2021 Cost Cap Rumours and Speculation

[Big Tea]

I think we should try to stay away from the people and teams involved and their interaction and take it as Team A and Driver A and the other 9 teams or it is going to descend into tribalism again rather than an actual possible solution.

[Just_a_fan]

I'm sure Hamilton still hasn't been 'sanctioned' for not turning up to the awards ceremony and seems he gets away with the jewellery saga again.

FIA has no backbone and is all ££££

He's been threatened for something that doesn't affect any other driver or team. Red Bull fans want Red Bull to get with something that affects the entire sport.

Interesting juxtaposition, that.

[Just_a_fan]

Reading through the posts in this speculation thread, I see little speculation. Most seem 100% certain that RBR cheated and should be punished very severely.
Nobody knows what the disagreement between the accountants of the FIA and RBR are about.

Suppose it is about the payments to Newey. The FIA accountants claim that Newey is not on their staff, but RBR's accountants have looked at the UK law books and read that he is on their staff, despite the fact that he sends RBR bills through his own company.
How can you call that cheating? The FIA has better accountants? They can't have done anything wrong/missed anything?
The blame is always on the team?

It's remarkably quiet at the FIA. I'll wait to see which accountants know best what is meant by employee in the UK law
before accusing them of cheating. After all, I think that is a heavy accusation when nothing is known yet.
That they have been above the BC according to the FIA accountants is one thing, but whether that is true and whether it is cheating
remains to be seen. Until the final result and reason is announced, I will wait quietly.

As it currently stands, Red Bull have been found in breach of the budget cap regulations. That's not speculation.

[cheeRS]

I think we should try to stay away from the people and teams involved and their interaction and take it as Team A and Driver A and the other 9 teams or it is going to descend into tribalism again rather than an actual possible solution.

Hey, look again at the title of this thread. We have 0% stake in a 'solution', and it's interesting to see others' take on this, tribalism or otherwise. I think most of here have thick skin or we wouldn't continue to post our opinions an a public message board.

[Big Tea]

I think we should try to stay away from the people and teams involved and their interaction and take it as Team A and Driver A and the other 9 teams or it is going to descend into tribalism again rather than an actual possible solution.

Hey, look again at the title of this thread. We have 0% stake in a 'solution', and it's interesting to see others' take on this, tribalism or otherwise. I think most of here have thick skin or we wouldn't continue to post our opinions an a public message board.

Well I for one want a solution!

[dans79]

I think we should try to stay away from the people and teams involved and their interaction and take it as Team A and Driver A and the other 9 teams or it is going to descend into tribalism again rather than an actual possible solution.

Hey, look again at the title of this thread. We have 0% stake in a 'solution', and it's interesting to see others' take on this, tribalism or otherwise. I think most of here have thick skin or we wouldn't continue to post our opinions an a public message board.

Well I for one want a solution!

Preferably an open and transparent one!

[mwillems]

I'm sure Hamilton still hasn't been 'sanctioned' for not turning up to the awards ceremony and seems he gets away with the jewellery saga again.

FIA has no backbone and is all ££££

And Verstappen is the ££££.

Er, apparently not: https://www.crash.net/f1/news/1014770/1 ... e-athletes

SportsPro’s most marketable athletes of 2022

1. Cristiano Ronaldo (football)

2. Serena Williams (tennis)

3. Lewis Hamilton (F1)

4. LeBron James (basketball)

5. Lionel Messi (football)

6. Naomi Osaka (tennis)

7. Virat Kohli (cricket)

8. Alex Morgan (football)

9. Sam Kerr (football)

10. Tom Brady (American football)

F1 drivers in the top 50

25. Charles Leclerc

33. Max Verstappen

35. George Russell

36. Sergio Perez

Lewis is third in the world in this assessment, Max is below Charles and only just above George and Sergio, all way, way below Lewis.

But that's not the FIAs income and its missing the point. Its the irascible non boring aggresive driver that has brought fans and excitement back to F1 and therefore viewers and fans at the gates, the FIA don't care how many watches the guys can sell.

Verstappen is the draw, we don't have to like him and buy the products he markets but without him the interest in F1 around the world would shrink.

But probably the best way to explain is this. Formula 1 has been dominated by the same guy for nigh on a decade. Formula 1 became much more interesting when Verstappen came along. Formula 1 have an opportunity to tinker with what RB can now do over the next few years and to bring Ferrari and Merc back into play and to ensure the next few years racing is close and hard. By removing the title from Verstappen the FIA may be essentially using too much of their "punishment currency" to be able to manage the future championships by reducing the advantage held by RB enough to keep it a close fight, or to even make them underdogs again, one of the best places for a fighting Verstappen to be.

I very much doubt that the FIA care about who won last year, they care about the brand and by hacking away RBs advantage and hauling them back over the next few years they will be ensuring exciting racing and more boom time for F1.

Of course this is just opinion and there is leeway and everything I have said, but I think you'd be hard pressed not to recognise the logic in what I say.

Or, they could risk everything to punish RB and Verstappen by taking the title, but I think those options are a million miles apart for the FIA in terms of the best outcome for them.

Zak brown is suggesting for exactly the type of punishment that brings RB in reach for the future when he believes Mclaren can challenge. Toto will be happy with it in Private I think, but will back his driver in public. Ferrari will be happy too because they could become favourites for the title in 2023 or 2024. Another big result for Formula 1's popularity.

So I'm not sure why they will mess with last years championship.

[mwillems]

For who? The FIA? Last time i checked, The teams seem to be pushing for a harsh penalty, so they will be annoyed should rb get off lightly, 2 of the sports top teams too, If they get punihsed harsh, The only ones i see being in uproar are RB / Max and fans of that team / driver. Not sure any body else, so the other 9 teams, 18 drivers and all their fans will be too upset, I picture most laughing at Redbull and giving a clap to the FIA instead of moaning about it?

I disagree, if they take away the '21 title of Verstappen now, it would likely reduce further the credibility of the FIA not increase it from fans, supporters and journos. And yes, RB and Max fans will go nuts too.

How would it reduce the credibility of the FIA? If the FIA does nothing, or only applies a minor penalty, it would show that the FIA has no power or balls to do the right thing. If they do produce a harsh penalty, such that would take away Max's title last year, it would show that the cost cap is in fact a crucial consideration to F1, and not just a minor regulation.

If roles were reversed, and we found out that Hamilton won his 8th title last year because Mercedes cheated and went over the cost cap, there would be orange smoke around the wolrd.

You've replied to the wrong reply, that was covered in a later reply.

[hollus]

Thread re-opened after a cool down and lots of deletions. The quote below is still valid!

This weekend lots of journos will ask lots of F1 personnel lots of things about this. And a cost cap, as the master resource compromise to limit engineering of a car, is 100% on topic for this forum.
Let's discuss it here. Discuss the concept, not the posters.

Guys, let's be clear:

No telling other people that their opinion is invalid. And no attacking, demeaning or teasing of other people at a personal level. (those rules apply in all threads)

Warnings have been and will continue to be given to whoever decides that a particular line of discussion or a particular poster should not be written/writing.

Discuss the thing, not the posters.

[littlebigcat]

I had another read of the rules earlier today, sections I hadn't read before. I had wondered about the reporting period.

The team's report for the previous years spending is due on the 31st of March or the nearest working day thereafter. So 6 months for the auditors to certify all the teams. Perhaps more interesting is that come the 30th of June they have to submit an interim report on the current cost cap spending up to the first quarter. Surely this is audited and there would be the potential feedback on compliance with the rules.

Even then what Zak Brown's letter makes clear, and quite cleverly, is that there was a trial run of the process on 2020 accounts and the rules were created in collaboration with the teams. There is no excuse not to be in compliance with the rules.

I would speculate that if RBR take this to an ABA and they have changed their procedures without consulting with the FIA as per the rules, they are going to be in a world of pain as its out of the FIA's hands.

[chrisc90]

I would speculate that if RBR take this to an ABA and they have changed their procedures without consulting with the FIA as per the rules, they are going to be in a world of pain as its out of the FIA's hands.

That is a interesting line in the rules.

2.11 The F1 Team should seek clarification from the Cost Cap Administration if it is uncertain
whether an entity should be included in its Reporting Group.

That's a pretty open statement to put in really though when you think of it. The words, 'if it is uncertain' technically allows the team to 'make their own decision' providing they are sure of the outcome when they make their final declarations.

If RB read and made their understanding of the rules, for which they seem certain of their interpretation of the rules, then thats fair enough to include it in the report, without the need to consult the FIA.

I wonder how it would be if RB included the same areas of expense, exclusions etc in their 2020 report, which was read and accepted by the FIA, irrespective of budget allowance (as all teams did) and nothing was said about it. Now the same area which is a sticking point and has put them over the 2021 cap has been turned around and said, 'nope, your not allowed to exclude that, we going to add it onto the expenditure, putting you over the cap'

I guess without knowing the specifics of exactly which area is in dispute, and what the 2020 reports and the 2021 reports contained, it is a massive guessing game.

For sure, I would be pretty annoyed if I submitted a 2020 report on my finances, which was read, debated etc etc by the FIA, then come 2021 they now change their mind on which area to include, that were ok in the previous report, I would be pretty annoyed to be fair.

[PlatinumZealot]

I had another read of the rules earlier today, sections I hadn't read before. I had wondered about the reporting period.

The team's report for the previous years spending is due on the 31st of March or the nearest working day thereafter. So 6 months for the auditors to certify all the teams. Perhaps more interesting is that come the 30th of June they have to submit an interim report on the current cost cap spending up to the first quarter. Surely this is audited and there would be the potential feedback on compliance with the rules.

Even then what Zak Brown's letter makes clear, and quite cleverly, is that there was a trial run of the process on 2020 accounts and the rules were created in collaboration with the teams. There is no excuse not to be in compliance with the rules.

I would speculate that if RBR take this to an ABA and they have changed their procedures without consulting with the FIA as per the rules, they are going to be in a world of pain as its out of the FIA's hands.

The word "reported" is very important here.

A team would never report an overspend. Why would they incriminate themselves right?

So it's a curious situation if RedBull reported a spend within the budget and then FIA still found overspend via other means or channels! That would be tantamount to fraudulent reporting... They should be stipped of both championships if this is the case...

[KeiKo403]

For sure, I would be pretty annoyed if I submitted a 2020 report on my finances, which was read, debated etc etc by the FIA, then come 2021 they now change their mind on which area to include, that were ok in the previous report, I would be pretty annoyed to be fair.

If that were the case surely Red Bull would’ve made a statement about that already?

[chrisc90]

For sure, I would be pretty annoyed if I submitted a 2020 report on my finances, which was read, debated etc etc by the FIA, then come 2021 they now change their mind on which area to include, that were ok in the previous report, I would be pretty annoyed to be fair.

If that were the case surely Red Bull would’ve made a statement about that already?

Possibly, it depends on the nature of the 'overspend'.

[littlebigcat]

People need to stop saying FIA when it's the auditors who have found RBR have breached the cost cap. It is the FIA's job to set out the rules and enforce them. They are now in the enforcement period of 2021 cost cap.

The review of the Reporting Documentation submitted has been an intensive and thorough process, and all Competitors gave their full support in providing the required information to assess their financial situation during this first year of the Financial Regulations. The FIA Cost Cap Administration notes that all Competitors acted at all times in a spirit of good faith and cooperation throughout the process.

There has been no fraudulent behaviour found in the Reporting Documentation submitted by RBR.