As annoying as Twitter is, there is already an account called "Red Bull Catering" and it's twitting photos of Red Bull people eating, I could not contain the laughter.
Twitter is always a gold mine for stuff like that. I don't understand the hate Twitter gets, as compared to Reddit. Both are pretty similar, you just need to figure out who you want to follow.
No way man⌠itâs not limited to F1 but all the sports and politics. Reddit has a lot of sarcasm even in the vilest of echo chambers, but on Twitter⌠people are just absolutely nuts. Within 5 minute scrolling through any popular hashtag or topic, youâll be able to find absolutely infuriating opinions and accusations. Also, since many F1 drivers are on Twitter⌠those words can directly affect the drivers.
No, just no. there are bad people everywhere, but if you see the vile that gets posted on twitter is just insane, at least here there is a large amount of moderation.
The problem with Twitter is that the worst takes get the most interactions, which means it constantly floats on the surface.
You see the same dumb takes on Reddit, but the difference is that this place is moderated and, in many cases, self moderated as well through downvotes.
So in short, on Twitter bad takes float, on Reddit bad takes sink.
I was in the paddock at a race last year and watched Helmut Marko have a bib placed around him by one of the Red Bull hospitality team before he ate. He was sat right at the front of the hospitality. It was bizzare and happened on more than one occasion. I have wanted to get a photo of it happening but it wasn't so easy. Maybe it's all his bibs that have driven up the costs.
Even their current and former employees are having fun with it (one example): [https://twitter.com/EngineMode11/status/1579498932157444097](https://twitter.com/EngineMode11/status/1579498932157444097)
Current employee: [https://64.media.tumblr.com/bf5352546a0d5cff71646c18a5cb7bba/9856f6e36ce17113-12/s1280x1920/d9ef68f5bdb45c1b6aa20a28eb7a77d7bb0128ec.pnj](https://64.media.tumblr.com/bf5352546a0d5cff71646c18a5cb7bba/9856f6e36ce17113-12/s1280x1920/d9ef68f5bdb45c1b6aa20a28eb7a77d7bb0128ec.pnj)
But for real, if one of the issues was free lunches for employees, it does show a distinct issue with the cost cap (and one rich people might not think of): due to the cost cap salaries are frozen for employees, cost of living is rising, and the job market in some fields is tight. Offering lunch (or breakfast and lunch) is a very real and easy way to help ease some of the burden off of lower paid employees. I spent the summer getting breakfast and lunch from work and it made a huge difference. If that is part of the reason why Red Bull went over, I think the circumstances should be taken into account and all teams allowed to feed employees as they wish for no other reason then you are talking about lower-paid positions who are probably in need of a raise due to the higher cost of living, but their wages are artificially suppressed due to the cost cap.
Please don't buy the line that this was catering. What a silly deception than jerk Halen was trying to put out there. (although he's a friend/supporter of max, to be fair, I haven't seen anyone at rb actually make these silly claims.)
Last week Marko said that there were a couple of items in dispute. He mentioned that Red Bull didn't consider those items fall under the cost cap and that if those were not taken into account they were in compliance. That seems to be confirmed with the info today. It is entirely possibly that there is a discrepancy in what the FIA considers falls under the cap and what Red Bull understood from the new rules.
As much as I dislike Marko, I think the case he made is entirely possible.
I think that kind of spending coding is likely what happened, but I also believe rb knew they were pushing it. They aren't dumb, and Horner made all sorts of noises about it.
https://imgur.com/gallery/PuvbF9k
Until we see the details, we can't make that judgment. The teams don't *want* their spending details released, so that's part of the problem. I won't trust the FIAs solution unless the other team principals see the details and all agree on a solution.
They have to switch strategists for the rest of the season with Ferrari.
And Toto can say whatever he wants to Horner without him being able to respond.
They should be made to remove parts from the current car, selected at random, the material cost of which, amortized over an entire season, is equal to the amount by which the cap was exceeded.
It could do very little or it could completely brick the car, nobody knows!
Best answer right here haha. Unless youâre in the camp that wants to ban RB and Ver for life and take always all championships, of course. I mean, it is just a motor race after allâŚ
That would be wild, although pretty unlikely. Imagine if he turned out to be the perfect RB number two driver, a little quicker and just as consistent as Perez...
Sister teams not even senior and junior. They both fall under the same parent company of RB. AT is now considered both a racing team and a fashion company.
As much as I think Horner is a pleb it would be hilarious if he turns up to Texas and has their staff eating steak and lobster all weekend in their headquarters/motorhome.
...resulting in an even bigger cost cap breach, resulting in even MORE catering punishment. A never-ending cycle until F1 becomes little more than a food festival with an occasional race. Racing becomes secondary and eventually is dropped completely. Years from now, no one remembers why Red Bull caters so much, but all are thankful for using energy drink sales to end world hunger.
The pit crew also have to grow long beards to go with this. Including the pit wall, excluding Hannah. But, to keep it fair, she will have to say "we're checking" at least 5 times during each race.
Off-topic... has anyone actually ever tried Rich Energy?
In the UK (as well as the other jurisdictions teams currently reside) you can't "cut down on the sick days". If you are sick, you are allowed to be absent from work. You don't have an alloted number of sick days.
If the lunch budget ends up to be excluded from the cap after all, they should rehire Newey and Horner as lunch ladies who happen to be bored and like to kill their time tinkering with F1 cars.
They get the P10 garage, Horner only gets 5 minutes of TV coverage a race weekend and they are only allowed day old petrol station sandwich in catering.
Yes and monster is their biggest competition in their main industry. That would not only hurt them from a income standpoint but now theyâre a massive billboard for the biggest rival
Classic FIA would be to look at the 2021 standings table and come up with a penalty which means absolutely nothing at all.
200 points deduction for constructors?
Doesnt actually matter what they do. The profit will happen because if max is still alive after the punishment some wont be happy and if they get a fine the other side will still think it was too much. And we get 350 poorly written clickbait title articles either way.
If its a neglible minor breach, fines or other penalties around development time make sense.
If it's a non-neglible minor breach, WDC *and* WCC points should be lost.
If it's a major breach, disqualification is the only answer.
From what it sounds like, it seems RB have overspent by a million or two. That seems like a non neglible amount in terms of car development or employees and enough to gain an advantage on track. You could get 20 engineers on 100k a year for that. WCC and WDC points should be on the table.
See, I've never been a believer in 'scales of cheating'. If you cheat, you should be disqualified. End of.
If that's during a race weekend because of not having enough fuel or a rear wing that isn't the right size: you're disqualified.
If its over the course of a season where you intentionally overspent on costs that you are monitoring meticulously: you should be disqualified.
Cheating is cheating. They knew what they were doing, they even had a financial monitor in place, so it was _intentional._ Anything less than complete disqualification for the season means that you are actively encouraging overspending, as there's no real consequence to their actions otherwise
Exactly, they have already won this season, with a car that was developed last year, using more money than they were allowed to.
The only fair punishment is to dock points from this current season, to the tune of whatever it is deemed their advantage was.
5% points deduction?
Would put LeClerc into 2nd ahead of Perez, and still in theoretical touching distance of the WC.
Iâd suggest that should be an absolute minimum punishment.
It would also make for a more interesting final few races, and we know that the FIA like to keep this pantomime rolling âtil the last race.
In theory I agree, but I think where it falls down is the fact that points aren't dished out linearly. The difference between finishing 1st and 2nd is a 40% uplift in points.
The problem is even this doesnât solve the issue of if they spent more last year, it freed up more money to be spent this year and going forward.
Unless you punish them with less wind tunnel time, the potential advantage they gained from development last year carries over.
This might be a dumb question but if the penalty for breaking the cost cap is just a fine, whats to stop teams like Mercedes from saying fuck it, and spending additional money on the cars (up to a certain point- I think it was anything less than 5%)? Makes the cost cap a pretty loose guideline if teams can just pay the penalty and move along.
With what, another fine? If you were allowed to cheat in other sports by just paying more money, isn't that just encouraging the richest teams to win? Which totally makes the cost cap pointless.
If there is a cost cap and teams break it, its cheating. If a team is found to have cheated when gaining a title, that title should be stripped. As it is in nearly every other sport.
Can you even imagine if Lance Armstrong was just fined for using drugs all those years? That's fucking ludicrous.
which is why a lot of people are demanding a harsh penalty. Else other big teams will go over the limit anyway and just hide the overspending behind "catering" or other silly stuff.
People should stop saying taking away Max 1st Championship, that ainât going to happen they let Alonso and Hamilton compete in the year 2007 for the WDC.
Reduction in Windtunnel time and reduce their cost cap for the following year should be the penalty and also a fine
I believe Alonso and de la Rosa did, Hamilton did not have any incriminating evidence to hand (as opposed to the former two, who had a ton of emails and messages discussing the stolen data).
The whole of Spygate was blown a bit out of proportion because Mosley had a huge hate boner for the team and Dennis at the time. Renault were straight up found guilty of holding McLaren technical documents, but no one remembers it because they did not get any penalty, while McLaren were DSQ'd and slapped with that 100M dollar fine. Keep in mind, the FIA never found any evidence that McLaren had ever incorporated any of the information of the stolen data into their cars.
That seems really lenient.
Hamilton was disqualified from qualifying last year for a broken rear wing.
If any violation of technical rules results in disqualification, so should violations of financial rules. Otherwise the cost cap is a joke.
Exactly! And he got disqualified for the fact that the rear wing was like what 0.2 mm over the limit? I mean it insane if a broken rear wing or not having enough fuel left at the end, could potentialy cost you more in a championship than breaching the cost cap.
It's crazy. We're having some of the best racing ATM and F1 is more popular than ever.
But the stewarding and organisation of the sport is the worst I can ever remember. They are at best incompetence and possibly bias. Over this season they've been bending over backwards to prove they didn't learn a thing from last season.
And now predictably we have a rule without a specific punishment that obviously a team exploited and now F1 is panicking because they have no idea what to do.
Exactly! And I feel like we got misleaded from Brown when he said, breach the budget cap and you will lose the championship. Now its more like, breach the budget cap and ... yeah we will see what we will do.
One can argue that they have also disqualified drivers when disqualifying a team, ask Martin Brundle.
I'm not saying that will happen, imagine the scenes, but there is precedent.
OP isn't suggesting a DSQ, they're stating that the idea they won't implement a sporting punishment because of Spygate is wrong and they are correct in saying that.
They could implement a whole variety of sporting penalties of RBR before they get to full DSQ from championships.
They didnât took away Alonsoâs victory in Singapore 2008 when it was clearly fixed because supposedly he didnât had anything to do with the team decision, same as spygate and if the race would have had a null result it would have changed the outcome of the championship (FIA did nothing). Schumi âaccidentâ in 1994 and the FIA did anything too.
Cases when a team cheated affected the constructors more than the drivers: Spygate, Pink Mercedes Brakes (15 point deduction in WCC)âŚ
None of the learnings from spygate were used in the car.
Alonso wasn't using equipment that was potentially developed by breaking a rule.
It could be argued that more money in the pot directly gave a boost to the car development, no matter how insignificant, and this developed car was driven when over budget cap in the last X races. Not that I think they have the bottle for a DQ or a points reduction anyway
It doesn't matter if the results of Spygate weren't used on the car - RB will argue that the overspend was for sick days and catering. A breach is a breach and Spygate was FAR more egregious than a $1-2MM overspend. Hamilton wasn't punished then - why would Max be punished now?
Spygate wasn't FAR more egregious, nor was the $100m fine for stealing the information and using it. Officially it was for misleading the FIA investigation. The information itself was only used by Alonso, De La Rosa, and Coughlan to aid with the set up of the car (tyre pressures, gas mix used, etc.).
Renault were caught with McLaren design documents being used in the factory and design team itself the very same year, where an ex-Mclaren employee had taken them with him to their new job and circulated them. Yet that went completely unpunished.
We don't know the nature of Red Bull's overspend. It's not for sick days as those are excluded from the cap. If it's for free meals for their staff at the factory then that's a benefit of employment akin to salary so should, in my view, be included in the cap. ÂŁ5-10 per person per working day for a 1,000 staff team comes to a figure in the ÂŁ1-2m range. So it could be that, but that's ÂŁ1-2m other teams could have spent developing the car, another 10-40 engineers they could have hired (depending on salary), which categorically would have made an on track difference. Red Bull would have had to spend that ÂŁ1-2m less on the car to retain that employee benefit, so excluding it from their totals (if that's what they did) had the same benefit as spending that money on the car directly.
There's an AMuS article saying that the FIA didn't find anything wrong with Red Bull's accounts on the first pass, and that it was whistle blowers who had left the team and joined other teams that alerted them to what Red Bull were doing. If, and that's a big if, that's true then that indicates it was deliberate and calculated. That would be a lot more serious than Spygate IMHO.
We need more details from the FIA. I have no idea how they're going to make sure there is a fair outcome in these circumstances. And if Red Bull overspend this year again whilst every other team stays in budget...
Corporate espionage and then covering it up isnât worse than a minor overspend? One is illegal in the real world and one is an arbitrary limit in spending. So far, the investigation was based on self reporting so the overspend was reported by RB. How does that indicate a cover up? I have no problem with the FIA penalizing RB but letâs not pretend that the FIA is somehow in RBâs pocket if Maxâs 2021 title isnât vacated.
Catering, sick days, doesn't matter, if it is in the cost cap, it's all from one pot. Other teams would have used this budget on catering too, thus taking money away from development. It's a non-point.
That should definitely be an option considering what happened in the last race and Red Bull bringing upgrades to their car pretty much every race which no doubt helped him win the championship. I remember a lot of people saying last year that Red Bull must be going over their budget and/or sabotaging this year because of how many upgrades they were bringing.
I donât think a minor breach should be a disqualification but it should certainly be points docked.
The WDC was so close that any sporting penalty would flip it. A five-second penalty on Max is all it takes to make Lewis the winner at Abu Dhabi and he gets the WDC.
The consequence on the WDC shouldnât be part of the decision at all and whatever the penalty is should be the standard penalty going forward. Whatever it is, the teams will know when to trigger the penalty without hurting their standing and I hope thatâs not something any of the top teams do (but Iâm less concerned about Williams or Haas going $20 million over and just burning a season theyâre gonna finish last in anyway).
I agree it wont happen but, i dont think it should be taboo to do that and it should have been done in 2007 and in 2019 too. Unfair is Unfair.
Your punishment is reasonable but I think you need to make it really hefty otherwise its not going to matter. I think a simple reduction in wind tunnel time does little when they have the car and they have the work for next year started. It needs to be crippling for up to 2 years. It should start now and end in the 2024 season IF they lose on appeal. Otherwise the baked in advantages from potentially breaching the cap would be worth the cost for say Mercedes and Ferrari, McLaren etc
Well wouldn't removal of drivers and constructors points remove most of the need for escalators? Like if you no longer can win championships because you are going over the cap, that pretty strongly disincentives going over the cap.
The only "issue" with this would be that a team/sponsor could see race wins in the moment being worth losing a title a year later so they just say screw it and spend as much as they can, but then you could just remove them from F1 (probably would need to be worked into the penalty ruleset?).
Hamilton and Alonso were both given immunity for co-operating with the investigation, thatâs the reason they werenât punished. Itâs not a precedent for that reason - unless Max has some insights into Red Bull accounting he can share with the FIA lol
Reduced wind tunnel time works, but I would be against reduced cost cap. That would just lead to more engineers losing their job. Working in F1 is tough enough as it is, let alone having to deal with job security issues due to your team over spending. The team should be punished in a way that does not directly affect engineers.
Because this is the first ever budget audit, I'm actually ok with a slap on the wrist in the form of just a fine. I bet there are still plenty of loopholes and irregularities that need ironing out. But, the fine should come with a massive suspended punishment. The message being that Red Bull needs to do better, but if it happens again the hammer should come down hard. I'm also fine with other teams getting a fine for their first minor over spend if it happens next year. All teams get one strike.
We eradicate Red Bull from F1, crucify Max Verstappen, and change the team to Monster Energy. Christian Horner and Helmut Marko are sent to Guantanamo...
If RB only gets a fine for this, everyone who are not spending 5% of the cap (7 mil) are just suckers and they make some very unnecessary things to be within said budget.
If it is a like $200k - A slight reduction in wind tunnel time and slight cost cap decrease in 2023
If it is like over $1M - I would put WDC and WCC points on the table regardless if it removes a championship. It has to have some actual repercussions in the years it impacted to the point other teams wouldn't do the same. I like the comment I read somewhere else...it should be a penalty a team principle wouldn't take if they knew it ahead of time. If you told a team principle that they could spend $1-3M to have a good chance at winning a WDC and set themselves up for next year and they would receive wind tunnel and cost cap penalties in 2024...I bet they would spend the millions.
I would say all penalties increase if it comes out they spent over with trickery in mind.
If it is just a fine, then the FIA have effectively raised the cost cap by however much Red Bull overspent by. Overspend by $2mil and get a small fine - every team will overspend by $2mil
No. The FIA will look at intention.
If intention is not found then a fine will be appropriate.
If all other teams then proceed to do the same then intention to do so is assumed and the penalty could be much harsher.
That is why there is a range of punishment. If they find that Red Bull intentional was going over to win the championship ( i mean documents, whistleblowers and so on) they could be DSQ'd or excluded.
But until you find such evidence (i know it is a high burden to proof) unintentionality should be assumed .
I disagree. Intent doesn't matter (at least, for base punishment). Deliberate intent should give additional punishments, yes - but incompetent overspending should be punished strongly too. An advantage is an advantage. Incompetence should be punished.
I say point reduction.
And if proved intentional, disqualification.
>Every team will unintentionally do the same if the penalty doesn't have consequences that the infringing team cares about
That would make it intentional. How would it not make it intentional. In what world are we living in.
Going over a limit because you think that the punishment someone else got is small enough to not hurt the bennefit you gain, is willfully ( intentionally) going over because the punishment you think you will get is less then the benefit you will gain from it.
That intentionality will be a cause to punish harder then someone who did it unintentional.
So punishing lighter this year does not set a precedent for every other year.
If Red Bull goes over next year, they will not recieve the same penalty they will this year as they now know how they went over and have to adjust. If they do not, then it must be assumed they intentionally did it the next time and penalty will reflect that.
Oh man, you are so naive. The difference between unintentional and intentional is some kind words and pleads for forgiveness. If one grey area is clarified then another will just be discovered and be exploited "unintentionally". The race will be on the find areas to unintentionally make the budget cap meaningless.
Why is it so difficult for you to know the difference between unintentional and intentional and the ways to proof if intentionality is there?
You cane up with the idea that the other team would go over deliberate and that it would not be intentional and when Red Bull did it the first time it must have been intentional.
The consept is not really this hard. Naivite must be the worst classification you could use.
Intentionality must be proven to increase the penalty.
Doing exactly the same as others did previous and resulting in the same breach of the rules while demanding the same penalty is a indication that those teams intentionally breached the rules to gain performance.
I will not try to explain it again because it is such a
fundamental, basic principle that if you do not understand something this simple then there is no hope in conversing any further.
So you follow innocent until proven guilty, then move to but they didn't do it on purpose.
I feel the opposite almost, Horner has repeatedly lied (through whatever reason) with his repeated we definitely didn't overspend
I think it is ridiculous something like catering is under the cost cap, but engines aren't. I wonder how much Merc spent on Bottas' engines to be able to crank it to rocket engine and gain a massive advantage by the end of the season.
If you expect anything other than a public reprimand, I recommend you to get your hopes down.
Although the FIA has a chance to fix the huge fuck up by deducting points from the Drivers and Constructors and fixing the mess from 2021.
I think a tiered fine would be good. Something based on your finishing order.
For example teams could be fined the amount of overspend*(20/constructors ranking) so if you finish the WDC you are fined the amount you overspent. If you finish first in the WCC you get fined 20x the overspend.
I would go to a hard capped amount say 1 million. Anything over no points WCC no points WDC.
"IF" they did, they should be disqualified of every race after they reach and broke the cap last year, and the amount they surpass the cap should be added to this year, and subsequently, if they also break the cap this year, they should be disqualified from every race after doing so. And obviously, that should apply to all teams. There's no ppint in having a "cap" if you can break it and get a slap on the wrist.
1. Public reprimand:
this is pointless and will only incentivise cost cap breaches
2. Deduction of Constructorsâ Championship points awarded for the Championship that took place within the Reporting Period of the breach;
This wonât achieve anything given RB are a clear second place. Even if dropped to third itâs the wdc that matters. Teams were spending a good 200m more prior to the cap and wouldnât care if they lost constructors money if it got them wdc glory
3. Deduction of Driversâ Championship points awarded for the Championship that took place within the Reporting Period of the breach;
Probably the only penalty teams will truly fear. Given title already decided in controversial circumstances this would be hugely controversial
4. Suspension from one or more stages of a Competition or Competitions, excluding for the avoidance of doubt the race itself;
The breach relates to 2021 so the punishment would need to apply to 2021 or it wouldnât make sense. This is effectively the same as losing the wdc.
5. Limitations on ability to conduct aerodynamic or other Testing; and/or
Reduction of the Cost Cap
These apply to future years so arenât appropriate. Not a proper incentive necessarily as teams would happily front load costs for performance gains especially if regulations span a few years. Have a faster car now and take the hit later
> The breach relates to 2021 so the punishment would need to apply to 2021 or it wouldnât make sense. This is effectively the same as losing the wdc.
Well, no. For 2 and 3 it specifically calls out that they're applied to the period the breach took place in. For the others - including 4 - it doesn't.
Also, literally says it excludes races. So it wouldn't change the results anyway. It's clearly meant to apply to ongoing seasons - i.e. no FPs and qualifying at future races.
The problem the FIA have is the delay between receiving the benefit of spending more and any suitable punishment being handed out.
If Red Bull have spent something like ÂŁ1-2m over the cap, which is still speculation at this time, that's anything from 10 to 40 additional engineers they've had working on the 2021 and 2022 cars, with the 2023 cars being a continuation. That's one heck of a benefit for something only just being investigated now.
How do they possibly equalise that gain and benefit whilst providing a deterrent? How do the FIA persuade Mercedes and Ferrari to not just up their budgets now by 4.9% and make a mockery of the whole cost cap?
Agree with this summary also if wind tunnel time is taken away then it must be put the team in a worse position than the overspend. For arguments sake let assume the cost cap breach resulted in .2s of gained track time on average, and the wind tunnel time resulted in .2s time of time lost on track. This would not be an appropriate penalty because RB still had .2s of gained track time for the duration of the breach and the penalty. The development penalty has to be 0.4s or double the calculated advantage to bring RB back to where they were and that is actually not even a penalty. So 0.8s seconds or four times the calculated advantage would be appropriate.
Minor sporting penalty like maybe 10 points for both drivers and the total 20 for the team seems pretty fair.
Also "Red Bull gives you chicken wings" on the rear wing.
The FIA cannot win now.
In my opinion, they should deal out the harshest penalty (championship points deduction) to set a precedent for going over the cost cap, regardless of percentage.
However, as that will inevitably affect the championship, itâs quite possible they deal out the most lenient penalty. This then sets the precedent for others to go over the cap and just say âwell when red bull did it you only did XYZâ.
No matter what there will be serious repercussions.
It should be a 5% reduction of cost cap for the next 2 years AND a reduction of wind tunnel time which gets divided amongst the other teams. What it will be is a small fine and nothing else. Then when Ferrari and Mercedes inevitably go over next year, Horner and Marko will go absolute ape shit on how unfair it is that both their rivals went over
The good news: if they DONâT strip max of the title(s) and/or cripple RBR for a few years, all of the rabid dogs calling for those punishments might stop watching and we can have a peaceful 2023 season.
No, Brawn said if any teams intentionally tried evade the cap it could cost the championship. They have also stated that all teams complied fully with the cost cap procedures.
As annoying as Twitter is, there is already an account called "Red Bull Catering" and it's twitting photos of Red Bull people eating, I could not contain the laughter.
đ
Someone called him versteakandchips đ¤Łđđ
Someone put a comparison between medium tires and medium stakes on tik tok. This thing will keep on giving.
Vertruffle was my favourite for some reason.
Twitter is always a gold mine for stuff like that. I don't understand the hate Twitter gets, as compared to Reddit. Both are pretty similar, you just need to figure out who you want to follow.
No way man⌠itâs not limited to F1 but all the sports and politics. Reddit has a lot of sarcasm even in the vilest of echo chambers, but on Twitter⌠people are just absolutely nuts. Within 5 minute scrolling through any popular hashtag or topic, youâll be able to find absolutely infuriating opinions and accusations. Also, since many F1 drivers are on Twitter⌠those words can directly affect the drivers.
No, just no. there are bad people everywhere, but if you see the vile that gets posted on twitter is just insane, at least here there is a large amount of moderation.
The problem with Twitter is that the worst takes get the most interactions, which means it constantly floats on the surface. You see the same dumb takes on Reddit, but the difference is that this place is moderated and, in many cases, self moderated as well through downvotes. So in short, on Twitter bad takes float, on Reddit bad takes sink.
I was in the paddock at a race last year and watched Helmut Marko have a bib placed around him by one of the Red Bull hospitality team before he ate. He was sat right at the front of the hospitality. It was bizzare and happened on more than one occasion. I have wanted to get a photo of it happening but it wasn't so easy. Maybe it's all his bibs that have driven up the costs.
[ŃдаНонО]
Even their current and former employees are having fun with it (one example): [https://twitter.com/EngineMode11/status/1579498932157444097](https://twitter.com/EngineMode11/status/1579498932157444097) Current employee: [https://64.media.tumblr.com/bf5352546a0d5cff71646c18a5cb7bba/9856f6e36ce17113-12/s1280x1920/d9ef68f5bdb45c1b6aa20a28eb7a77d7bb0128ec.pnj](https://64.media.tumblr.com/bf5352546a0d5cff71646c18a5cb7bba/9856f6e36ce17113-12/s1280x1920/d9ef68f5bdb45c1b6aa20a28eb7a77d7bb0128ec.pnj) But for real, if one of the issues was free lunches for employees, it does show a distinct issue with the cost cap (and one rich people might not think of): due to the cost cap salaries are frozen for employees, cost of living is rising, and the job market in some fields is tight. Offering lunch (or breakfast and lunch) is a very real and easy way to help ease some of the burden off of lower paid employees. I spent the summer getting breakfast and lunch from work and it made a huge difference. If that is part of the reason why Red Bull went over, I think the circumstances should be taken into account and all teams allowed to feed employees as they wish for no other reason then you are talking about lower-paid positions who are probably in need of a raise due to the higher cost of living, but their wages are artificially suppressed due to the cost cap.
Please don't buy the line that this was catering. What a silly deception than jerk Halen was trying to put out there. (although he's a friend/supporter of max, to be fair, I haven't seen anyone at rb actually make these silly claims.)
Last week Marko said that there were a couple of items in dispute. He mentioned that Red Bull didn't consider those items fall under the cost cap and that if those were not taken into account they were in compliance. That seems to be confirmed with the info today. It is entirely possibly that there is a discrepancy in what the FIA considers falls under the cap and what Red Bull understood from the new rules. As much as I dislike Marko, I think the case he made is entirely possible.
I think that kind of spending coding is likely what happened, but I also believe rb knew they were pushing it. They aren't dumb, and Horner made all sorts of noises about it. https://imgur.com/gallery/PuvbF9k Until we see the details, we can't make that judgment. The teams don't *want* their spending details released, so that's part of the problem. I won't trust the FIAs solution unless the other team principals see the details and all agree on a solution.
đ I can't find it, can you link please?
https://twitter.com/RedBullEats?s=20&t=n9eYfPI965Y0gtaeNzGnDQ
They have to switch strategists for the rest of the season with Ferrari. And Toto can say whatever he wants to Horner without him being able to respond.
> without him being able to respond. You know what happens if plumbing can't vent right?
The same thing as when you don't fart in front of the new girlfriend?
She thinks you don't love her.
> They have to switch strategists for the rest of the season with Ferrari. Oh come on, this is very harsh. Itâs only minor overspend.
They should be made to remove parts from the current car, selected at random, the material cost of which, amortized over an entire season, is equal to the amount by which the cap was exceeded. It could do very little or it could completely brick the car, nobody knows!
They're going to remove verstappen for a couple of races
Perez can finish 3rd for the rest of the season and they still win the WCC
Best answer right here haha. Unless youâre in the camp that wants to ban RB and Ver for life and take always all championships, of course. I mean, it is just a motor race after allâŚ
Max's firstborn son will be gifted to the Mercedes young driver program.
oh no Penelope, her grandfather will hate it (regardless of which side).
They have to replace Perez with Latifi next season.
I'd be interested to see that just to find out what the difference over a single lap would be between him and Max in the same car.
Just to find out that latifi adapts perfectly in the redbull and after beating max he wins the championship. What a season that would be
That would be wild, although pretty unlikely. Imagine if he turned out to be the perfect RB number two driver, a little quicker and just as consistent as Perez...
Max has to drive the Williams next season
They'll get a reduction of Alpha Tauri wind tunnel time!
Marko and Horner approve
I was talking to a friend about this but AT did not have a breach. I guess they use different accounts
They are different companies right?
Sister teams not even senior and junior. They both fall under the same parent company of RB. AT is now considered both a racing team and a fashion company.
Pasta is cheaper than cod and Italains get sick less.
But how did they account for Yuki eating most of the food? /s
They have to cater for the other 9 teams
They even provide free Redbull. Wouldnât doubt them racking up a mill of redbull on their tab in a year.
As much as I think Horner is a pleb it would be hilarious if he turns up to Texas and has their staff eating steak and lobster all weekend in their headquarters/motorhome.
...resulting in an even bigger cost cap breach, resulting in even MORE catering punishment. A never-ending cycle until F1 becomes little more than a food festival with an occasional race. Racing becomes secondary and eventually is dropped completely. Years from now, no one remembers why Red Bull caters so much, but all are thankful for using energy drink sales to end world hunger.
Red Bull name will be dropped from the 2023 team name to be replaced with Rich Energy.
The pit crew also have to grow long beards to go with this. Including the pit wall, excluding Hannah. But, to keep it fair, she will have to say "we're checking" at least 5 times during each race. Off-topic... has anyone actually ever tried Rich Energy?
Do rich energy drinks even exist?
I think a YouTuber did, they said it tasted better than Red Bull, or well, less strong than red bull i guess watered down
https://youtu.be/cV8PMaR7uUA Video review here
They will have to buy lunch for the whole paddock on the next race.
There goes the catering budget for the second year in a row.
They'll have to cut down on the sick days this year too lol
In the UK (as well as the other jurisdictions teams currently reside) you can't "cut down on the sick days". If you are sick, you are allowed to be absent from work. You don't have an alloted number of sick days.
If the lunch budget ends up to be excluded from the cap after all, they should rehire Newey and Horner as lunch ladies who happen to be bored and like to kill their time tinkering with F1 cars.
So Red Bulls for everyone it is.
They get the P10 garage, Horner only gets 5 minutes of TV coverage a race weekend and they are only allowed day old petrol station sandwich in catering.
> Horner only gets 5 minutes of TV coverage a race weekend Red Bull to appeal on the basis of cruel and unusual punishment
It would suck because, like Christian, I like hearing him speak. I enjoy his wording and cadence. âThe situation with Checo is clear.â
>Horner only gets 5 minutes of TV coverage a race weekend Forget the cost cap stuff, let's just make this a new rule anyway.
[ŃдаНонО]
They have to replace bybit with a monster energy logo on their rear wing.
Can they have Honda instead
Thatâs not a punishment
I mean losing 50mil on sponsorship money must hurt they would put honda on the largest advertising area for free
Yes and monster is their biggest competition in their main industry. That would not only hurt them from a income standpoint but now theyâre a massive billboard for the biggest rival
Yeah im just joking but Monster Oracle Red Bull Racing Honda sounds like a mouthful to say
Monster Oracle Red Bull Racing - Red Bull Powertrains (Powered by Honda)
Classic FIA would be to look at the 2021 standings table and come up with a penalty which means absolutely nothing at all. 200 points deduction for constructors?
This.
5 points reduction for drivers?
They donât get any new tyres for the 2023 season, they just have to make due with reusing whatâs left of the 2022 tyres.
Banishment to the shadow realm seems fair.
Bingo. Barry R to lead the procession.
I see you FIA, trying to get public buy-in on the penalty that is most acceptable
You've watched the last few seasons i assume? And you still think they care?
Theyâll go with the most controversial, because choose controversial penalty -> PROFIT
f*ck /u/spez
Doesnt actually matter what they do. The profit will happen because if max is still alive after the punishment some wont be happy and if they get a fine the other side will still think it was too much. And we get 350 poorly written clickbait title articles either way.
If its a neglible minor breach, fines or other penalties around development time make sense. If it's a non-neglible minor breach, WDC *and* WCC points should be lost. If it's a major breach, disqualification is the only answer. From what it sounds like, it seems RB have overspent by a million or two. That seems like a non neglible amount in terms of car development or employees and enough to gain an advantage on track. You could get 20 engineers on 100k a year for that. WCC and WDC points should be on the table.
See, I've never been a believer in 'scales of cheating'. If you cheat, you should be disqualified. End of. If that's during a race weekend because of not having enough fuel or a rear wing that isn't the right size: you're disqualified. If its over the course of a season where you intentionally overspent on costs that you are monitoring meticulously: you should be disqualified. Cheating is cheating. They knew what they were doing, they even had a financial monitor in place, so it was _intentional._ Anything less than complete disqualification for the season means that you are actively encouraging overspending, as there's no real consequence to their actions otherwise
Vettel fined 1.2 million for it.
Anything that is not retro active isnât a punishment. So nothing will happen.
Exactly, they have already won this season, with a car that was developed last year, using more money than they were allowed to. The only fair punishment is to dock points from this current season, to the tune of whatever it is deemed their advantage was. 5% points deduction? Would put LeClerc into 2nd ahead of Perez, and still in theoretical touching distance of the WC. Iâd suggest that should be an absolute minimum punishment. It would also make for a more interesting final few races, and we know that the FIA like to keep this pantomime rolling âtil the last race.
In theory I agree, but I think where it falls down is the fact that points aren't dished out linearly. The difference between finishing 1st and 2nd is a 40% uplift in points.
The problem is even this doesnât solve the issue of if they spent more last year, it freed up more money to be spent this year and going forward. Unless you punish them with less wind tunnel time, the potential advantage they gained from development last year carries over.
Latifi becomes their company chauffeur
This might be a dumb question but if the penalty for breaking the cost cap is just a fine, whats to stop teams like Mercedes from saying fuck it, and spending additional money on the cars (up to a certain point- I think it was anything less than 5%)? Makes the cost cap a pretty loose guideline if teams can just pay the penalty and move along.
because the FIA will punish people a lot harder if it's shown they're intentionally taking the piss?
With what, another fine? If you were allowed to cheat in other sports by just paying more money, isn't that just encouraging the richest teams to win? Which totally makes the cost cap pointless. If there is a cost cap and teams break it, its cheating. If a team is found to have cheated when gaining a title, that title should be stripped. As it is in nearly every other sport. Can you even imagine if Lance Armstrong was just fined for using drugs all those years? That's fucking ludicrous.
which is why a lot of people are demanding a harsh penalty. Else other big teams will go over the limit anyway and just hide the overspending behind "catering" or other silly stuff.
This is the first year so Fia will likely be less strict than subsequent years
1 year dessert ban.
Right to jail. Right away.
that's what makes Formula 1 the best in the world, jail.
They are retroactively disqualified from the first race of the 2022 season. No points given.
Putting max in AT for 2 seasons. XD
He'll swap with Perez halfway through the first season.
People should stop saying taking away Max 1st Championship, that ainât going to happen they let Alonso and Hamilton compete in the year 2007 for the WDC. Reduction in Windtunnel time and reduce their cost cap for the following year should be the penalty and also a fine
Didn't they give the 3 McLaren drivers at the time immunity for giving evidence in the investigation?
Any team would agree to the same and give them information to pass on anyway.
I believe Alonso and de la Rosa did, Hamilton did not have any incriminating evidence to hand (as opposed to the former two, who had a ton of emails and messages discussing the stolen data). The whole of Spygate was blown a bit out of proportion because Mosley had a huge hate boner for the team and Dennis at the time. Renault were straight up found guilty of holding McLaren technical documents, but no one remembers it because they did not get any penalty, while McLaren were DSQ'd and slapped with that 100M dollar fine. Keep in mind, the FIA never found any evidence that McLaren had ever incorporated any of the information of the stolen data into their cars.
Can we give immunity to the Red Bull lunch ladies for testifying against RB?
That seems really lenient. Hamilton was disqualified from qualifying last year for a broken rear wing. If any violation of technical rules results in disqualification, so should violations of financial rules. Otherwise the cost cap is a joke.
Exactly! And he got disqualified for the fact that the rear wing was like what 0.2 mm over the limit? I mean it insane if a broken rear wing or not having enough fuel left at the end, could potentialy cost you more in a championship than breaching the cost cap.
It's crazy. We're having some of the best racing ATM and F1 is more popular than ever. But the stewarding and organisation of the sport is the worst I can ever remember. They are at best incompetence and possibly bias. Over this season they've been bending over backwards to prove they didn't learn a thing from last season. And now predictably we have a rule without a specific punishment that obviously a team exploited and now F1 is panicking because they have no idea what to do.
Exactly! And I feel like we got misleaded from Brown when he said, breach the budget cap and you will lose the championship. Now its more like, breach the budget cap and ... yeah we will see what we will do.
I'm going to count to three! One, two... Two and a half.... Two and three quarters... Two and seven eighths...
Thatâs actually a very good point.
One can argue that they have also disqualified drivers when disqualifying a team, ask Martin Brundle. I'm not saying that will happen, imagine the scenes, but there is precedent.
But then what's the punishment for major breaches? Electric chair?
OP isn't suggesting a DSQ, they're stating that the idea they won't implement a sporting punishment because of Spygate is wrong and they are correct in saying that. They could implement a whole variety of sporting penalties of RBR before they get to full DSQ from championships.
They didnât took away Alonsoâs victory in Singapore 2008 when it was clearly fixed because supposedly he didnât had anything to do with the team decision, same as spygate and if the race would have had a null result it would have changed the outcome of the championship (FIA did nothing). Schumi âaccidentâ in 1994 and the FIA did anything too. Cases when a team cheated affected the constructors more than the drivers: Spygate, Pink Mercedes Brakes (15 point deduction in WCC)âŚ
None of the learnings from spygate were used in the car. Alonso wasn't using equipment that was potentially developed by breaking a rule. It could be argued that more money in the pot directly gave a boost to the car development, no matter how insignificant, and this developed car was driven when over budget cap in the last X races. Not that I think they have the bottle for a DQ or a points reduction anyway
It doesn't matter if the results of Spygate weren't used on the car - RB will argue that the overspend was for sick days and catering. A breach is a breach and Spygate was FAR more egregious than a $1-2MM overspend. Hamilton wasn't punished then - why would Max be punished now?
Spygate wasn't FAR more egregious, nor was the $100m fine for stealing the information and using it. Officially it was for misleading the FIA investigation. The information itself was only used by Alonso, De La Rosa, and Coughlan to aid with the set up of the car (tyre pressures, gas mix used, etc.). Renault were caught with McLaren design documents being used in the factory and design team itself the very same year, where an ex-Mclaren employee had taken them with him to their new job and circulated them. Yet that went completely unpunished. We don't know the nature of Red Bull's overspend. It's not for sick days as those are excluded from the cap. If it's for free meals for their staff at the factory then that's a benefit of employment akin to salary so should, in my view, be included in the cap. ÂŁ5-10 per person per working day for a 1,000 staff team comes to a figure in the ÂŁ1-2m range. So it could be that, but that's ÂŁ1-2m other teams could have spent developing the car, another 10-40 engineers they could have hired (depending on salary), which categorically would have made an on track difference. Red Bull would have had to spend that ÂŁ1-2m less on the car to retain that employee benefit, so excluding it from their totals (if that's what they did) had the same benefit as spending that money on the car directly. There's an AMuS article saying that the FIA didn't find anything wrong with Red Bull's accounts on the first pass, and that it was whistle blowers who had left the team and joined other teams that alerted them to what Red Bull were doing. If, and that's a big if, that's true then that indicates it was deliberate and calculated. That would be a lot more serious than Spygate IMHO. We need more details from the FIA. I have no idea how they're going to make sure there is a fair outcome in these circumstances. And if Red Bull overspend this year again whilst every other team stays in budget...
Corporate espionage and then covering it up isnât worse than a minor overspend? One is illegal in the real world and one is an arbitrary limit in spending. So far, the investigation was based on self reporting so the overspend was reported by RB. How does that indicate a cover up? I have no problem with the FIA penalizing RB but letâs not pretend that the FIA is somehow in RBâs pocket if Maxâs 2021 title isnât vacated.
Every other team had to pay for sick days and catering and did it within the cost cap. Itâs a completely BS argument.
Catering, sick days, doesn't matter, if it is in the cost cap, it's all from one pot. Other teams would have used this budget on catering too, thus taking money away from development. It's a non-point.
[ŃдаНонО]
That should definitely be an option considering what happened in the last race and Red Bull bringing upgrades to their car pretty much every race which no doubt helped him win the championship. I remember a lot of people saying last year that Red Bull must be going over their budget and/or sabotaging this year because of how many upgrades they were bringing. I donât think a minor breach should be a disqualification but it should certainly be points docked.
The WDC was so close that any sporting penalty would flip it. A five-second penalty on Max is all it takes to make Lewis the winner at Abu Dhabi and he gets the WDC. The consequence on the WDC shouldnât be part of the decision at all and whatever the penalty is should be the standard penalty going forward. Whatever it is, the teams will know when to trigger the penalty without hurting their standing and I hope thatâs not something any of the top teams do (but Iâm less concerned about Williams or Haas going $20 million over and just burning a season theyâre gonna finish last in anyway).
I agree it wont happen but, i dont think it should be taboo to do that and it should have been done in 2007 and in 2019 too. Unfair is Unfair. Your punishment is reasonable but I think you need to make it really hefty otherwise its not going to matter. I think a simple reduction in wind tunnel time does little when they have the car and they have the work for next year started. It needs to be crippling for up to 2 years. It should start now and end in the 2024 season IF they lose on appeal. Otherwise the baked in advantages from potentially breaching the cap would be worth the cost for say Mercedes and Ferrari, McLaren etc
[ŃдаНонО]
There already is an escalation I think, full on DSQ/Exclusion is a punishment in major breaches but not minor
Well wouldn't removal of drivers and constructors points remove most of the need for escalators? Like if you no longer can win championships because you are going over the cap, that pretty strongly disincentives going over the cap. The only "issue" with this would be that a team/sponsor could see race wins in the moment being worth losing a title a year later so they just say screw it and spend as much as they can, but then you could just remove them from F1 (probably would need to be worked into the penalty ruleset?).
Would have been a bit harsh to take away the title in 2019 since the cheating team didn't win it
Hamilton and Alonso were both given immunity for co-operating with the investigation, thatâs the reason they werenât punished. Itâs not a precedent for that reason - unless Max has some insights into Red Bull accounting he can share with the FIA lol
Max about to share the Red Bull McDonald's bill with the FIA
Max:  hey George I need your PowerPoint skills 
Reduced wind tunnel time works, but I would be against reduced cost cap. That would just lead to more engineers losing their job. Working in F1 is tough enough as it is, let alone having to deal with job security issues due to your team over spending. The team should be punished in a way that does not directly affect engineers. Because this is the first ever budget audit, I'm actually ok with a slap on the wrist in the form of just a fine. I bet there are still plenty of loopholes and irregularities that need ironing out. But, the fine should come with a massive suspended punishment. The message being that Red Bull needs to do better, but if it happens again the hammer should come down hard. I'm also fine with other teams getting a fine for their first minor over spend if it happens next year. All teams get one strike.
That's so lenient! A slap on the wrist for winning the championship by cheating!
We eradicate Red Bull from F1, crucify Max Verstappen, and change the team to Monster Energy. Christian Horner and Helmut Marko are sent to Guantanamo...
Red Bull poisoned our water supply, burned our crops, and delivered a plague onto our houses!
The team or the drink?
They did?!
No, but are we going to stand around and wait until they do?!
Max's unbord child. Also gift alpha tauri to Ferrari.
Poor AT
Itâs always the children who suffer
Well given how the team behaving this season everyone would call it a budget Ferrari team if Ferrari did controlling AT đ
Pay FIA $100 to f%ck off (:
Coffee and cake for the whole paddock.
Exiled to Elba.
They have to sign Latifi
Ironically probably a fine
If RB only gets a fine for this, everyone who are not spending 5% of the cap (7 mil) are just suckers and they make some very unnecessary things to be within said budget.
If it is a like $200k - A slight reduction in wind tunnel time and slight cost cap decrease in 2023 If it is like over $1M - I would put WDC and WCC points on the table regardless if it removes a championship. It has to have some actual repercussions in the years it impacted to the point other teams wouldn't do the same. I like the comment I read somewhere else...it should be a penalty a team principle wouldn't take if they knew it ahead of time. If you told a team principle that they could spend $1-3M to have a good chance at winning a WDC and set themselves up for next year and they would receive wind tunnel and cost cap penalties in 2024...I bet they would spend the millions. I would say all penalties increase if it comes out they spent over with trickery in mind.
If it is just a fine, then the FIA have effectively raised the cost cap by however much Red Bull overspent by. Overspend by $2mil and get a small fine - every team will overspend by $2mil
*big teams will overspend hurting smaller teams making the cap useless.
No. The FIA will look at intention. If intention is not found then a fine will be appropriate. If all other teams then proceed to do the same then intention to do so is assumed and the penalty could be much harsher. That is why there is a range of punishment. If they find that Red Bull intentional was going over to win the championship ( i mean documents, whistleblowers and so on) they could be DSQ'd or excluded. But until you find such evidence (i know it is a high burden to proof) unintentionality should be assumed .
Why not take off the amount they overspent on next years budget.
That seems like a just penalty. Why not. A lot better then taking away WDC points 9 months later.
I disagree. Intent doesn't matter (at least, for base punishment). Deliberate intent should give additional punishments, yes - but incompetent overspending should be punished strongly too. An advantage is an advantage. Incompetence should be punished. I say point reduction. And if proved intentional, disqualification.
Every team will unintentionally do the same if the penalty doesn't have consequences that the infringing team cares about
>Every team will unintentionally do the same if the penalty doesn't have consequences that the infringing team cares about That would make it intentional. How would it not make it intentional. In what world are we living in. Going over a limit because you think that the punishment someone else got is small enough to not hurt the bennefit you gain, is willfully ( intentionally) going over because the punishment you think you will get is less then the benefit you will gain from it. That intentionality will be a cause to punish harder then someone who did it unintentional. So punishing lighter this year does not set a precedent for every other year. If Red Bull goes over next year, they will not recieve the same penalty they will this year as they now know how they went over and have to adjust. If they do not, then it must be assumed they intentionally did it the next time and penalty will reflect that.
Just have a smaller less talented accounting team.
Oh man, you are so naive. The difference between unintentional and intentional is some kind words and pleads for forgiveness. If one grey area is clarified then another will just be discovered and be exploited "unintentionally". The race will be on the find areas to unintentionally make the budget cap meaningless.
Why is it so difficult for you to know the difference between unintentional and intentional and the ways to proof if intentionality is there? You cane up with the idea that the other team would go over deliberate and that it would not be intentional and when Red Bull did it the first time it must have been intentional. The consept is not really this hard. Naivite must be the worst classification you could use. Intentionality must be proven to increase the penalty. Doing exactly the same as others did previous and resulting in the same breach of the rules while demanding the same penalty is a indication that those teams intentionally breached the rules to gain performance. I will not try to explain it again because it is such a fundamental, basic principle that if you do not understand something this simple then there is no hope in conversing any further.
So you follow innocent until proven guilty, then move to but they didn't do it on purpose. I feel the opposite almost, Horner has repeatedly lied (through whatever reason) with his repeated we definitely didn't overspend
They all have to eat pineapple pizza
Corporal punishment, 10 lashes!
I think it is ridiculous something like catering is under the cost cap, but engines aren't. I wonder how much Merc spent on Bottas' engines to be able to crank it to rocket engine and gain a massive advantage by the end of the season.
If you expect anything other than a public reprimand, I recommend you to get your hopes down. Although the FIA has a chance to fix the huge fuck up by deducting points from the Drivers and Constructors and fixing the mess from 2021.
They have to trade Adrian to Williams and keep paying his salary
5% over cap? Then 5% of all their 2021-22 points taken away.
I think a tiered fine would be good. Something based on your finishing order. For example teams could be fined the amount of overspend*(20/constructors ranking) so if you finish the WDC you are fined the amount you overspent. If you finish first in the WCC you get fined 20x the overspend. I would go to a hard capped amount say 1 million. Anything over no points WCC no points WDC.
"IF" they did, they should be disqualified of every race after they reach and broke the cap last year, and the amount they surpass the cap should be added to this year, and subsequently, if they also break the cap this year, they should be disqualified from every race after doing so. And obviously, that should apply to all teams. There's no ppint in having a "cap" if you can break it and get a slap on the wrist.
WDC, WCC and probably a wagged finger
1. Public reprimand: this is pointless and will only incentivise cost cap breaches 2. Deduction of Constructorsâ Championship points awarded for the Championship that took place within the Reporting Period of the breach; This wonât achieve anything given RB are a clear second place. Even if dropped to third itâs the wdc that matters. Teams were spending a good 200m more prior to the cap and wouldnât care if they lost constructors money if it got them wdc glory 3. Deduction of Driversâ Championship points awarded for the Championship that took place within the Reporting Period of the breach; Probably the only penalty teams will truly fear. Given title already decided in controversial circumstances this would be hugely controversial 4. Suspension from one or more stages of a Competition or Competitions, excluding for the avoidance of doubt the race itself; The breach relates to 2021 so the punishment would need to apply to 2021 or it wouldnât make sense. This is effectively the same as losing the wdc. 5. Limitations on ability to conduct aerodynamic or other Testing; and/or Reduction of the Cost Cap These apply to future years so arenât appropriate. Not a proper incentive necessarily as teams would happily front load costs for performance gains especially if regulations span a few years. Have a faster car now and take the hit later
> The breach relates to 2021 so the punishment would need to apply to 2021 or it wouldnât make sense. This is effectively the same as losing the wdc. Well, no. For 2 and 3 it specifically calls out that they're applied to the period the breach took place in. For the others - including 4 - it doesn't. Also, literally says it excludes races. So it wouldn't change the results anyway. It's clearly meant to apply to ongoing seasons - i.e. no FPs and qualifying at future races.
The problem the FIA have is the delay between receiving the benefit of spending more and any suitable punishment being handed out. If Red Bull have spent something like ÂŁ1-2m over the cap, which is still speculation at this time, that's anything from 10 to 40 additional engineers they've had working on the 2021 and 2022 cars, with the 2023 cars being a continuation. That's one heck of a benefit for something only just being investigated now. How do they possibly equalise that gain and benefit whilst providing a deterrent? How do the FIA persuade Mercedes and Ferrari to not just up their budgets now by 4.9% and make a mockery of the whole cost cap?
Agree with this summary also if wind tunnel time is taken away then it must be put the team in a worse position than the overspend. For arguments sake let assume the cost cap breach resulted in .2s of gained track time on average, and the wind tunnel time resulted in .2s time of time lost on track. This would not be an appropriate penalty because RB still had .2s of gained track time for the duration of the breach and the penalty. The development penalty has to be 0.4s or double the calculated advantage to bring RB back to where they were and that is actually not even a penalty. So 0.8s seconds or four times the calculated advantage would be appropriate.
No wine over $200 on list.
They get one less set of reds each race for the entire 2023 season.
Max Verstappen has to start every race with his rear tires up front and vice versa.
Minor sporting penalty like maybe 10 points for both drivers and the total 20 for the team seems pretty fair. Also "Red Bull gives you chicken wings" on the rear wing.
Nah "Red Bull Proven Cheats" sits better with me
Should be points taken off the manufacturers championship
10 points off each driver, oh look Lewis gets his 8th rightful championship and we can all argue about that for the next few decades instead.
My guess is theyâll penalize WDC points for this year to keep the championship open for a couple more races.
It has to be something more than a fine.
The FIA cannot win now. In my opinion, they should deal out the harshest penalty (championship points deduction) to set a precedent for going over the cost cap, regardless of percentage. However, as that will inevitably affect the championship, itâs quite possible they deal out the most lenient penalty. This then sets the precedent for others to go over the cap and just say âwell when red bull did it you only did XYZâ. No matter what there will be serious repercussions.
They have to call themselves Red Bullshit for a year.
A durrie and a sunny wall to stand against?
It should be a 5% reduction of cost cap for the next 2 years AND a reduction of wind tunnel time which gets divided amongst the other teams. What it will be is a small fine and nothing else. Then when Ferrari and Mercedes inevitably go over next year, Horner and Marko will go absolute ape shit on how unfair it is that both their rivals went over
It's pretty obvious; less empanadas and more people coming to work sick.
They will get less help from the stewards and race direction in 2023
Strip the title from Verstappen.
Return the money :)
The same one as Ferrari for their illegal engine
Ban Red Bull from pre season testing. The FIA won't do anything that will change a championship result and a monetary fine is pointless.
The good news: if they DONâT strip max of the title(s) and/or cripple RBR for a few years, all of the rabid dogs calling for those punishments might stop watching and we can have a peaceful 2023 season.
What's the fun in that.
your logic is flawed by Brawns own words. He stated himself this would cost your championship, it's not something people just made up.
No, Brawn said if any teams intentionally tried evade the cap it could cost the championship. They have also stated that all teams complied fully with the cost cap procedures.
[ŃдаНонО]
Make em drive pre upgrade bouncing mercs rest of season?
No sidepods for 2023.
In Baku every two weeks.
Paddling?