Salary cap, Shmalary Cap

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

Syed ... does not dispute that Verstappen was a worthy WDC in 2021.

Continually writing Hamilton was robbed might suggest otherwise.

Originally Posted by Anyopenroad

The person I have a strong dislike of is Christian Horner. He is just plain nasty. Gaslighting the rest of the paddock over the cost cap, defending the indefensible in some of Verstappen’s driving, throwing a “rogue” marshall under the bus to cover up a mistake, calling down the social media hounds of hell onto Hamilton, rank hypocrisy in how differently he describes driving by his team and others. The guy is a total ******* with no redeeming features.

I hope I'm not coming accross as defending him. In dealings with the motorsport Horners, I've had issues before now.

[Anyopenroad]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Continually writing Hamilton was robbed might suggest otherwise.

I try not to read between the lines or seek to glean insight into the inner workings of a writer’s mind, particularly one as precise and concise as Matthew Syed. I’m just going to go with the words he actually used, which is to point out that Hamilton would be 2021 champion rather than Verstappen had the final laps of the final race been handled correctly.

Whether or not that would have been a “just” or “fair” outcome is a different question. An entirely legitimate one, but not one Syed gets into so I have no idea what he thinks about it and nor, tbh, do you .

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Continually writing Hamilton was robbed might suggest otherwise.

Unless you read what he actually wrote, and the context of repeating that statement.

"This doesn’t imply that Hamilton was robbed by Horner or Verstappen — it just means that he was denied what was rightfully his, which is pretty much the textbook definition of the term."

He doesn't say that Verstappen was not a worthy champion, but that Horner is tarnishing that achievement with his reaction to comments in Austin.

It's also worth remembering what was said to garner that reaction from Horner. Kravitz: "[Hamilton] doesn't win a race all year, and then finally comes back at a track where he could win the first race all year, battling the same guy who won the race he was robbed in the previous year, and manages to finish ahead of him. What a script and a story that would have been. But that's not the way the script turned out today, was it? Because the guy that beat him after being robbed actually overtook him, because he's got a quicker car, because of engineering and Formula One and design, and pretty much because of [Adrian Newey, Red Bull's chief technical officer] over there."

Kravitz was referring to the race in which Hamilton was robbed - not to the season.

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by peebee2

Continually writing Hamilton was robbed might suggest otherwise.

If you look back at the "rank the drivers" thread from last year, almost everyone put Verstappen and Hamilton in the first 2 places. Indeed, I chickened out and put them =1st. The two of them were a class apart from everyone else last season.

It is perfectly legitimate to say that Verstappen was a worthy winner, but at the same time he should not have won it because of the way that the last lap of the last race was handled.

It is not Verstappen's fault that this happened. The fact that the FIA sacked the man in charge and have done something to limit the teams communication with the stewards during the race suggests that the FIA know that what happened was not right, and hence logic suggests that behind closed doors they too must think that Hamilton was hard done by in some way due to the shambolic way that race ended.

Such grey areas are not necessarily easy to convey in writing. Plus of course shades of grey are never understood or appreciated by the baying masses on twitter and other social media sites. Horners approach to things does not make him easy to warm to, does not make discussions about RBR and Mercedes infringements easy, and his brass neck is the brassiest neck of them all!

[chillibowl]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Unless you read what he actually wrote, and the context of repeating that statement.

"This doesn’t imply that Hamilton was robbed by Horner or Verstappen — it just means that he was denied what was rightfully his, which is pretty much the textbook definition of the term."

He doesn't say that Verstappen was not a worthy champion, but that Horner is tarnishing that achievement with his reaction to comments in Austin.

It's also worth remembering what was said to garner that reaction from Horner. Kravitz: "[Hamilton] doesn't win a race all year, and then finally comes back at a track where he could win the first race all year, battling the same guy who won the race he was robbed in the previous year, and manages to finish ahead of him. What a script and a story that would have been. But that's not the way the script turned out today, was it? Because the guy that beat him after being robbed actually overtook him, because he's got a quicker car, because of engineering and Formula One and design, and pretty much because of [Adrian Newey, Red Bull's chief technical officer] over there."

Kravitz was referring to the race in which Hamilton was robbed - not to the season.

thats fair, but is it ted's job to be bringing up that part of it during what is essentially the defacto official race broadcast?

that's more my issue to be honest. that and SKY's penchant for far too frequently giving Horner, and increasingly Toto, a soap box to vent their ego driven animosity towards one another.

that said, i am more forgiving to Ted because hes just a pundit and not really operating as a journalist (in truth everyone on that broadcast is more pundit than journo) so its kind of silly for anyone to take anything they say very seriously.

but again, that goes to exactly what type of broadcast FOM/SKY want to provide...and increasingly its of the FOX News style imo. perhaps it always was and i am, over the past couple of seasons, seeing it a whole lot more.

wish the show was conducted with a bit more class overall.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by chillibowl

thats fair, but is it ted's job to be bringing up that part of it during what is essentially the defacto official race broadcast?

that's more my issue to be honest. that and SKY's penchant for far too frequently giving Horner, and increasingly Toto, a soap box to vent their ego driven animosity towards one another.

that said, i am more forgiving to Ted because hes just a pundit and not really operating as a journalist (in truth everyone on that broadcast is more pundit than journo) so its kind of silly for anyone to take anything they say very seriously.

but again, that goes to exactly what type of broadcast FOM/SKY want to provide...and increasingly its of the FOX News style imo. perhaps it always was and i am, over the past couple of seasons, seeing it a whole lot more.

wish the show was conducted with a bit more class overall.

This is where I am at. Just as we can say that RBR might be expected to get some grief as to their response, the same can be easily said toward the journalists. The race broadcast team is playing multiple roles. They are there for the entertainment factor as well as pure journalistic needs. And they also have a fine line to walk to service both needs. No topic is so sacred that it can't be mentioned during the race broadcast, but hot topics need to stay to facts and less toward opinion. Aggravating this... I generally think Ted can lack tact at times. Which is fine and is a particular style.. unless you are also part of the race broadcast.

Overall, this thing is very polarizing. For many, Ted is a hero or an idiot. There will be no consensus on this topic.

Richard

[morninggents]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Unless you read what he actually wrote, and the context of repeating that statement.
"This doesn’t imply that Hamilton was robbed by Horner or Verstappen — it just means that he was denied what was rightfully his, which is pretty much the textbook definition of the term."
He doesn't say that Verstappen was not a worthy champion, but that Horner is tarnishing that achievement with his reaction to comments in Austin.
Kravitz was referring to the race in which Hamilton was robbed - not to the season.

And had the decision last year gone the way of Hamilton there would have been justified references to the race in which Verstappen was robbed - Silverstone.

[Aysedasi]

Aside from the fact that there is quite a difference between first lap and last lap 'robbery', i guess so....

[Tourer]

It rarely turns out well when someone takes on the media - quite why RB chose to deal with Sky the way they did eludes me - poor decision making. If it was me in RB's situation, I would have taken them on by getting face to face and arguing out the "robbed" comments.

As someone above has said, Sky does give the team principals a soap box and they tend to give the winning TP or championship leading TP more air time than others (understandable). So we've seen a lot of Wolff and Horner tossing handbags at each other - all pretty much petty and insignificant in my view.

I definitely get why Horner might feel a bit under siege in recent weeks and I get that it would tend to ramp up the "us vs. them" mindset in the RB garage but it's part of the sport and hasn't been handled well with the boycott approach.

[Skam85]

I'm not completely convinced these reactions by team principals aren't heavily hammed up to get more discussion, clicks and Netflix viewers and that they all begrudgingly respect each and every team.

[Adam43]

If Horner is prepared to besmirch his own reputation so much for that reason he is such a whore to the publicity I have even less respect for him.

That’s worse than how Anyopenroad describes him.

[Skam85]

Originally Posted by Adam43

If Horner is prepared to besmirch his own reputation so much for that reason he is such a whore to the publicity I have even less respect for him.

That’s worse than how Anyopenroad describes him.

I was more suggesting all team principals are either directly or indirectly coaxed to ham everything up for the drama

I don't mind Christian personally but he does tend to speak before he thinks. And I don't think Helmut is the kind of guy that would discourage that either, more enables it. Toto is great too but we've had instances from him "Michael I've sent you an email".

Not that it's just confined to Red Bull and Mercedes but they are the ones that everyone always talks about.

[EastonNeston]

Of course Horner will be concerned that with the death of the owner of 49% of red Bull, the new management might decide to move their marketing expenditure into other outlets, which would leave RB Racing facing an economic blackhole even large than the one Liz Truss created.

[wolfhound]

What if in the future driver 'A' gets disqualified from a race he won because there was only 95% of the fuel required for testing.

Meantime driver 'B' goes on to win the title by 10 points. 9 months later it is found that driver 'Bs' team has broken the cost cap by just under the 5% limit to be called a minor breach.

Assuming no other controversies who should win the championship and if the results are overturned what would it do to the standing of the championship?

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by wolfhound

What if in the future driver 'A' gets disqualified from a race he won because there was only 95% of the fuel required for testing.

Meantime driver 'B' goes on to win the title by 10 points. 9 months later it is found that driver 'Bs' team has broken the cost cap by just under the 5% limit to be called a minor breach.

Driver B wins the championship - and rightly so.

The penalties are part of the regulations within which the entrants compete.

Driver A disqualified as per regulations.
Driver B's team penalised as per regulations.

[peebee2]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Driver B wins the championship - and rightly so.

The penalties are part of the regulations within which the entrants compete.

Driver A disqualified as per regulations.
Driver B's team penalised as per regulations.

Spot on. Budget cap is not in any way the same as tech regs.

[Richard C]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Driver B wins the championship - and rightly so.

The penalties are part of the regulations within which the entrants compete.

Driver A disqualified as per regulations.
Driver B's team penalised as per regulations.

Agree with this as well.

Richard

[Teretonga]

Originally Posted by crmalcolm

Driver B wins the championship - and rightly so.

The penalties are part of the regulations within which the entrants compete.

Driver A disqualified as per regulations.
Driver B's team penalised as per regulations.

Absolutely.
People may disagree with the regulation, but the authority of the governing body, and their officials, lies within the scope of the regulation, and not outside them.
That is why it was right that Alonso got his COTA points back.

[Adam43]

Driver B’s team think that it was well worth it.

Some people think, well that’s not right. Fair enough. Others think, a little overspend shouldn’t make a different. Fair enough too.

[Skam85]

Championship deciding driver indiscretions have always been worn by the driver (Senna 1989, MSC 1997)

Team indiscretions that may have changed the course of championships have never been worn by a driver. (Spygate 2007, Crashgate 2008, Costcapgate 2021/22)

[steve_r]

Originally Posted by Skam85

Costcapgate 2021/22)

costastrophe (21/22) ?

[Adam43]

Teflonso!

(as we are having made up names)

[crmalcolm]

In Italy (and other locations) the general use term seems to be anchoring on 'Budget Cap Gate'.

[Adam43]

Actually it’s cancello del cap budgetio.

[crmalcolm]

Originally Posted by Adam43

Actually it’s cancello del cap budgetio.

Actually - if you are trying to be accurate - Italians that I speak to have adopted the English variant of the phrase and refer to the situation as Budget Cap Gate.

But - if they were going to use an Italian phrase it would be 'tetto massimo di spesa poli' (in Italy we tend to use the suffix -poli for scandals).

But hey - why go with what an Italian tells you, when Google Translate suggests otherwise