It seems that sky are reporting red bull offered some lesser punishment for admission of guilt. If the figure is 1.8mil and red bull are saying they merely blew the catering budget and other teams which similar staffs made their eat mcdonalds or whatever and pay for it then there has to be evidence of that discrepancy available to fia. As other said it's very clear there's been a leak of confidential data to the other teams to be able to comment so I'd not be shocked that someone gets fingers and a team gets fingers on that as well. As for 1.8million. How many races, where, how many days, how many people, what per diem is applied. Example 20 races, x 100 people x 5 days x 20 quid a head = 200k. So that clearly doesn't add up so now is it 300 days a year x 500 people or what? We are in the end arguing over what we know to be a less than 5% breach and no clear rules for punishment so the thing will be messy until all the facts become clear.
we don;t know ****, I'd say the reason for the delay in reporting is because it's over 5% and the FIA are trying to make it under so they don;t have to give a meaningful penalty. If it wasn't for the leak the FIA would probably try to pretend they were under budget. HMRC should be watching this story and start auditing Horner.
Well the requirement for what has been put into the public record is crystal clear so I'd say deciding that the fia are lying to us would be going just a tad far. Bit conspiracy theorist tbh cos if merc had anything to contradict the minor charge they'd have dropped it already
I think the FIA are trying to get Red Bull to agree to an 'Accepted Breach Agreement' so then they admit they went over budget but FIA can't then impose any points deductions or reduction in future Budget caps - so just a very gentle slap on the wrist. The question is will Red Bull actually want to admit to breaking the rules
I think you are right but the official rules state that by accepting an Accepted Breach Agreement they accept any punishment dealt out! I do think they will be negotiating what the punishment should be though.
I will be interested in the punishment as I would put money on Red Bull using the same accountancy scheme for this years budget cap as last. So they will almost certainly be over for this year too!! Now should that be considered a re-offence and thus a harsher punishment or will Red Bull basically just turn up to the last few races and maybe do a single lap or what ever the Concorde agreement says they are obliged to do and just blame the lack of parts for not running more to try and stay under the cap or at least within the minor overspend category? I think the FIA, once again, didn't think this through and being so late with the results of the 2021 budget cap means that any team that breached it 'unknowingly' will have automatically breached it again in 2022 by using same methods!
F1 just isn't a sport anymore. It's a product. If they went back and penalized RBR, and that penalty meant reassigning the champion, it would have a huge negative effect on the product. A slap on the wrists is far less damaging to the product, so they are always going to go that route. Teams know this, so will push the limits to the enth degree. I mean, even though it wouldn't change anything, maybe just eject them from the constructors championship to be seen to have done something... Assuming this is a large overspend I doubt we will ever know the true numbers involved, but RBR really came back to form last season (partially down to the floor).
No matter what I think the FIA will not be harsh. Undoubtedly, a breach last year will mean they will have breached this year. F1 is a commercial enterprise and if an overspend is a detriment to other teams I would imagine a legal challenge could be brought. It is a sham that this has not been dealt with at the beginning of this season. An appropriate penalty will be less damaging than a feeble lift of the carpet and a quick brush. There is too much controversy, race director **** up and now this.
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/63361127 "Team principal Christian Horner said that "what is in contention is a couple of hundred thousand dollars" in the team's financial submissions for 2021." "Horner said that a rule clarification in June - three months after teams had to hand their final 2021 accounts to the FIA - had changed the way unused parts were assessed under the cap and "had a seven-digit effect on our submission"." So the goal posts moved? Well at least we actually now know what caused the problem and roughly how much they went over... we're getting somewhere
Horner still maintaining that Red Bull have not spent too much and the overspend was a couple of hundred thousand $. He maintains that the overspend did not impact car performance at all!! I'm not sure he will accept an 'Accepted Breach Agreement' - to a degree I hope they don't accept the agreement and then FIA give them a decent punishment for the next 2 seasons!
It's a sport that's full of ultra-competitive people and a 'do whatever it takes but don't get caught' culture. And global brands and sponsorship & marketing budgets. Maybe the FIA's sanctions should include an official asterisk next to any team that breaks the budget cap. Takes the shine off the team's achievements (wherever they finish in the championship), and embarrasses the team's sponsors and reduces the marketing payback. Whether you're a driver or a sponsor or a mechanic or an aero designer, you don't want to see an asterisk that tells the world "this is where the team finished, but keep in mind that they broke the financial rules that are trying to give a level playing field". https://www.sportspromedia.com/anal...ents: Red Bull Racing,be worth US$300 million.
Is there truth behind the budget rules clarification after they submitted? Maybe this is how Mercedes etc knew red bull went over. If so. That's rubbish.... rules should be set then any amendments should be implemented in following seasons. But then I'm not surprised as the FIA love to amend rules on the fly
In the end there's monkey business going on in the pit lane and a lot of people looking to gain advantage. They need to recall that helmut is a total helmet and he might just choose to close a team out of spite. Red.bull have 2 seats at the table and might well turn round and decide to be very very awkward on anything and everything. But as per its a lot of people throwing **** about. We need clarity all 20 teams spend totals published and clarify on what's in and out.
The bottom line right now is that one has overspent, nailed two championships, so despite the fact they won't/can't go back and penalize, they need to hit them with something to deter them continuing as we go forward. This budget cap only works if every team is on board and playing by the book, otherwise we're just artificially shifting the balance of power. And that's the same for any team cooking the book or taking the piss.
Basically it's this.. we have a budget cap and EVERY team sticks to it as agreed, and if it's broken the punishment is severe, or we scrap the budget cap. Them's the choices.
Well those are not the choices being offered up and down the grid. Teams want to basically financially decapitate red bull Teams want to have them lose championships. Teams want to reverse results. The reality is we have an unknown level of breach being discussed. Is it 200k, is it 1.8m is it 5m? what is it? The fia call it minor as <5% yet then the teams decide after the fact that they could get to Mars on that or something. The penalties seem unclear depending on who is writing as well. How can we judge what is right without a clear picture of scale of breach and understanding the penalties that were agreed prior to the start of cap? These are as I understand them the scale of punishments possible. A fine - financial penalty to be determined on a case-by-case basis Public Reprimand Deduction of Constructors' Championship points Deduction of Drivers' Championship points Suspension from one or more stage of a season (such as qualifying, but excluding the race) Aerodynamic testing capability reduced Reduction in future cost cap limit. If you apply all 7 for 200k over the limit then thst would seem a tad aggressive given there are levels of breach defined. 5 to 7 seem to apply to future while 3 and 4 appear to apply retrospectively. Certain actors in this want 3 and 4 and other actors want 6 and 7. Each seeking their own advantage. Do ignoring the teams bleating on..... and ignoring lewis hamilton screwjob.....what is appropriate to apply if A) it's 200k breach due to free lunches as horner insinuates B) it's 1.8mil breach as was Rumoured this week C) it's 5mil breach as Mercedes seem to be insinuating. Remembering that a major breach needs to be also punished somehow on top of this.
Whilst I think this is in general a fair perspective, if the overspend is related to the clarification about spare parts that was issued in April this year, then I don’t think we can treat this situation as being so black and white. Maybe last year RedBull did think “this is unclear, we’ll exploit it to the maximum and then argue it later” and all the other teams took the opposite approach. The situation is now clarified, which is: a) an admission on the part of the FIA that there were valid /reasonable alternative interpretations, b) is as effective a deterrent as is required to prevent it happening again I suspect that this is what is really being negotiated, RedBull want the FIA to admit that they were within a valid interpretation of the rules and the FIA want RedBull to admit some guilt. The teams piling on is mostly an attempt to destabilise the team that has built a decent lead under the new regs, so as to peg them back.
'unused parts' what does that constitute though? Tyres that weren't used, spare front and rear wings, enough spares to completely rebuild a car, the fuel left in the car at the end of the race? I'd say that nothing like that should be excluded, and I'd put money on RBR excluding them all. At the end of the day every team in the pitlane was highly suspicious of redbull by the halfway point in the season, and they know exactly how much everything costs.
