F1 2022


A reprimand is one of the possible outcomes available to the governing body.

Given the track record of the FIA I feel there will not be anything beyond that accompanied by a glib statement about further breaches being dealt with harshly to ward off other teams attempts to catch up.

I hope I am wrong but I have little faith in this organisation.
It will be a sad reflection on FIA if RBR are let off and no matter what weasel words the FIA use to justify it their credibility will be shot to pieces, that is if they have any credibility left.
 
I thought you said it was ‘wound licking’ and ‘irrational’ to discuss this? Why the 360?

More or less, there were a good number of posts (interestingly not so much from regular posters here over the last few races but others popping up) simply speculating about eg how the title could be switched and deciding that the rumour was enough to convict short of any actual facts or outcomes. Now we have the outcome. Thank you though I would like to think I'm always open to look at issues 360, but I suspect you were suggesting a 180?

Not the only one, it was a poorly laid out article, got confused on Aston Martins issues myself
Guardian reckons its 2.2m, 1.5% overspend

Thank you - thought it was just me!
 
Last edited:
That's what breaking the cost cap will have bought and needs appropriate sanction applied.
It'll be a shame, because I personally think the dominance of that car is down to Newey designing one of the best cars of his career. I think it's no coincidence that the only guy in F1 who was designing cars in the last ground effects era (plus indycar & endurance cars) has created the fastest car of the new regs...
 
More or less, there were a good number of posts (interestingly not so much from regular posters here over the last few races but others popping up) simply speculating about eg how the title could be switched and deciding that the rumour was enough to convict short of any actual facts or outcomes. Now we have the outcome. Thank you though I would like to think I'm always open to look at issues 360, but I suspect you were suggesting a 180?



Thank you - thought it was just me!
The issue with breaches of any law, regulation etc is that lines need to be drawn.

30 mph = ok
31 mph = you are speeding. ( yes I know the police apply some leeway on occasion)

The cost cap is a line in the sand. If breaches are not punished there is no point in having a cap.
 
It'll be a shame, because I personally think the dominance of that car is down to Newey designing one of the best cars of his career. I think it's no coincidence that the only guy in F1 who was designing cars in the last ground effects era (plus indycar & endurance cars) has created the fastest car of the new regs...
Which was possible by RBR breaking the cost cap.
 
The issue with breaches of any law, regulation etc is that lines need to be drawn.

30 mph = ok
31 mph = you are speeding. ( yes I know the police apply some leeway on occasion)

The cost cap is a line in the sand. If breaches are not punished there is no point in having a cap.

I agree with what you are saying, said the same in a post earlier, poor example though - you cannot be punished at 31 or 32, the system acknowledges a 10% error in equipment on both sides. That's 10% - double the 5% here. Also no one is charged wth speeding before the evidence is available. That's not a defence of RBR or backing of FIA so far to be clear.
 
I agree with what you are saying the same in a post, poor example though - you cannot be punished at 31 or 32, the system acknowledges a 10% error in equipment on both sides. That's 10% - double the 5% here. Also no one is charged wth speeding before the evidence is available. That's not a defence of RBR or backing of FIA so far to be clear.
Fair point - I was disturbed mid post and could not think of a more appropriate “line in the sand” example.

But I will. I‘ll be back.

Incidentally, I read recently that one police force in this country has stopped applying that 10% leeway. However, I cannot recall the specifics.

But I will. I’ll be back 😉
 
I agree with what you are saying, said the same in a post earlier, poor example though - you cannot be punished at 31 or 32, the system acknowledges a 10% error in equipment on both sides. That's 10% - double the 5% here. Also no one is charged wth speeding before the evidence is available. That's not a defence of RBR or backing of FIA so far to be clear.
That’s because there is actually an error associated with both your speedometer in car and the measuring equipment used. A calculator doesn’t have a 5% error built into it, so the analogy fails.

Regarding the speculation last week - this was more than speculation. The teams were aware of all submissions way back in April this year. They knew full well who was under and over. You can tell from RBs interviews they were guilty as charged, and you aren’t investigated for 6 months if you aren’t guilty. As it proved to be.

I really don’t understand why there is a 5% distinction at all tbh. Given crash damage can be argued away as not inclusive, as Max’s Silverstone crash was for instance, there is nothing variable about it. The team know at the start of the year what their catering costs are, they’ll have a multi year contract with a catering partner to deliver catering for x people for y Grand Prix. They’ll have a multi year contract with fuel suppliers, Pirelli, engine suppliers, ERS, gearboxes and most other parts, all of which will not vary at all over the year. Looking through the budget cap, there is surprisingly little that actually would vary due to events, other than development of the car itself.
 
Fair point - I was disturbed mid post and could not think of a more appropriate “line in the sand” example.

But I will. I‘ll be back.

Incidentally, I read recently that one police force in this country has stopped applying that 10% leeway. However, I cannot recall the specifics.

But I will. I’ll be back 😉

Interesting, the science has moved on, the fixed cameras should be 100% accurate for example, but at the very least older cars speedos aren't, are we all to be told (via the highway code) to allow 10% under the speedo to meet speed limits!!
 
Fair point - I was disturbed mid post and could not think of a more appropriate “line in the sand” example.

But I will. I‘ll be back.

Incidentally, I read recently that one police force in this country has stopped applying that 10% leeway. However, I cannot recall the specifics.

But I will. I’ll be back 😉
Pssst - drink drive limit in most non-England countries is black and white.
 
I agree with what you are saying, said the same in a post earlier, poor example though - you cannot be punished at 31 or 32, the system acknowledges a 10% error in equipment on both sides. That's 10% - double the 5% here. Also no one is charged wth speeding before the evidence is available. That's not a defence of RBR or backing of FIA so far to be clear.
Line in the sand example

F1 imposed a $ 145m spending cap on teams which they must not exceed.

Red Bull exceeded the $145m (£114m) limit during 2021
 
Interesting, the science has moved on, the fixed cameras should be 100% accurate for example, but at the very least older cars speedos aren't, are we all to be told (via the highway code) to allow 10% under the speedo to meet speed limits!!
It is physically impossible for any measuring device in the world to ever be 100% accurate. Very aside from the point of this thread, but there is always variables in the world that would mean a slight change in measurement. Whether that’s the frame rate of a VAR camera, or the speed of lasers through various material (such as rain) that offers a slight variance, or whatever else.
 
I agree with what you are saying, said the same in a post earlier, poor example though - you cannot be punished at 31 or 32, the system acknowledges a 10% error in equipment on both sides. That's 10% - double the 5% here. Also no one is charged wth speeding before the evidence is available. That's not a defence of RBR or backing of FIA so far to be clear.
speeding leeway info-

 

Back
Top