I think those are one in the same. The purpose of sanctions is to severely discourage ignoring the sporting regulations. I contend if Ferrari just needs to pay $100,000 to buy Alonzo points so he has a better shot of winning the drivers championship, they’ll do it again.
Team Orders did not end when Schumacher passed Rubens Barrichello in Austria in 2002, and everybody knows that. Massa had a ‘long’ pit stop in Brazil to help Raikkonen take the title in 2007. Kovalainen often helped Hamilton at McLaren.Irvine assisted Schumacher at Ferrari which could well have lost him the title in 1999 after Schumacher broke his leg.
A TEAM operates its two cars in a manner that maximizes its chances of winning the driver’s or constructor’s title. Every team has been lying about that fact since 2002. Ferrari’s only sin here is they did a bad job of it. Alonso was faster and has more points. Without “team orders” you have Vettels crashing into the Webers in the lead. Maybe Alonso should have wrecked Masa.
In the law, you have Court Rules. Rule #2 is that the rules must be applied to acheive justice - you don’t apply them because they exist. This is because all lawyers know that no rule covers every possible situation.
The FIA should take heed. They should apply their rules in the best interest of their sport. Alonso is blameless. The team has the same number of points, notwithstanding the orders. F1 so often has been dominated by one team that it is boring, especially to Americans. Now you have a resurgent Ferrari that looks like it will take on Red Bull in the second half. How does taking Ferrari out of the constructor’s race help the sport? It should be a monetary fine only.