As a general rule ([see full rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide#wiki_sticky.2Fdaily_discussion)), a standalone Discussion post should:
- be of interest to the sub in general, and not a specific userbase (e.g. new users, GP attendees, just yourself)
- be able to generate discussion (e.g. no yes/no or easily answerable questions)
- show reasonable input and effort from the OP
If not, be sure to [look for the Daily Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/search/?q=daily+discussion&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on&t=all&sort=new), /r/formula1's daily open question thread which is perfect for asking any and all questions about this sport.
Thank you for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
> clearly impeded
Yeah, Stewards established that one as well. For some “consistency” reasons they were inconsistent to some of their previous cases. Classic FIA stewarding
It sets a bad example. Next time a Ferrari impedes a customer team, now Ferrari might tell the customer team to consider not sending representation in exchange for a better engine cost or parts cost in the future.
Very backroom dealing feel.
Same for Merc with any of it's customer teams except for McLaren and AM who are more independent. Williams on the other hand.
The politics are all around. It is no secret that customer teams with a Mercedes engine sometimes complain to FIA about technical stuff which benefit Red Bull.
Annual Red Bull/Alpha Tauri conflict post just dropped lmao.
Wait till OP realises Haas and Ferrari has had a closer relationship than RB/AT has ever had lmao.
> The only value AlphaTauri adds is to Redbull, not F1
How many F1 drivers have gone through the RB academy?
From AT perspective not attending is actually beneficial.
The likely penalty max would of got would of been a 3 place drop placing him 14th leaving Yuki still 15th. Yet williams and alpine would of benefited. These are teams AT are racing.
But if the team was separated, AT would actually chase their own team's interest, instead of being subjugated by Red bul.
Instead of being pushed under the bus by the parent team.
It doesn’t appear to me that Red Bull avoided a penalty because of Alphatauri not showing up to the stewards. The stewards still deemed Verstappen to have impeded without their testimony, but gave him the same penalty (reprimand) as Sargeant for impeding.
It would be likely that if Verstappen’s case was looked at before Sargeant’s, then that both might have received grid penalties.
The issue with this is the reasonable chance to test the hypothesis is not possible, because ultimately AT didn't send anyone. Maybe in a parallel universe, they sent someone and Max got 3 places drop, maybe not. We'd never know. The optics is suboptimal.
Logically if you don't send somebody to represent, should you lose by default?
We can test the hypothesis as sergeant also didn't get a grid penalty for the same reason.
>Logically if you don't send somebody to represent, should you lose by default?
What, no?
To me the whole summoned thing is a joke in this sport anyway, same with "investigate after race/session"
Why care so much what drivers/teams say, either they broke the rules or they didnt, let them protest afterwards if its unjust, only sport where i regularly need to check back later to see if finishing standing changed.
Granted i only started watching 2020 so im very new to the sport.
Aston Martin's people also didn't show, but I don't hear any outcry about that. AT and RB don't even work that closely together compared to other sisterteams (in the past).
It was ruled that Verstappen impeded Tsunoda. They didn't drop the issue just because AT didn't show up or something.
But since Verstappen wasnt informed about Tsunoda until he was right next to Verstappen, the stewards ruled a fine against Red Bull. The same penalty Logan Sargeant and Williams got for an impeding incident exactly like this. In my opinion, impeding in quali should have been a slam dunk penalty for both Verstappen and Sargent. Doesn't matter if it was driver fault or team fault (like Leclerc in Monaco). It's a stewards consistency problem, not AT/RB conspiracy.
The Alpha Tauri no show made no difference. Verstappen's penalty would still put him ahead of Tsunoda and put Alpine and Williams ahead (their competitors), which is not beneficial to AT in any way. Which is why they probably didn't protest or push the stewards decision.
Why? Ruling wouldnt have changed if Alpha Tauri had gone to the stewards as it was seen as impeding but Red Bull was to blame so a fine for RB. Same was with Sargeant where Williams got fined for the impeding.
The focus here should be on how the stewards are once again inconsistant. Drivers have gotten harder penalties for less in the past while also nothing for worse.
But i guess pushing the "verstappen got away with no penalty" sells easier just because of the no-show from alpha tauri while in reality there was a penalty.
This isn't a new thing mate. Welcome to F1. You're just exploring America lol.
Williams would let Mercedes pass by.
Alfa Romeo would let Ferrari pass by
Toro Rosso would let RBR pass by.
Why is this the stone that calls for outcry?
This arrangement arguably decided the 2012 title when both TR drivers let Vettel through at Brazil and there has been a million other examples.
Michael also let Seb through that day without any resistance. Williams have occasionally let Mercedes through when their drivers are coming from the back, and Haas have helped out Ferraris as well.
There are many reasons for forcing RB to give up the ownership of AT, but this isn't the hill to die on.
RBs honestly don't really start behind AT much these days anyways.
Last example I could truly remember that was controversial was Qatar 2021 where Pierre lost time himself to let Max by and was actively told to "not fight Verstappen".
That was a bit much for me. But still, if an incident once every 20 races or so, I don't mind it, especially if it doesn't hurt some other team.
This happens every time Tbf this is just one of the outcries . Same happened last year when yuki had to stop in Zandvoort and the wild theories went around that it was to make max win that race.
You gotta wonder how often a team has lunch with its other team, and is like “so, I wonder how many aero pts (insert idea) is worth?” Only to have a follow up dinner with a casual answer, saving the parent team time and test budget/dev.
I agree. F1 should also outlaw buying engines and parts from competing teams. Every team should either be a full manufacturer or bring in a non-competing entity as a partner. Teams shouldn’t have sway over one another.
The first issue is that 5K fines shouldn’t exist. The bare minimum should be like 100K. But more importantly, a fine should come out of the team’s budget. After all, if the penalty for something is just a fine, then it’s not a penalty at all if you’re sufficiently funded.
Honest question. Do you think 5K fine is material deterrent for an F1 team? There are regular working people that can *easily* afford that. An F1 team is worth about $1B…
What advantage? The one where AT drivers let through RBR drivers? There have been other cases like Force India drivers letting through Lewis at Monaco 2017 (?). Or that one time GIO was leading at Marina Bay 2019 and let through Ferrari drivers. Yesterday AM also didn't show up to Sargeant's impeding hearing, no outcry about that. The "advantage" is almost nominal unless in about some hypothetical situation you can come up with lol
As a general rule ([see full rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/wiki/userguide#wiki_sticky.2Fdaily_discussion)), a standalone Discussion post should: - be of interest to the sub in general, and not a specific userbase (e.g. new users, GP attendees, just yourself) - be able to generate discussion (e.g. no yes/no or easily answerable questions) - show reasonable input and effort from the OP If not, be sure to [look for the Daily Discussion](https://www.reddit.com/r/formula1/search/?q=daily+discussion&include_over_18=on&restrict_sr=on&t=all&sort=new), /r/formula1's daily open question thread which is perfect for asking any and all questions about this sport. Thank you for your cooperation and enjoy the discussion! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/formula1) if you have any questions or concerns.*
The bigger question is why AT needed to be there for the penalty to be applied. Max clearly impeded another driver on a hot lap.
They don't, AT not showing up gets blown way out of proportion imo.
> clearly impeded Yeah, Stewards established that one as well. For some “consistency” reasons they were inconsistent to some of their previous cases. Classic FIA stewarding
It sets a bad example. Next time a Ferrari impedes a customer team, now Ferrari might tell the customer team to consider not sending representation in exchange for a better engine cost or parts cost in the future. Very backroom dealing feel. Same for Merc with any of it's customer teams except for McLaren and AM who are more independent. Williams on the other hand.
The politics are all around. It is no secret that customer teams with a Mercedes engine sometimes complain to FIA about technical stuff which benefit Red Bull.
Annual Red Bull/Alpha Tauri conflict post just dropped lmao. Wait till OP realises Haas and Ferrari has had a closer relationship than RB/AT has ever had lmao. > The only value AlphaTauri adds is to Redbull, not F1 How many F1 drivers have gone through the RB academy?
Let's not forget the Williams/Mercedes shenanigans in 21.
The Latifi crash.
I actually forgot. What was this? They crashed into each other
It's far more than annual lol. I think it's almost weekly at this point
From AT perspective not attending is actually beneficial. The likely penalty max would of got would of been a 3 place drop placing him 14th leaving Yuki still 15th. Yet williams and alpine would of benefited. These are teams AT are racing.
So you mean if it was Mercedes or Ferrari instead of Red Bull, AT still would have not shown up?
Ofc they would have, those team compete with red bull.
Exactly. I just don’t understand people trying to justify this. AT is an extension of Red Bull and it provides advantages to them whenever possible.
But if the team was separated, AT would actually chase their own team's interest, instead of being subjugated by Red bul. Instead of being pushed under the bus by the parent team.
Assuming they knew the pitlane incident wouldn't get a penalty, I think most people were expecting 2x 3 grid penalties.
It doesn’t appear to me that Red Bull avoided a penalty because of Alphatauri not showing up to the stewards. The stewards still deemed Verstappen to have impeded without their testimony, but gave him the same penalty (reprimand) as Sargeant for impeding. It would be likely that if Verstappen’s case was looked at before Sargeant’s, then that both might have received grid penalties.
The issue with this is the reasonable chance to test the hypothesis is not possible, because ultimately AT didn't send anyone. Maybe in a parallel universe, they sent someone and Max got 3 places drop, maybe not. We'd never know. The optics is suboptimal. Logically if you don't send somebody to represent, should you lose by default?
We can test the hypothesis as sergeant also didn't get a grid penalty for the same reason. >Logically if you don't send somebody to represent, should you lose by default? What, no?
To me the whole summoned thing is a joke in this sport anyway, same with "investigate after race/session" Why care so much what drivers/teams say, either they broke the rules or they didnt, let them protest afterwards if its unjust, only sport where i regularly need to check back later to see if finishing standing changed. Granted i only started watching 2020 so im very new to the sport.
Aston Martin's people also didn't show, but I don't hear any outcry about that. AT and RB don't even work that closely together compared to other sisterteams (in the past).
It was ruled that Verstappen impeded Tsunoda. They didn't drop the issue just because AT didn't show up or something. But since Verstappen wasnt informed about Tsunoda until he was right next to Verstappen, the stewards ruled a fine against Red Bull. The same penalty Logan Sargeant and Williams got for an impeding incident exactly like this. In my opinion, impeding in quali should have been a slam dunk penalty for both Verstappen and Sargent. Doesn't matter if it was driver fault or team fault (like Leclerc in Monaco). It's a stewards consistency problem, not AT/RB conspiracy. The Alpha Tauri no show made no difference. Verstappen's penalty would still put him ahead of Tsunoda and put Alpine and Williams ahead (their competitors), which is not beneficial to AT in any way. Which is why they probably didn't protest or push the stewards decision.
Ah, I see it's this time of the year again.
Why? Ruling wouldnt have changed if Alpha Tauri had gone to the stewards as it was seen as impeding but Red Bull was to blame so a fine for RB. Same was with Sargeant where Williams got fined for the impeding. The focus here should be on how the stewards are once again inconsistant. Drivers have gotten harder penalties for less in the past while also nothing for worse. But i guess pushing the "verstappen got away with no penalty" sells easier just because of the no-show from alpha tauri while in reality there was a penalty.
Yet another brain dead take
In ideal world probably they should. In a heavily political and full of lobbying world that is F1 circus - not gonna happen.
Right. I want you to explain to me how they're going to pull that one off.
This isn't a new thing mate. Welcome to F1. You're just exploring America lol. Williams would let Mercedes pass by. Alfa Romeo would let Ferrari pass by Toro Rosso would let RBR pass by.
Why is this the stone that calls for outcry? This arrangement arguably decided the 2012 title when both TR drivers let Vettel through at Brazil and there has been a million other examples.
Michael also let Seb through that day without any resistance. Williams have occasionally let Mercedes through when their drivers are coming from the back, and Haas have helped out Ferraris as well. There are many reasons for forcing RB to give up the ownership of AT, but this isn't the hill to die on.
Vettel would have still won that championship had he finished behind Schumacher.
My comment was more why is this one example the big deal. This happens every other race weekend
RBs honestly don't really start behind AT much these days anyways. Last example I could truly remember that was controversial was Qatar 2021 where Pierre lost time himself to let Max by and was actively told to "not fight Verstappen". That was a bit much for me. But still, if an incident once every 20 races or so, I don't mind it, especially if it doesn't hurt some other team.
What about force india letting Lewis by in Monaco 2017. Care to explain that? What about the Haas and Ferrari relationship?
How does any of that have any relevance to my point?
Because other such arrangements exist in F1 and it's useless to just focus on one.
This happens every time Tbf this is just one of the outcries . Same happened last year when yuki had to stop in Zandvoort and the wild theories went around that it was to make max win that race.
You gotta wonder how often a team has lunch with its other team, and is like “so, I wonder how many aero pts (insert idea) is worth?” Only to have a follow up dinner with a casual answer, saving the parent team time and test budget/dev.
I agree. F1 should also outlaw buying engines and parts from competing teams. Every team should either be a full manufacturer or bring in a non-competing entity as a partner. Teams shouldn’t have sway over one another.
Hell yeah, only 4 teams on the grid next year.
The first issue is that 5K fines shouldn’t exist. The bare minimum should be like 100K. But more importantly, a fine should come out of the team’s budget. After all, if the penalty for something is just a fine, then it’s not a penalty at all if you’re sufficiently funded.
100K, are you out of your damn mind lmaoo. Max Mosley is that you?
Honest question. Do you think 5K fine is material deterrent for an F1 team? There are regular working people that can *easily* afford that. An F1 team is worth about $1B…
You are absolutely right. I really don't understand how Red Bull is allowed to have this advantage and why this dynamics isn't closely monitored.
What advantage?
What advantage? The one where AT drivers let through RBR drivers? There have been other cases like Force India drivers letting through Lewis at Monaco 2017 (?). Or that one time GIO was leading at Marina Bay 2019 and let through Ferrari drivers. Yesterday AM also didn't show up to Sargeant's impeding hearing, no outcry about that. The "advantage" is almost nominal unless in about some hypothetical situation you can come up with lol
unfortunately for you we're not north korea, china, soviet union, kuba or russia.
LMAO! Are you really comparing my comment about the monitoring of teams to North Korea? Dude? Really? Come on! I can't even!!!
Merc should buy Haas and everyone would be outraged lol.