F1 2022

[Dave]

I disagree - many athletes have had their medals and championships stripped. Why should F1 be any different?

I just see it as doing more harm than good, would Hamilton even want the title under those conditions?

 

[Hamster]

enough of a deterrent

They mentioned a procedure breach as well. No idea about specifics (if they ever mentioned anything) but given AMR got the same it sounds like they did their budget calculations wrong: like left out stuff (extra catering costs if we give them the benefit of the doubt) that should've been included.

Cannot imagine a team deliberately breaching the budget cap when they know it will be audited.

 

[quovadis]

I just see it as doing more harm than good, would Hamilton even want the title under those conditions?

If you consider that the FIA still hasn't been able to sell their response/review to last seasons fiasco you could argue that stripping the 2021 title would right the wrong and provide an out to the FIA.

They could then argue that it is a great enough sanction that the 2022 title can stand. If they allow RB to retain the 2021 championship then not only will they have to continue to deal with the 2021 criticism they'll now have to deal with a 2022 criticism too - it's essentially even worse for them. I doubt F1 cares - they're just getting more ammunition to support dropping the FIA altogether.

I don't think the FIA have the balls but their integrity is definitely on the line.

 

[quovadis]

They mentioned a procedure breach as well. No idea about specifics (if they ever mentioned anything) but given AMR got the same it sounds like they did their budget calculations wrong: like left out stuff (extra catering costs if we give them the benefit of the doubt) that should've been included.

Cannot imagine a team deliberately breaching the budget cap when they know it will be audited.

A breach is a breach - you could argue in mitigation of the sanction imposed but I think it's disingenuous that RB had their own interpretation that differed from everyone else within the budget cap.

 

[Mzezman]

Who would have thought we would see a real life Kobayashi Maru

 

[Speedster]

But it was afaik, a minor overspend punishment is as follows, so hit them in the constructors with a big point deduction and no aero testing is within the punishments allowed.

The potential consequences for a 'minor' breach are a financial penalty and/or minor sporting penalty, and are as follows:

• A fine in an amount to be determined on a case by case basis
• A public reprimand
• A deduction of Constructors' Championship points awarded
• A deduction of Drivers' Championship points awarded
• Suspension from one or more stages of a competition
• Limitations on ability to conduct aerodynamic or other testing; and/or reduction of the cost cap

That list is far too broad. It simply says that the punishment could take any of those forms, or a combination of them. There is, for example, a huge difference between a public reprimand and a suspension. It also doesn't say that if they opt for a suspension, how long that suspension would be or if they deduct points, how many points.

 

[Speedster]

Reducing all driver and constructor points by double the excess percentage and the same for future budget caps for the next two years would be enough of a deterrent. Major breach should be the above plus disqualification.

Reports indicate they overspent by between 1% and 1.5%. Deducting those points, even double, won't be a big enough disincentive to prevent future breaches by any of the other teams.

 

[Speedster]

RBR is a team, and Max having a superior car gave him the tools he needed to win. This he should be equally penalised.

I like the idea of them having double the amount they were over being deducted from next years cap. That will send a strong message. And of course for Max to hand over last years trophy to its rightful owner, Hamilton.

Have you considered seeing a counselor?

 

[quovadis]

Reports indicate they overspent by between 1% and 1.5%. Deducting those points, even double, won't be a big enough disincentive to prevent future breaches by any of the other teams.

Fair enough. Could even make it the points deducted from both championships be double the combined sum of the difference to every team's cap total that didn't exceed the cap.

 

[Naks]

One of the issues with the cost cap is that some things are exempt: drivers' salaries + top three earners.

One rumour floating around is that the overspend is down to how RBR & the FIA interpret the definition of 'employee' differently: RBR hired Adrian Newey as a contractor through the latter's own company. RBR see Newey as an employee and not subject to the cap, while the FIA disagrees: https://www.motorsportweek.com/2022/10/17/is-adrian-newey-at-the-root-of-red-bulls-budget-cap-saga/

If it wasn't that and the FIA can show the overspend was performance-related, then strip RBR of both the 2021 & 2022 championship points: teams must be deterred from even thinking of creative HR & accounting to get around the cost cap. Fiddling with driver's points at this stage would be too messy.

Easy solution would be to include *everything* in the cost cap, and then there's no wiggle room.

 

[caroper]

If the over spend was Adrian Newey then the FIA have shown that the overspend was performance-related.......

I am also hearing similar talk that Helmut Marko's multi Million Salary was also not declared.

FIA need to put the facts into the open, non of this is helping F1 but it is making the FIA look incompetent.

 

[Naks]

If the over spend was Adrian Newey then the FIA have shown that the overspend was performance-related.......
I am also hearing similar talk that Helmut Marko's multi Million Salary were also not declared.
FIA need to put the facts into the open, non of this is helping F1.

I don't think it's that simple: AN would have designed a fast regardless of how he is employed.

Thing is, employment contracts are confidential, so the FIA can't just expose those details without breaking EU labour laws.

 

[Naks]

 

[quovadis]

Fiddling with driver's points at this stage would be too messy.

It's just as messy and allows gaming of the system. The driver benefits from the car. The car and driver are not severable.

 

[UrBaN963]

It's just as messy and allows gaming of the system. The driver benefits from the car. The car and driver are not severable.

You're right, but at this point the punishment should be forward-looking. Nobody benefits from stripping Max of his title. There's already been so much drama around it and we're almost a year on. Regardless of what happens, that title will always be tainted. Best to leave it be and manage and enforce rules to improve the sport.

 

[quovadis]

You're right, but at this point the punishment should be forward-looking. Nobody benefits from stripping Max of his title. There's already been so much drama around it and we're almost a year on. Regardless of what happens, that title will always be tainted. Best to leave it be and manage and enforce rules to improve the sport.

Why would F1 be different to any other sport if it's found out retrospectively that rules were broken?

 

[Naks]

It's just as messy and allows gaming of the system. The driver benefits from the car. The car and driver are not severable.

Sure, but there is precedent for this: Spygate, where McLaren was DSQ'd from the 2007 championship, but not its drivers.

 

[UrBaN963]

Why would F1 be different to any other sport if it's found out retrospectively that rules were broken?

You miss the point. Nobody is arguing rules weren't broken.

We're looking at potential solutions.

Say they strip Max of the title and it goes to Lewis. A title that is already controversial now becomes more so. Instead of it being the title that "Max didn't win"," Max was gifted" etc, it becomes the title that "Lewis only won because of the FIA", "Lewis won a year too late" etc etc etc.

It's really bad optics for the sport. And it is a business, marketing is huge for Formula 1. What if Max leaves over this nonsense? We lose one of the best drivers to ever do it, the championship is that much less interesting.

Whether you're a Max or Lewis fan (the two most vocal camps), I doubt either side would be happy with an outcome like that.

 

[quovadis]

Sure, but there is precedent for this: Spygate, where McLaren was DSQ'd from the 2007 championship, but not its drivers.

The precedent has to match the circumstances too. I'm not sure if Spygate involving the isolated criminal actions of team members is comparable.

 

[quovadis]

You miss the point. Nobody is arguing rules weren't broken.

We're looking at potential solutions.

Say they strip Max of the title and it goes to Lewis. A title that is already controversial now becomes more so. Instead of it being the title that "Max didn't win"," Max was gifted" etc, it becomes the title that "Lewis only won because of the FIA", "Lewis won a year too late" etc etc etc.

It's really bad optics for the sport. And it is a business, marketing is huge for Formula 1. What if Max leaves over this nonsense? We lose one of the best drivers to ever do it, the championship is that much less interesting.

Whether you're a Max or Lewis fan (the two most vocal camps), I doubt either side would be happy with an outcome like that.

Are you seriously arguing that a driver is greater than the sport? I don't see the comparison in terms of the controversy - if rules are broken there should be consequences where an advantage was arguably gained. This is not a scenario where the rules were not enforced as intended/written or reinterpreted incorrectly.