2021 Cost Cap Rumours and Speculation

[Quantum]

For the good of the thread, it would be good if both sides accept that this is not yet a clear cut situation,

What is hard about accepting the FIA found RB guilty?

They may appeal as is their right. But as of now they're guilty.

This has absolutely nothing to do with "MB acolytes", this deflection is not constructive toward finding out why RB are guilty of the breach.

[Quantum]

For so long as there is an appeal pending, nothing is final and hence, FIA findings that have found a breach that Red Bull has denied, are debatable. There is a reason why there is a process and that is still due.

So it's debatable that the FIA have found RB guilty?

It's debatable for as long as the process of findings, appeals and a verdict isn't final. Can we move on or are we going to be in this loop?

Theyre guilty pending appeal.

You are operating on the pretence that any appeal is greater than the verdict.

Like why bother with verdicts when appeals trump everything.

If you cannot accept that then yea we are done.

[mendis]

So it's debatable that the FIA have found RB guilty?

It's debatable for as long as the process of findings, appeals and a verdict isn't final. Can we move on or are we going to be in this loop?

Theyre guilty pending appeal.

You are operating on the pretence that any appeal is greater than the verdict.

Like why bother with verdicts when appeals trump everything.

If you cannot accept that then yea we are done.

"FIA's findings".

[Just_a_fan]

It's debatable for as long as the process of findings, appeals and a verdict isn't final. Can we move on or are we going to be in this loop?

Theyre guilty pending appeal.

You are operating on the pretence that any appeal is greater than the verdict.

Like why bother with verdicts when appeals trump everything.

If you cannot accept that then yea we are done.

"FIA's findings".
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FeuCoalX0AY ... name=large

Team PR is your "evidence"?

Er, OK.

[mendis]

Theyre guilty pending appeal.

You are operating on the pretence that any appeal is greater than the verdict.

Like why bother with verdicts when appeals trump everything.

If you cannot accept that then yea we are done.

"FIA's findings".
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FeuCoalX0AY ... name=large

Team PR is your "evidence"?

Er, OK.

It's an official statement! If a vague Toto is quoted as saying, a certain amount could provide certain performance advantage, what's the harm in believing a statement from the official team source?

[Quantum]

"FIA's findings".
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FeuCoalX0AY ... name=large

Are you really citing the guilty party's statement?

[Quantum]

It's an official statement! If a vague Toto is quoted as saying, a certain amount could provide certain performance advantage, what's the harm in believing a statement from the official team source?

I guess you missed the bit where the FIA consider RB to be guilty.

[mendis]

"FIA's findings".
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FeuCoalX0AY ... name=large

Are you really citing the guilty party's statement?

For so long as the findings, appeals and verdict is pending, either party has the right to hold on to their position.

[DChemTech]

For the good of the thread, it would be good if both sides accept that this is not yet a clear cut situation,

What is hard about accepting the FIA found RB guilty?

They may appeal as is their right. But as of now they're guilty.

This has absolutely nothing to do with "MB acolytes", this deflection is not constructive toward finding out why RB are guilty of the breach.

As I literally say in the post, there is no problem with that, and it has nothing to do with deflection or anything.
What I'm saying is that acting like the breach was certainly intentional/malicious/cheating is just as dishonest as acting like RBR did not breach the cap. You're very quick to point fingers and shift the blame at others or to strawman their positions - as is once again examplified by isolating and completely misrepresenting my statement above - but sometimes a bit of reflection may not hurt.

[dans79]

They are up for debate, until the matter is fully closed!

The FIA verdict is clear. They are guilty.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/63204082

https://www.france24.com/en/live-news/2 ... ap-the-fia

https://www.espn.co.uk/f1/story/_/id/34 ... budget-cap

https://www.express.co.uk/sport/f1-auto ... ing-rules

For your benefit.

So for the good of the thread, can you accept the FIA have found Red Bull guilty?

What if RB prove the FIA have missed something? That’s why there is a appeals procedure and they currently in discussions.

The Audit was done by a 3rd party if memory serves, not the typical FIA buffoons, so missing something is a lot less likely!

[Quantum]

"FIA's findings".
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FeuCoalX0AY ... name=large

Are you really citing the guilty party's statement?

For so long as the findings, appeals and verdict is pending, either party has the right to hold on to their position.

You do realise, one party is a competitor and the other is the governing body for world motor sport.
Having rights doesn't mean an equivalence of position.

[Wouter]

The thing is, we do see patterns emerge and statements made which cannot be retracted.
For example, when journalists noted Red Bulls successive upgrade packages arriving at each race weekend.

As per Binotto/Wolff etc it was noted that RB had a stream of updates on their car and other teams were scratching their heads as to how this was achievable.

So why was Red Bull so much more efficient than any other team last year, producing updates ad nauseaum,
and this year we find they breached the budget cap?

That reeks.

.
So RBR has upgrade packages to the car every weekend?
And they were "producing updates ad nauseaum."?
Could you show me from each weekend the upgrades? I can't find them. Thankx.

.
I've provided you with the motorsport links.

If you wish to dispute my post, by all means find a link to dispute the motorsport story with links to all the upgrades RB brought last season.

.

I can't find an official link.

Can you provide a link for me, as I kindly did for you? Thanks in advance.

.
You mean in the same way you gave me all the upgrades from each GP weekend?
Well ....You didn't! I had to find them myself and I couldn't find them, because they don't exist!
Have a good day!

[mendis]

Are you really citing the guilty party's statement?

For so long as the findings, appeals and verdict is pending, either party has the right to hold on to their position.

You do realise, one party is a competitor and the other is the governing body for world motor sport.
Having rights doesn't mean an equivalence of position.

Fair and natural justice shouldn't deter an appealer from the process of seeking justice, only because it's against an establishment.

[Quantum]

As I literally say in the post, there is no problem with that, and it has nothing to do with deflection or anything.
What I'm saying is that acting like the breach was certainly intentional/malicious/cheating is just as dishonest as acting like RBR did not breach the cap. You're very quick to point fingers and shift the blame at others or to strawman their positions - as is once again examplified by isolating and completely misrepresenting my statement above - but sometimes a bit of reflection may not hurt.

When you read the last few pages and find RB acolytes not accepting the FIA verdict, you seem to be quiet.
But if you point fingers at cheating, you have issue. Did I just surmise correctly?

[dans79]

I was correct.

https://www.fia.com/sites/default/files ... iss.12.pdf

6.4

All correspondence between the F1 Teams and the Cost Cap Administration, the Independent
Audit Firm appointed by the Cost Cap Administration, the Cost Cap Adjudication Panel and/or
the ICA shall be in one of the two FIA official languages (English and French). The F1 Team may
be required to provide a certified translation of any Reporting Documentation into English at
its own expense.