Formula 1-2022 Season

In reply to jmabarone :

If the cap actually means anything, it doesn't matter where the overspend was.

And if the cap doesn't really mean a cap, then the teams who can will all spend the effort to get around the cap- which makes it pointless.  Just like the powertrain cap rule that is easy to get around.

z31maniac said:

That would give Hammy title. But I think the team needs to be punished more than the driver.

A few million isn't that big of a deal. They need to make an example of RBR, if not, what's the point of having a cap?

You need to punish both, otherwise it sets a precedent that you can cheat to win one championship by willingly sacrificing the other.

To have teeth, punishments for rules need to remove all of the gains you got by breaking them.  This is why "too many engines" is a massive grid drop -- if they just made it a monetary penalty for exceeding the engine allotment them anyone with enough money can just buy more of them.

If you're one pound underweight, the car and driver are both disqualified. I don't see any reason why being 1 dollar over budget should be different.

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

Agreed

Has it been proven that they did go over the cap?

I would think any team in F1 has the ability to make sure that the spending they do fits the letter of the rules......and I'm sure they have plenty of ways to accomplish this and still spend everything they need to to win. 

Working in shades of gray or is it all black and white? What is Red Bull excluding that FIA believes should be included?  

Or just a bunch of Red BullE36 M3?

MiniDave said:

Has it been proven that they did go over the cap?

I would think any team in F1 has the ability to make sure that the spending they do fits the letter of the rules......and I'm sure they have plenty of ways to accomplish this and still spend everything they need to to win. 

 

The FIA thinks so, and they are the only ones that actually matter here.

codrus (Forum Supporter) said:

 

If you're one pound underweight, the car and driver are both disqualified. I don't see any reason why being 1 dollar over budget should be different.

 

I like that 1/0 analogy, you are either right or wrong here- there's no gray area.

Rumor is (since none of us are actually there), the overspend was on catering and sick leave.  On one hand, you could point to that and say, "Well, it's not performance related and you can't predict when someone is sick".   However, all of us work at companies, or even in our own lives, know that when unexpected costs arise, the money has to come from somewhere. 

I think they should get slapped down hard for this, I just don't know what that should be.  As a Hamilton fan, pulling points from 2021 sounds awesome, but having a * next to a championship stinks.  And regardless of how he earned it, it would always be tainted. 

If it doesn't hurt, then it just shows the cost cap is a joke and nobody will pay attention to it going forward.  If it's a loophole, the sick leave/PTO rules apparently aren't 100% clear, they close it and give a minor penalty because, it's racing.  Racing is about finding loopholes and grey areas......

-Rob

In reply to rob_lewis :

Well, Max's 2021 championship should have an * by it, given how the rules of operation were changed on the last lap of the last race of the season deciding the championship.

Still, it should not matter what so ever where the overspend happened.  Otherwise the cap is pointless.  Also, money is money- they can easily claim the overspend was in catering and whatnot and then hide the spending someplace else.  It's a matter of shifting blame.  The limit is the limit.

alfadriver said:

In reply to rob_lewis :

Well, Max's 2021 championship should have an * by it, given how the rules of operation were changed on the last lap of the last race of the season deciding the championship.

Still, it should not matter what so ever where the overspend happened.  Otherwise the cap is pointless.  Also, money is money- they can easily claim the overspend was in catering and whatnot and then hide the spending someplace else.  It's a matter of shifting blame.  The limit is the limit.

Is it that black and white?

In reply to fusion66 :

Well, again, the FIA say they went over the number, and they are the only ones who matter.  I forgot about the whole marketing part, though.

In reply to alfadriver :

Just don't be too upset if the FIA says they went over budget but acknowledge that it was a "gray" area and thus the penalty is a slap on the wrist and not 7 years in the dungeon 

Without seeing the actual balance sheets it is impossible to form an opinion.I dislike Red Bull but until more detail is released it's impossible to say what if any punishment there should be. 

Also it's not as if the FIA has never been complete wrong (yes you Mr Balestre) but teams have also tried shameless attempts at skirting the rules.

Now on the subject of shameless.................I think they should strip Max of his points because I want Hamilton to have 8 championships.

I'm quite sure there is a difference of opinion on what expenses fit in which category.  I'm also quite sure books are being cooked all over the sport.  It would possibly be easier for Merc, Ferrari and Renault, being road car manufacturers, to hide the odd bit of work somewhere in the other side of the company.

The one thing I will guarantee you, Max is not losing any of last years points.

fusion66 said:

In reply to alfadriver :

Just don't be too upset if the FIA says they went over budget but acknowledge that it was a "gray" area and thus the penalty is a slap on the wrist and not 7 years in the dungeon 

if that happens, all the teams will figure out how to pad their budgets doing the exact same thing.  Which makes the cap pointless.  And the next one will push the budget 10%.

Either make it a rule, or eliminate the rule.  Don't "kinda, maybe, perhaps" a rule that is to stop the separation of means in F1.

I don't think taking Max's points from 2021 helps.  That would make F1 look silly - naming a new champion a year later.  They could take away RBR's manufacturer's points so they finish last.  That means that they shouldn't have received the F1 payments for their finish last year.  That would be easy to enforce by withholding that amount from what they would normally be due from this year's finish.  That's a substantial penalty.  That also means everyone (except Merc) moves up and gets more money -which might make them support the penalty.  

Of course, I think they'll actually just tell RBR "You were very bad.  Don't do it again." and the whole budget cap will be a farce.

In reply to Kubotai :

But max would directly benefit from that.  Just like if they made the car 1kg too light.  

I think Red Bull should get a Lemons style penalty for next year. Like a big metal chicken glued to the cars for all of next year. Something suitably humiliating for Christian Horner. 

In reply to alfadriver :

Yes, he benefited from what RBR did.  I don't see a realistic way to fix that because of how much time has passed.  I agree that this violation should mean that he isn't really the 2021 champion.  I don't think he should have been declared champion anyway because to the way the last race was run.  So, yes, you could strip him of his championship but I think that just makes F1 look foolish.  It's been almost a year.  At this point, I think the best you can hope for is for F1 to punish the team via $$ so that all teams are discouraged from doing this sort of thing in the future.  

Seems that the most likely outcome is a reduction in aero modeling/testing as well as a reduced cost cap in the future.  Especially since the breach could go forward in the data for many years.  And they can make it significant and not make max fans upset.

And doing it for next season would be kind of a double whammy, since they will already get the largest reduction by winning.

If they do it again, then I would exclude the team and drivers from the championship.  As well as not give them prize money.  Given that McLaren was given most of that (other than the drivers part), it would not be unprecedented.

In reply to Kubotai :

McLaren was excluded from the championship over a decade ago.  No reason they can't do that again.  And I don't think people were worried that the FIA looked foolish then.

alfadriver said:

Seems that the most likely outcome is a reduction in aero modeling/testing as well as a reduced cost cap in the future.  Especially since the breach could go forward in the data for many years.  And they can make it significant and not make max fans upset.

And doing it for next season would be kind of a double whammy, since they will already get the largest reduction by winning.

If they do it again, then I would exclude the team and drivers from the championship.  As well as not give them prize money.  Given that McLaren was given most of that (other than the drivers part), it would not be unprecedented.

So does every team get one freebie to violate the cost cap, or just RBR?

Letting a team get away with deliberate, knowing, and flagrant violations of a rule like this will massively hurt what credibility the FIA has left.  Monetary penalties are insufficient, you cannot let someone buy a championship like that.

In reply to alfadriver :

I didn't know that.  Did they take back a championship that had already been awarded or were they excluded going forward?  I would be OK with them getting reamed over this.  I'm just trying to set my expectations so I don't get too disappointed by what eventually happens.

In reply to codrus (Forum Supporter) :

Good point, but it still seems that a financial and testing penalty will be the one they choose- large enough one to undo what the extra money did.

In reply to Kubotai :

It happened during the season, but that's also when the info all came out.  When it happened, McLaren had a good lead over Ferrari, Hamilton & Alonso were within a handful of point of Kimi at the end.  It was also $100M fine.

I doubt it will happen here- it's more likely that they have a big cut in money and testing in the future.  And if they do it again, then exclusion.

But who knows, Ross Brawn was pretty adamant when the rules came out that they will come down hard if the rules are broken.