The Cracks Emerge

In such a close-run Formula One championship chase, it was inevitable that the largely good-natured rivalry between the main Ferrari and McLaren protagonists wouldn't last for long.

Four alpha male personalities, waging a tightrope battle for the greatest prize in motorsport, isn't conducive to the sort of joking bonhomie that characterised the incident between Lewis Hamilton and Felipe Massa at Malaysia earlier in the season.

Sooner rather than later, we would witness an incident that would change the nature of the conflict so far, and lay down clear battle lines. Most would have bet that an accident or allegations of dirty driving would break the fragile calm and ignite a truly heated championship scrap.

Few would have predicted that allegations of team orders would prove the catalyst - and fewer still that those allegations would be levelled against McLaren rather than Ferrari.

Monaco, for all its glamorous trappings, seldom provides thrilling or memorable racing. Yet the implications of Fernando Alonso's win around the tight and twisty streets of the Principality on Sunday could reverberate for the rest of the season, and become an F1 talking point for years to come.

Former champion Michael Schumacher must have left the circuit with a wry smile, because team order allegations are an inseparable part of his legacy: two-time reigning champion signs for major team with the aim of restoring former glory, said champion is seen to be apparently favoured by the team, resulting in complaints that racing is no longer 'fair' or 'pure'.

It's an entirely understandable grievance from fans just wanting to see a straight dice for supremacy among rivals who are given equal opportunity to win. However, especially in the context of what is still a team sport, it is almost impossible to provide the level of parity demanded.

Traffic problems while lapping backmarkers, mechanical breakdowns, different race or qualifying strategies, inconsistent standards of marshaling or stewards' decisions - all can and will be used to claim that the results were not representative of the drivers' talents.

Such was the case on Sunday, with angry accusations that McLaren's approach to the entire weekend favoured Alonso unfairly over rookie teammate Lewis Hamilton, who seemed more fired up than ever to gain his maiden F1 win on a circuit where he has never lost a race.

In assessing the allegations, it is necessary to split the issue into two distinct but related halves - the race strategies decided on Saturday, and the orders issued to the drivers by radio during the GP on Sunday.

In terms of the strategy decisions taken by McLaren prior to the third and final qualifying session on Saturday afternoon, there can surely be no controversy. Monaco favoured McLaren's excellent mechanical grip, and is likely to be one of the few circuits where the team will enjoy a clear advantage over rivals Ferrari.

Fernando Alonso ahead of teammate Lewis Hamilton at Monaco © XPB/LAT

In such a close championship battle, it was imperative for McLaren to break Ferrari's streak of four consecutive pole positions, and Felipe Massa's run of back-to-back victories.

The last thing McLaren needed was for Felipe Massa to snatch yet another win. Yet with the high likelihood of rain forecast for Sunday, exacerbated by the probability of a Safety Car period at some time during the race, a surprise Ferrari win remained a distinct possibility.

In choosing to run Alonso lighter on an optimal two-stop strategy, with Hamilton considerably heavier to give a greater pitstop window and the possibility to run a one-stop race if necessary, McLaren hedged their bets sensibly.

It was equally justifiable to allocate the optimal strategy to reigning champion Alonso. The Spaniard has shown season-long consistency and dependability in each of his two victorious championship campaigns. As impressive as Hamilton's first four GP have been, he is still unproven over the course of a full season.

If McLaren's strategic decisions on Saturday could be fully justified, Sunday's application was a very different matter. It is quite normal, even routine, for team owners to instruct their drivers to stop racing and hold position after the final round of pitstops. Issuing the same order after the first of two scheduled pitstops, just one third of the way into the race, invited comparisons to Ferrari's infamous team orders at Austria 2002.

Ostensibly, the situations were quite different. For starters, McLaren chief Ron Dennis could claim that Ferrari ordered their drivers to swap positions in Austria, while he only instructed his drivers to maintain their established positions at Monaco. Furthermore, Dennis could claim that his decision benefited the driver trailing in the championship, while Ferrari favoured the championship leader.

A third factor is that Schumacher's teammate Rubens Barrichello looked poised for victory on merit in Austria. At Monaco, a Hamilton win always looked unlikely. Early in the race, the ITV commentators were optimistic that, if Hamilton could stay close to Alonso, his heavier fuel load (and the extra laps on light fuel right at the end of the stint) would be enough for him to leapfrog Alonso and gain the all-important track position.

It's a strategy that paid off countless times for Michael Schumacher during his career. Schumacher was often able to crank in hot laps one to three seconds faster than his rivals as they struggled after their pitstops on much heavier fuel loads. However the trade-off between low fuel weight and fresh rubber is much narrower at Monaco.

This was illustrated perfectly during lap 28 of Sunday's race - the last lap before Hamilton's first pitstop. It was on this lap that the rookie recorded his fastest lap of the race, a 1m15.372s. Alonso, having just pitted and on a much heavier fuel load, turned in a 1m15.462s on the same lap.

Ron Dennis and Fernando Alonso © LAT

At that pace differential, the three extra laps that Hamilton had (or even the five or six laps that he thought he had) were never going to be enough to overturn the deficit. Alonso's fresh rubber was more than a match for Hamilton's light fuel weight.

Still, as in Austria 2002, it is not the measurable result that rankles, so much as the negative mindset behind it. In 2002, after winning four of the first five GPs in the season, Ferrari and Michael Schumacher did not have the confidence and self-belief to take on the opposition on equal terms, resorting instead to cynical manipulation.

The same lack of confidence underpinned McLaren's decision on Sunday. All season long, Alonso and Hamilton have done a superbly dependable job of bringing the cars home. Where they have made driver errors (Hamilton in Australia, Alonso in Spain), they have not been race-ending mistakes. They have kept the cars away from the barriers, and have raced hard and professionally to earn eight successive high-scoring points finishes for the team.

Even in an era of obsessive focus on maximising points at every opportunity, the fears voiced by Dennis and former champion Jackie Stewart - that there was too great a risk of one or both McLarens ending their race against the barriers - seems unnecessarily negative.

It has also put both drivers in a situation that benefits neither. As proud and fiercely competitive racers, neither wants even the suggestion of team favouritism casting doubt on their future achievements. Yet, inevitably, it's a stigma that both will have to deal with, regardless of the outcome of the FIA investigation into McLaren's tactics.

Alonso is experienced enough to know and understand the team's priorities, and has already dealt with issues of team favouritism (or lack of support) during his time at Renault. For Hamilton, it will be yet another test of his maturity and ability to adapt quickly to the demands of F1.

The most intriguing factor is the potential effect on the relationship between the two drivers. Although Hamilton's disgruntled post-Monaco comments have been aimed squarely at the team tactics rather than Alonso, history dictates that the conflict is bound to get personal.

In the past, Ron Dennis has managed harmonious but unsuccessful partnerships (Coulthard/Raikkonen among others) and explosively hostile but dominant pairings like Prost and Senna. If McLaren can continue their Monaco form into Canada and beyond, managing a potentially hostile relationship between his two star drivers is a downside that Dennis may accept willingly.