Red Bull to quit F1?

JeditOjanen · 19 Mar 2015 at 13:07

timmeh said:
It happens all the time where the teams challenge another team's (usually Red Bull) interpretation of the rules and, if the FIA agree they have to change the parts either between sessions or before the next race. Running 'illegal' parts isn't completely black and white and Red Bull used that to their advantage on numerous occasions, here's one I found after a quick Google.

On the subject of teams challenging other teams: it's great when people hold up Vettel's two close WDC wins as examples of Red Bull not cheating. The only reason he has either of those titles is because Toro Rosso drivers were under orders not to hold him up. If having four cars on the track isn't cheating, what the hell is?

Skeeter · 19 Mar 2015 at 14:18

Which rule did they break?

Marvin · 19 Mar 2015 at 17:58

JeditOjanen said:
On the subject of teams challenging other teams: it's great when people hold up Vettel's two close WDC wins as examples of Red Bull not cheating. The only reason he has either of those titles is because Toro Rosso drivers were under orders not to hold him up. If having four cars on the track isn't cheating, what the hell is?

The ONLY reason? Surely TR would have to be ahead of the people they're holding up for that to be true, which as a midfield team seems rather unlikely. If you're suggesting it was whilst blue flags were being waved then they would have been penalised for impeding.

Skeeter · 19 Mar 2015 at 18:18

This guy also thinks RBR 'cheated' by owning the Red Bull Ring Marvin, so don't expect it to make much sense.

I seem to remember him also going off on one about McLaren providing the standard ECU, and that they were cheating by being sponsored by TAG while they were providing the timing systems.

Alibaba99 · 19 Mar 2015 at 18:41

Skeeter said:
The FIA did not catch them doing anything. At the 2012 Canadian Grand Prix the stewards found that under visual inspection it appeared that the front ride height could be changed by hand and not by a tool as the rules require. They requested RBR change the parts, they did. There was no evidence of cheating and no penalties.

One has to wonder why the front suspension had been designed in contravention of the rules. Whilst there is no evidence that they made illegal adjustments there is also no evidence that they didn't. Everything on an F1 car is there for a reason, and that is to make it go faster.

Rammix said:
Hasn't the race for an unfair advantage always been part of F1?

Hell, Gordon Murray one of the best car designers of his generation once attached an 18" fan to the back of one of his cars. Because, well, the regulations didn't say he couldn't and it gave them a massive increase in downforce.

The rules stated that the 51% of the fans flow must be for cooling, it clearly contravened that.

Milkybk said:
Thought I'd just be talking to a brick wall tbh knowing how OCUK is, nice to see some people can actually look at it without blinkers on.

The two they won convincingly were still only properly over in the second half of the season, they kicked up a gear with excellent upgrade packages. With Mercedes we know it's over after the first race, yet they won't be smacked with constant legislation like RBR were.

It appears that the Merc doesn't have a magic bullet (or 3) that can be legislated against. It is just a very thoroughly designed car with the best engine. CH;s comments smack of wanting to equalise performance by imposing penalties on the Mercedes only.

Skeeter · 19 Mar 2015 at 19:36

But as you say, he's missing the point if he thinks just borking the engine a bit will slow the Mercedes down much. Just look at the gap they have over the other Mercedes powered teams.

JUMPURS · 19 Mar 2015 at 20:10

JeditOjanen said:
On the subject of teams challenging other teams: it's great when people hold up Vettel's two close WDC wins as examples of Red Bull not cheating. The only reason he has either of those titles is because Toro Rosso drivers were under orders not to hold him up. If having four cars on the track isn't cheating, what the hell is?

What about Ferrari and Marussia? They supplied engines and at least one driver,

Or Force India and McLaren?? Didn't they supply a driver and a 'technical working relationship'?

Flibster · 19 Mar 2015 at 20:31

Red Bull are the new Ferrari.

"We'll take our toys and go home if you don't do what we want!"

Surely that's Ferrari's old battle cry?

timmeh · 19 Mar 2015 at 20:40

JUMPURS said:
What about Ferrari and Marussia? They supplied engines and at least one driver,

Or Force India and McLaren?? Didn't they supply a driver and a 'technical working relationship'?

Those situations are slightly different to owning two teams on the grid.

Skeeter · 19 Mar 2015 at 21:28

timmeh said:
Those situations are slightly different to owning two teams on the grid.

In what way? Ferrari had 30m invested in Marussia, they probably owned 30% of the team without including the 'favours' of free kit and funded drivers.

Toto Wolff owns a chunk of Williams who run the engines made by his bosses.

Sauber were in Ferrari's back pocket for years.

The RBR/STR relationship is tame in comparison. Red Bull don't own all of STR anyway do they? And the relationship between the 2 Red Bull teams is so 'strong' that one of them is opening up its doors to allow itself to be bought by the engine supplier that's peed off with the other

. I doubt Horner could tell Franz what colour socks to wear at the moment, let alone what his drivers should do.

Oh, and its not against any rules. Should probably have started with that tbh... lol.

One · 19 Mar 2015 at 21:56

Skeeter said:
Red Bull don't own all of STR anyway do they?

They do. I don't see any issue though. There's nothing stopping other manufacturers from purchasing/creating 'junior' teams. The only issue I have is the liveries are too difficult to tell apart

Skeeter · 19 Mar 2015 at 22:18

Oh yeah, didn't spot that Bergers share had been bought back.

Personally I think there's a lot of positives in teams working in partnership. Clearly 12 independent teams hasn't worked recently, so perhaps 6 dual team partnerships would produce a more competitive grid? Ferrari clearly think so with the Haas partnership. I'd trade Marussia, Caterham and HRT for sister teams from Ferrari, Williams and McLaren any day.

JeditOjanen · 20 Mar 2015 at 12:50

Marvin said:
The ONLY reason? Surely TR would have to be ahead of the people they're holding up for that to be true, which as a midfield team seems rather unlikely. If you're suggesting it was whilst blue flags were being waved then they would have been penalised for impeding.

There's these things in F1 called "pit stops", you may have heard of them.

Marvin · 20 Mar 2015 at 18:32

So two Toro Rosso cars were enough between them to hold up Red Bull's competitors (who pitted earlier) during the couple of laps at most before the Toro Rosso then pitted themselves, and this is the only reason why Vettel/Red Bull won 4 titles? Has it ocurred to you that it's not "illegal" for a car technically ahead of a competitor to not instantly get out of the way? Surely the same would impact Red Bull too with other teams should they come in for an early stop?

If that's the case why did Webber not finish 2nd in the driver's championship every year?

JeditOjanen · 20 Mar 2015 at 20:17

Marvin said:
So two Toro Rosso cars were enough between them to hold up Red Bull's competitors (who pitted earlier) during the couple of laps at most before the Toro Rosso then pitted themselves, and this is the only reason why Vettel/Red Bull won 4 titles? Has it ocurred to you that it's not "illegal" for a car technically ahead of a competitor to not instantly get out of the way?

Of course it's not illegal for the Toro Rossos to block competitors. Red Bull were cheating because Toro Rossos specifically did not block Red Bulls while racing with everyone else.

And yes, it is the only reason Vettel won two of his titles, because had Toro Rossos been racing him instead of letting him past he would have certainly lost enough points in both 2010 and 2012 to hand those titles to Alonso.

Skeeter · 20 Mar 2015 at 20:19

Which races?

Dimi · 20 Mar 2015 at 21:59

This got me thinking, do broadcasters like the BBC/Sky and those abroad put pressure on the FIA?

Let's say viewer figures are down, not much of a show on the track and teams not being happy etc..

Could we see broadcasters having a major say in all this?

mattyg · 20 Mar 2015 at 22:01

Dimi said:
This got me thinking, do broadcasters like the BBC/Sky and those abroad put pressure on the FIA?

Let's say viewer figures are down, not much of a show on the track and teams not being happy etc..

Could we see broadcasters having a major say in all this?

They wont need to. Lower viewing figures means less advertising and less coverage. I think the sponsors will be knocking on the door first

Skeeter · 20 Mar 2015 at 22:29

It's possible that broadcasters may want lower fees, but not really the BBC or Sky. BBC is non commercial and they want out anyway, and F1 is only a very small part of an expensive but highly subscribed Sports pack on Sky so they won't be to concerned. The money pay TV broadcasters pay for F1 also fills any gap teams get from sponsorship. The prize pool has increased in recent years so the teams are earning more.

It's also not like figures are falling though the floor, especially when you look at the markets. The UK figures for example are down, but we account for less than 5% of the total F1 market. China had a small blip in their figures that accounted for more viewers than the entire UK audience.

Just look at where the races are going too. Simply looking at just the top level viewer numbers and claiming F1 is dying is woefully shortsighted and under informed.

englishpremier · 20 Mar 2015 at 22:37

Yeah being based in the UK people tend to get fixated on UK figures, ignoring that it's a small market. Happens all the time in the bike threads when talking about monthly sales.