3rd place for the benefit of the leader (the teammate of the 2nd place guy). If the “idea” of holding someone up to benefit a teammate comes from the cockpit, where a driver decides of his own accord to help out a teammate in a subtle way (say, apexing a corner a couple MPH slower than normal, such that the guy behind has to get on the power later than normal, slowing straightaway speed), that is one thing, and more or less permissible because it’s impossible to prove wrongdoing. If the idea comes from the pitwall, though, and there’s radio proof of collusion between teammates, that’s where the hammer needs to come down. So, while we do know that there was a transmission to Hinch that Marco was going to back Taku up toward him (pretty damning, in and of itself, since that is basically an admission that Marco won’t be heeding any blue flags), the slam dunk evidence would be in Marco’s radio feed. Did the pitwall tell Marco to slow Taku up? Or was it just that Marco suddenly lost a few tenths of a second for a few laps because he was trying too hard in inclement conditions, thereby also causing Taku to slow? I’m asking, because I’ve never heard.
Because this is such a grey area, I am OK with IndyCar giving Marco and Andretti Autosport a glorified slap on the hand (a monetary fine only) to get the precedent set that teammate shenanigans will not be tolerated in the future. That’s the most important thing here.
You asked for opinions, so here’s mine.
I don’t think that Marco should have been assessed any penalty. That is because, as Paul stated he didn’t break any rules. For me it is as simple as that.
In many ways I agree wholeheartedly with Steph (and Paul) insofar as that I don’t think that it is fair for a team mate who is almost a lap behind to deliberately slow down the leader who is in second place. However this is not an issue of being fair. This is an issue as whether Marco broke any rules. Marco did not break any rules. Marco was not a lap behind the leader. Marco should not have been penalised.
Allegations of cheating and collusion between teammates are very serious allegations. They should have been treated by race control with full seriousness if they believed there was a case for the Andretti team to answer. For this you need strong evidence: for me that would be telemetry should that Marco was going unreasonably slow over parts of the lap, and evidence from both Marco and Hinch (via radio if possible) that instructions or communications occurred between drivers which show collusion. Hinch being told that Marco was slowing when there is limited evidence at best to see that Marco was going slow (2 slow laptimes in the rain isn’t strong enough evidence to me, and no communications between Marco and the team as to whether he was going slow) is not enough to convict Marco as guilty. At minimum race control should be assessing the evidence of these serious allegations with the full benefit of time after the race. The actions of race control in deciding that Marco was guilty of deliberately slowing and then deciding to “make up a rule” because they did not have the power to punish Marco given their rulebook is shocking at best and seriously incompetent at worst.
I usually like and mostly agree with you Steph but Paul is dead on with his (non-hypothetical) points. Hunch team msy have been on the radio but no radio of Marcos team receiving orders to slow down. A car on the lead lap is entitled to race for his position. Marcos 5th in the championship. He’s on the lead lap. If taku can’t get around d him that’s his problem. You can’t make up rules in a race. Paul…you win the argument! This time at least!! Lol
reply
Getting caught up on podcasts after flipping back to you guys, since Trackside decided to dump their listeners….
Anyways, Paul was right. I think Hinch’s team just realized Marco wasn’t the fastest car on track, and would be holding Takuma up, and Hinch should put the hammer down (no pun intended, well, maybe a little).