I'm not opposed to team orders per se. I am angry at the bias of people saying the team driver who is (rather luckily) leading his teammate at the halfway point of a 24 round championship should have the full weight of the team behind him. I say let them race at this very early stage, just my opinion after 50 years of following McLaren F1. I'm not even of the belief that it should be left until the other driver has zero mathematical chance, that would be too democratic. If Lando drops a race with Oscar winning with fastest lap they would be 18 pits apart - not totally unlikely, both drivers must be allowed free reign with 8 (+3 sprints) to go. If you ASS U ME that fully backing one driver over the other will be the most profitable tactic then you may make an ASS over U and ME! It's still game on.
Turning attention to McLaren strategy I understand the way they went. Conservative. With 18 laps to go and Oscar maintaining a 5 second lead over Charles it should have been a case of "who blinks first". McLaren blinked and lost. Charles tyres were much older than Oscar's and the times as far as I can see were still quite strong. The gaps to Lewis and Carlos were such that even if the tyres went off the cliff the damage would be insignificant in results. Yes, when you make the choice to pit again while still aiming to win you need to do it early enough to be in with a chance of catching the leader. The magnitude of the tactical error was, in retrospect fairly low/medium and not in the range of Silverstone's howler.