Over spending penalty

[Andy B]

So RB overspent and won two WC's on the back of it so what penalty should be given?
Points deduction?
Fined?
Maybe a verbal?
What's your take on it?
My view is that it is pointless having a $ limit if it is not adhered to so especially in the first case an example has to be made.
As for AM they got their documentation wrong but didn't overseen.

[Monty]

I see that one of the possible penalties is ‘Public Reprimand’.
That would really worry RBR wouldn’t it 🙄
The FIA gifted Max last year’s WDC and this year he has been winning in a car that has enjoyed more upgrades than any other - almost certainly thanks to the overspend.

[Jericoke]

There need to be an overhaul to the system. It's ludicrous that it takes an entire fq season to judge if a team followed the rules last year. The only choices are to retroactively take away a championship, which is embarassing, or no serious penalty at all, equally embarassing

How hard is it to have a comptroller employed by the FIA controlling each teams funds in real time?

If the issue really is catering, as red bull states, then just no food at the lat 3 fly away

Sorry about your luck boys, brown bag it and maybe switch to a team that knows how to budget

[Andy B]

I hadn't heard the "Its catering" comment it makes RB even more laughable but even if it was catering that allowed more to be spent on the car.
I doubt this will get the punishment it deserves.
They hit McLaren hard all those years ago so why not now as cheating is cheating.

[Dare]

If a few want to take away RB's championship would you
want Max's and Sergio's win erased too? At least one good things
has come out of it, Ferrari isn't the bad guy now

[rmassart]

When they finally proved Lance Armstrong was cheating, they annulled his 7 Tour De France titles, as well his entire racing record in that competition. But did not, I don't think, declare the second guy the winner. Those years now don't have a winner.

Of course, RB were not champions last year, only Max was. I really can't help thinking they will kick RB out of last years constructors championship. No harm done, but "a big penalty" applied in FIA eyes. Otherwise, I guess the penalty will be financial. Like their budget for this year is cut 10% and a slap on the wrist and "don't do this again or else things will get really bad" type warning.

I would quite like to see a sin bin type thing on the Engineering side. Like put Adrian Newey in a sin bin on full pay for 6 months. No access or interaction with the team allowed. I know it's not his fault, but that would really hurt them. Plus it might make Engineers wonder whether it is worth working for cheats, if they risk being binned themselves...

[Andy B]

If a few want to take away RB's championship would you
want Max's and Sergio's win erased too? At least one good things
has come out of it, Ferrari isn't the bad guy now

The breaking of the budget allowed RB to give the drivers a car to win races and the WC  so both have to be penalised or nothing at all which will open the floodgates.
As usual another FIA mess!

[lkjohnson1950]

How about they fine them the amount of the overspending and dq them from both of next year's titles?

[Monty]

I think the penalty should be punitive; obvious and transparent.
It would be crazy to go back and change last year’s championships so it should impact the current championships.
I recommend a 25 point deduction per 5% step of overspend for both drivers (obviously affecting the drivers and the team). This would be material and painful but not so severe that it couldn’t be overcome within a season.

[Jericoke]

How about they fine them the amount of the overspending and dq them from both of next year's titles?

While that sounds like a fair and just penalty, we have to remember how political F1 is.  If Red Bull is forced to compete for nothing, what stops them from taking their ball and going home?  Who's going to tune in for 16 car championship?

Certainly they should return all their winnings, pay a fine at least twice the offending amount, and have that come out of next season's budget.  Let them compete with their hands tied behind their back.  I don't want to see RBR (or AT) win, but imagine the story of a team down $10 million against everyone else's cap and still winning.

[rmassart]

The penalty must be a sporting one, not a financial one. If the penalty is purely financial then the cap will no longer serve a purpose. The winning team will still be the one with the deepest pockets, just that they will also have to cover the fines ...

[Alianora La Canta]

If Red Bull truly won two titles on the back of its overspend, it would need to be removed from those championships and made to return all rewards from them*, simply to reverse the benefit (let alone compensation) - something that would shutter the F1 team, with recovery costs likely exceeding the amount of reward obtained. This is not be something the FIA would be willing to do, even if it could defend its actions in front of an actual legal court, (it is not clear it could do so) and even if it had not pre-chosen its champion (hard to defend in the face of the last 14 months).

* - This is a bit complicated. The FIA would be owed anything it has paid to Red Bull for those two seasons. Liberty would be owed any Column 2 (success) payment beyond that given to the last-placed finisher at least, and arguably all the Column 2 payments (Column 1 payments - about half of an average team's Liberty income - and Red Bull's modest historic bonus payment would be immune). Sponsors would be owed any reward money for performing above expectations, unless those expectations were literally "turn up and do X amount of PR at Y quality". Red Bull would owe Dietrich Mateschitz any additional funding contingent on performance beyond that automatically accruing from attending all racing sessions. However, British law is such that bonuses paid out as part of salaries would not be owed back to the team, unless particular staff members can be identified as having caused the problem (and then the maximum fine that can be imposed without a court for this is £30 per week, and then only while that person/those people remain at the team). Bonuses Red Bull paid out to others that I haven't mentioned would be reclaimable, but difficult to enforce in law.

However, it's something every sport has to do for chemical doping. Why should financial "doping" be different, given that overspends have compound benefit unless the money was wasted or the benefits countered by other actions?

If a few want to take away RB's championship would you
want Max's and Sergio's win erased too?

Yes. They couldn't do what they did without the car, and the car benefitted from the money (even those arguing in vain that the problem was catering should be aware that it was money available to benefit the team that others do not have, and that an army marches on its stomach).

[lkjohnson1950]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't McLaren banned from the Championship and still required to race after their scandal?

[Jericoke]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't McLaren banned from the Championship and still required to race after their scandal?

Yes, but McLaren needs F1 more than Red Bull does.  And the McLaren drivers were still in the WDC running

[lkjohnson1950]

There are some rumors circulating that Red Bull may be leaving anyway. Apparently Mateschitz may be losing interest in F1. One reason Porsche was trying to make a deal with them. Mateschitz seemingly was in F1 for the glamour and PR, not because he's a hardcore fan.