Salary cap, Shmalary Cap

[PhilipR]

Another thing to be considered - spending extra money does not need to show in actual car development parts, it can be used to hire more top engineers meaning you have more people trying to find solutions to an issue and will also put less stress on a small number of personnel.

[AnnoyedMoose]

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

If 9 teams and the FIA read it one way, and RBR reads it another way, it isn't a grey area.

You're assuming that the only reason the other teams are under is because they haven't done whatever RB have done to put them over. It's not that simple.

[steve_r]

As the rule break occurred during the 2021 season, it is only right and fair that for the rest of this season and for the whole of 2023 RBR have to replace their best driver with the driver that finished last in the championship in 2021. So, the 2023 WDC runner up in the RBR is going to be... Nikita Mazepin. I'm pretty sure this is in the rules somewhere.

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by steve_r

As the rule break occurred during the 2021 season, it is only right and fair that for the rest of this season and for the whole of 2023 RBR have to replace their best driver with the driver that finished last in the championship in 2021. So, the 2023 WDC runner up in the RBR is going to be... Nikita Mazepin. I'm pretty sure this is in the rules somewhere.

lol thats a very creative penalty...kind of wish it was in the rule book!

for sure i hope the penalty is such that it massively discourages future overspending including for relatively small over spends...but i do wonder though if drivers will on their own leave that team when they see future spending/development time limits etc on the horizon?

a top team overspending could very well see knock on effects well beyond those that the FIA sets...which isnt necessarily a bad thing if we want to see teams honour both the rule and spirit of the cap system.

[Sodemo]

Maybe the FIA could ban them from FP1+2 for the duration of the 2023 season?

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Maybe the FIA could ban them from FP1+2 for the duration of the 2023 season?

More likely they will get a light slap on the wrist.

My goodness, this is a tiresome drawn out and strange way to go about things for what is supposed to be the pinnacle of motorsport. Leaks, rumors', accusations, counter rumors', threats, finger pointing, pouting, shouting and whatabouting.

The rules are in black and white, so I fail to see why this should not have remained completely and utterly confidential until the results were disclosed to the world. At the same time the results were disclosed, whatever penalties that apply should have been announced at the same time. I think I have already made that point though...

[AndreasDavour]

I could not agree more.

[VIVA GT]

Add me to the list of people in agreement.
Certainly the punishment does need to have a significant (but not necessarily/only financial) effect to be an effective deterrent. If it is only financial, the the cost cap is ineffective as all the wealthier teams will need to do is spend the money on development as usual, and then just pay the fine and say 'sorry'.

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by AnnoyedMoose

They still might not have overspent though. It's all a matter of interpretation. According to the FIA's understanding of the rules they have gone over. According to Red Bull (via their auditors) they haven't gone over. The next stage, assuming Red Bull don't agree with the FIA, is for it to go to a panel where the majority make a decision and even that can be appealed. It's always the problem with these things. So many grey areas. It's no different to double diffusers in many ways.

Agree completely - this is how I see it and expect it to go (unless RB surprise by accepting the breach / penalty - which COULD happen)

Originally Posted by PhilipR

Another theory of mine - I wonder if RB saw a grey area in the accounting - however had they clarified it with FIA then it would have been disclosed to all teams meaning they would lose the theoretical advantage from it.

As such they did not go for clarification and tried to explain it through other costs when the reviews are being made and maybe this is what caught them off . A case of pushing boundaries and hoping it sticks same way one does with technical regulations.

Quite possible and assuming RB take it to the adjudication panel, it MAY be that RB's interpretation is deemed acceptable - then all teams will have a bit more clarity on whatever the area of overspend is. We've seen similar things with technical rules many times and this could end up being similar.

Originally Posted by Akrapovic

If 9 teams and the FIA read it one way, and RBR reads it another way, it isn't a grey area.

Sorry, can't agree - there have been heaps of instances with tech rules where one team has done something within the rules that the other teams hadn't thought of, or that the other teams didn't think was OK under their interpretation of the rules. This is potentially no different really.

[Trev Campbell]

The Brawn Double diffuser springs to mind. I know Lewis / Merc fans will call for RB to be disqualified from 2021 and for Lewis to be crowned champ. But There would be 0% chance of that happening. If RB are found guilty there are a range of penalties that have been laid out IIRC. But If it's a financial fine. It should be HUGE, and I think the budget for the following year for the team should be reduced by the amount of overspend aswell.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by Trev Campbell

The Brawn Double diffuser springs to mind. I know Lewis / Merc fans will call for RB to be disqualified from 2021 and for Lewis to be crowned champ. But There would be 0% chance of that happening. If RB are found guilty there are a range of penalties that have been laid out IIRC. But If it's a financial fine. It should be HUGE, and I think the budget for the following year for the team should be reduced by the amount of overspend aswell.

If the penalty is to be financial, I agree that it should be HUGE but I also think that the reduction to their budget for the following season should be greater than the overspend. They have already benefitted from that, meaning that they are already ahead (of development) of the other teams by that (financial) amount, it just means that it will finally level out by the end of the season by which time they could already be in front with the points. That should be included in the punishment...

[Aysedasi]

Originally Posted by Trev Campbell

The Brawn Double diffuser springs to mind. I know Lewis / Merc fans will call for RB to be disqualified from 2021 and for Lewis to be crowned champ. But There would be 0% chance of that happening.

The 'fans' that inhabit the lower slimier reaches of social media will undoubtedly but genuine 'sporting' fans? No, I don't think so. They may well feel that Lewis was 'robbed' but it would be an appalling way to be handed the championship back. It just isn't going to happen, it would make the FIA and F1 a laughing stock.

[wolfhound]

So the team whose driver won the WDC in 2021 on the last lap of the last race in strange circumstances ends up being found to have broken the rules almost a year later. Where does that leave us?

Technical rules are often enforced within hours resulting in a short sharp effect. Financial rules make that much more difficult however they are necessary in today's world.


If my memory serves me correctly teams had to submit their accounts for 2020 to help prepare them for 2021 so that everybody knew where they stood.

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by VIVA GT

If the penalty is to be financial, I agree that it should be HUGE but I also think that the reduction to their budget for the following season should be greater than the overspend. They have already benefitted from that, meaning that they are already ahead (of development) of the other teams by that (financial) amount, it just means that it will finally level out by the end of the season by which time they could already be in front with the points. That should be included in the punishment...

But if they do that, the RBR staff will have to bring their own sandwiches for lunch.

This is all still about catering? Right?

[S griffin]

Fact is the rule is there for a reason, to keep costs down. It needs to be enforced properly so people don't break them. Sadly they've let one or two teams not follow it properly, so now the FIA need to find the right punishment. I don't envy them in this position, because how do they find a punishment that's not too much and not a slap on the wrist

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by steve_r

But if they do that, the RBR staff will have to bring their own sandwiches for lunch.

This is all still about catering? Right?

No, if the speculation in the media is correct and that Red Bull overspent their budget because their spending on catering was excessive, then all that means is that they spent more than was permitted and should have, therefore, reduced their spending on other cost centres.

If your caught exceeding the speed limit, it doesn't matter whether you are caught exceeding the permitted speed for that particular road, whether it be a motorway or a local road.

[steve_r]

I was joking with the catering comment, but on re-reading my post it may come across as a defense of RBR rather than the intended cheap poke at the absurdity of this situation.

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by steve_r

I was joking with the catering comment, but on re-reading my post it may come across as a defense of RBR rather than the intended cheap poke at the absurdity of this situation.

[VIVA GT]

Originally Posted by steve_r

I was joking with the catering comment, but on re-reading my post it may come across as a defense of RBR rather than the intended cheap poke at the absurdity of this situation.

Along the same lines, I was going to comment that maybe if RBR was to forego cutting the crusts off the aforementioned sandwiches it may be a big enough saving...

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by Sodemo

Maybe the FIA could ban them from FP1+2 for the duration of the 2023 season?

Cute idea but no. That would inhibit them from true competition.
The punishment should be in the realm where they transgressed so something around the limit of the spending for the following season and seeing it takes the FIA most of the year to deliver their verdict on the results of the investigation maybe it needs to be for the year following the announcement.
That is, infringement penalty for 2021 year would be for the 2023 year.

So an amount of reduction in their allowed cap of 5.7 million for the 2023 year, along with a 5.7 fine which would be distributed evenly amongst the other teams would probably make anyone else in the future do a double take on any plans for simply overspending.
They would hate the idea that they would be giving money to the other teams AND be limited more than the others in their spend for the following year.
If they are getting a gain in one year by overspending then it catches up with them and no team gets the opportunity to string together more than two years advantage from their overspend. So the field is balanced out and we enable someone else to dominate for a year....

[Akrapovic]

Originally Posted by Teretonga

Cute idea but no. That would inhibit them from true competition.

That is literally the idea. And the regulations even state they may be prohibited from taking part in any part of a race weekend apart from the race.

[EastonNeston]

Looking at the situation, it's important to look at the situation in general terms, not letting the identity of the offenders influence the decision of the penaties applied.


The following questions have to be considered.
a) did the offending teams benefit from breaking the spending rules?
b) when the overspending benefit the offending teams?
c) Did the benefits gained from breaking the rules affect the championship ?
d) what penalty would remove the benefts gained from offence?
e) what level of penalty will ensure that this is not repeated?


In my opinion, the offening teams did benefit substantially from breaking the rules, not only in the 2021 season, but also in 2022 and into 2023. The overspending did have a very significant influence on the championship and disadvantaged the teams that abided by the regulations. Also the offending team, it's drivers and sponsors have had commercial and financial benefits as a direct result of the rule breaking.

Therefore any punishment should not only restore the situation to where it should have been if the rules had not been broken, but should have an additional punitive element to doscourage any futher breaking of these rules.
We also need to take into consideration the penalties issued for the "spygate" incidents & the "Tyrrell water balast" situation.


I would suggest that both of the offending teams are

1) stripped of ALL drivers and constructors points for 2021, 50% of points for 2022.
2) A very significant financial penalty is applied ( higher than the spygate penalty)
3) A 10% reduction in the teams budget cap for 2023 and a similar reduction in wind tunnel and CFD hours.
4) an FIA appointed auditor is based at the offending teams, to monitor their spending through 2023 & 2024, all the costs of which are to be included in the teams spending limits.


It is only right that the punishment for the offences not only removes from the offending teams the benefits from their deliberate rule breaking, but it ensures no other team will attempt to do the same again.

[davec]

My issue with all of this is that although accounts should be black and white, they very rarely are!

The company I work for is "relatively" small with a turnover of around £4million. Because we are part of a much larger group company we are audited in November as a pre audit and then in January for the full year end audit. We work on many international projects spanning multiple years so always there is an interpretation of what can be "work in progress" in 1 year and what expenses should be accrued for work not invoiced yet due to client payment milestones. Every year this is a "negotiation" between us and the auditors to come up with something that is realistic and reasonable and there can never be a 100% accurate answer. I understand that the cost cap is only looking at the expenses but how do you quantify something from a 3rd party supplier for when it is ordered / delivered / invoiced / paid?? If it was ordered in 2021 but not delivered until 2022 it would be in 2022 accounts! If it was delivered in 2021 but not invoice till January 2022 it should be accrued in accounts even though it was not invoiced!

I assume that there are rules on depreciation of equipment but who sets the timeframe on this! Who should say that Redbull dont make an item last 3 years but Ferrari 2 years so the monthly depreciation is more for the red team!! Did Redbull push it to the limit or did the other hide it better?

[Mike Harte]

Originally Posted by EastonNeston

I would suggest that both of the offending teams are

Only one team overspent on their permitted budget; the other two did not overspend, merely had errors in their paperwork or were late in submitting them.

[EastonNeston]

If that is the case, the punishment for the "techniacal" errors should be approriate to the magnitude of the offense.