scbriml wrote:Aesma wrote:Easy out there for the stewarts, no new evidence, case closed.
Lots of rumours that Red Bull’s main new evidence is GPS data which shows that Hamilton was never as fast through Copse on any other lap in the race. However, I’m really struggling to grasp how the stewards can consider “the future” when judging an incident in “the present”. I can’t see how the evidence can be admissible.petertenthije wrote:I would not be surprised if this is more a jab at the FIA then at Mercedes. This incident will have to come out of Red Bull's regular budget, which the FIA has limited at 145 million per season. Writing of a car at 1,5 million is going to impact Red Bull's future options (in addition to having lost points)
My guess is they will want to either get a (partial) refund by Mercedes, or that the spending limit is raised by the value of this write-off.
There’s no mechanism for any of those things to happen and the rules won’t change mid-season. All the teams will have contingency built into their budgets, but obviously $1.8 million is a big chunk to lose. I would point out that Mercedes has also suffered a massive car accident with Bottas car.
Not picked up on here yet, but Stewards rejected the Red Bull appeal..
https://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/formula1/58014629
I wonder if the cost of the lawyers comes out of the season spending cap?
Probably a good time for Red Bull to get back on with the job of racing instead of politicking.
Be interesting to see if Max can decide which approach gives him a better chance of winning the championship - more measured, or more aggressive?
Rgds