Quote:
Originally Posted by E86Z4MC
I agree we'll have to see where things net out. I almost think about this in a similar way to legal claims in manufacturing. For example, if you need to fill a can of soda to 16 oz, you can be sure that all production, quality testing, statistical process controls, and accounting methods err on the side of caution to overfill because the ramifications of underfilling have severe consequences. Obviously, you work to get as close to target as possible, but you still allow for that margin of error and chalk it up as the cost of business.
In this case, if the pros of overspending outweigh the cons, then it's toothless to begin with. Last year's WDC is likely worth hundreds of millions in marketing value, in addition to the second place finish in wdc payout. No one knows if there was an overspend, but if it turns out to be the case, there should be severe consequences that nullify all possibility of benefit (and send a very strong message to all others).
|
Or like any motorsports there are grey areas, where teams will try to exploit. Whether in the rules and/or on the car.
Can anyone blame RB or AM for breaching the budget, knowing there is a 5% buffer that likely will result in a slap on the wrist? Just another area in the rule book where teams found a loophole.
I am actually amazed at F1 fans that actually think some teams would not try to take advantage of the 5% material breach rule.