2021 Cost Cap Rumours and Speculation

[langedweil]

I think we all know what will happen; FIA & RB will agree on something behind closed doors, as both FIA and RB are not looking for public humiliation, rules are tightened for next year, and the show goes on. Exact same thing as before. I even bet RB would put the threat on the table to walk away, leaving F1 with only 8 teams ..

Honestly, I can't be bothered.
I do dislike the polarized finger pointing very much though, regardless whether it is coming from the Fer, MB or RBR camp.
I just want some cars driving their wheels off instead of watching a politicised soap debacle. As if either one of them three is better/cleaner etc. It's just bullocks ..

[johnny comelately]

As part of the Americas Cup preparations, here is one new rule to help reduce costs:

"Lighter winds on day 21 make for a great day off the Barcelona coastline for Alinghi Red Bull racing.

Section 41. Reconnaissance

a) As a campaign cost reduction measure, COR/D has mutually agreed to cooperatively implement a centralised reconnaissance programme for all teams for the reconnaissance of all Competitors’ AC75 Yachts, AC40 Yachts and LEQ12 yachts including both on-land and on-water imagery (the “Joint Recon Programme”).

b) Each team is assigned a two-person Recon Unit to follow their every on-water move, but it's not that simple. The cameras are supplied and identical for all Recon Units. Drones are not allowed, and they can't get that close, plus following a boat and keeping a camera steady at 45 knots isn't that easy to begin with.

c) A three minute interview follows each on water day, and teams must answer the Recon Unit's questions while trying not to give too much away. It's a raw, unedited view of the never before seen behind-the-scenes development of a team and their boat to win the oldest trophy in international sports. "

[Wil992]

Just to add further fuel to this, I have a question.
Given that RB are adamant they are below the cap, is it fair to assume that whatever interpretation they have used that the FIA say takes them over, they will have done the same again this year? Why would they not have, if they are positive it’s correct?
If I was Ferrari I’d be making sure I finished ahead of Russell in the championship, whoever’s the first non red bull driver might end up champion.
Also, on a related note, if a driver is excluded from the championship, are they excluded from all the races? What I mean is, is the driver that finished second in a race behind someone who is later dsq from the championship awarded a race win, or do the race results stand?

[Quantum]

I do dislike the polarized finger pointing very much though, regardless whether it is coming from the Fer, MB or RBR camp.
I just want some cars driving their wheels off instead of watching a politicised soap debacle. As if either one of them three is better/cleaner etc. It's just bullocks ..

Depends how fairly you want the cars driving the wheels off.
Don't see why other teams have to be thrown into the same category.

[hollus]

This thread needs a bit of a cool down. 24 h for everyone to think before another reply.
Please don’t spill this discussion to other threads, this one will re-open on Sunday.

[hollus]

Re-opened. Please no personal attacks, discuss the post, not the poster.

[pob]

Also, on a related note, if a driver is excluded from the championship, are they excluded from all the races? What I mean is, is the driver that finished second in a race behind someone who is later dsq from the championship awarded a race win, or do the race results stand?

When Tyrrell were excluded from 1984, they were also retroactively disqualified from all the races and the points positions redistributed e.g. Bellof's 4th place at Monaco was given to Rosberg and all other drivers moved up; Brundle's 2nd place in Detroit given to de Angelis etc.

When Schumacher was disqualified from the 1997 championship for his collision with Villeneuve, his race results were still allowed to stand, including wins, poles, fastest laps and points.

[Wouter]

Well, Bernie thinks he knows what is happening:
.

Ex-F1-Boss Ecclestone glaubt an happige Strafe für Red Bull

«Punktabzug? Es wird schlimmer kommen!»
Was Ex-GP-Chef Bernie Ecclestone (bald 92) befürchtet, gibts hier im «F1 inside»von Formel-1-Reporter Roger Benoit.

Die Bullen müssen hart bestraft werden. Dieser klaren Meinung ist auch der frühereFormel-1-Boss Bernie Ecclestone (bald 92).
Frage: «Verliert Red Bull die WM-Punkte 2021?
» Der Brite, mit Red-Bull-Teamchef Horner befreundet: «Es wird schlimmer kommen!»Das hoffen auch Mercedes und Ferrari.

.
Ex-F1 boss Ecclestone believes Red Bull will be severely punished

«Point deduction? "It's going to get worse!»
What ex-GP boss Bernie Ecclestone (soon to be 92) fears can be found here in Formula 1 reporter Roger Benoit's "F1 inside".

The cops must be severely punished. The former Formula 1 boss Bernie Ecclestone (soon 92) is also of this clear opinion.
Question: «Will Red Bull lose World Cup points in 2021?»
The Brit, a friend of Red Bull team boss Horner: "It will get worse!"
Mercedes and Ferrari hope so too.

[mendis]

I am surprised this thread is opened again. There are no latest official developments and I am sure we will see posters fighting here once again, repeating exact same content. It would be wise to keep this locked until FIA publishes new information.

[Wouter]

I am surprised this thread is opened again. There are no latest official developments and I am sure we will see posters fighting here once again, repeating exact same content. It would be wise to keep this locked until FIA publishes new information.

.
This process could take a very long time, the maximum time is even five years! It won't last that long, but in the meantime
a few things will come out and it is desirable that there is a separate thread for that to exchange thoughts about.

[McL-H]

This sport has seen cars be disqualified for wings that were a mm too wide, for having too much fuel flow for only 1 second during a whole race.

If Red Bull is not disqualified after this, F1 cannot be taken seriously anymore. Not only would it be unfair to any team that was previously punished for slight rule breaches. They would give fiat for just breaching any rule out there in the future.

If the FIA is serious about the cost cap this is the time to prove it and set a very very clear precedent.

[henry]

As I understand it they did a dry run of the Cost Cap process in the middle of last year. I don’t know exactly how it was run but I expect that it allowed teams to discover if their interpretations of the rules were agreed by the regulators.

If they weren’t in agreement then they had the rest of the year to ensure that they did agree with the interpretations. As others have pointed out, there is a specific clause in the regs requiring them to do that.

If they were in agreement but decided to change their financial practises and once again needed agreement on interpretation then, once again, they needed to seek that agreement before the practises led to an overspend.

This is rather like the homologated engine rules. If you want to make a reliability change you have to have it agreed, by the FIA and your competitors, before you use it. If you were to use a change either without seeking approval or if approval is rejected you would be disqualified in any race you used it. No point in arguing it’s only a reliability thing and I’m sure it would have been agreed to. Same with cost cap, no point in arguing after you spend the money.

So in my mind the teams should have had interpretation agreement before spending the money. Without it they run the risk of punishment as with a modified Engine.

[hollus]

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.

[djones]

I am surprised this thread is opened again. There are no latest official developments and I am sure we will see posters fighting here once again, repeating exact same content. It would be wise to keep this locked until FIA publishes new information.

You have a choice to not open the topic until you feel it’s worth coming back in to. Nobody is forcing you to come here. Others should equally have a choice to post their opinions or discussions.

Anyway….

I was thinking about this subject over the weekend and I do wonder if we will see a team leave the sport. If Redbull are severely punished they may threaten to leave. Equally if they are not severely punished the likes of Mercedes’ may threaten to leave too. I think the situation this cost cap breach has caused is actually even more serious than it first looked.

[Stu]

This sport has seen cars be disqualified for wings that were a mm too wide, for having too much fuel flow for only 1 second during a whole race.

If Red Bull is not disqualified after this, F1 cannot be taken seriously anymore. Not only would it be unfair to any team that was previously punished for slight rule breaches. They would give fiat for just breaching any rule out there in the future.

If the FIA is serious about the cost cap this is the time to prove it and set a very very clear precedent.

The difference is that the things in your first paragraph could be classed as categorically pre-meditated.
RedBull (and any team in the future that breaks any of the caps - budget, wind-tunnel/Tera-flops, testing, engine use), require a fitting punishment. All of those except the budget cap would be premeditated, to plan to exceed the budget cap would be the same; whereas discovering that it has been breached by a misinterpretation/differing interpretation is questionable as far as premeditation is concerned.
Maybe teams should be compelled to submit a budget forecast ahead of the season (this could remain sealed until the full accounts are submitted and reviewed).