Up Next
When does something in Formula 1 become illegal? When it is conceived with the intent of getting around a rule, when it is put on a car (regardless of whether it is used or not), or when it is conclusively used in a grand prix event in a manner that breaks the rules?
It is surely the final scenario: when something is on the car that does not conform to the rules and is also used in a rule-breaking way. That is the tipping point from when a device/idea/trick or whatever you want to call it goes from something the rulemakers will remind teams cannot be used to something that needs a punishment.
The potential for misuse doesn't prove misuse itself. And in the hot topic of Red Bull having a cockpit-activated device that can change the height of the leading edge of the floor – the ‘bib’ or ‘tea tray’ – the likelihood of it being used or not is essential to understanding whether this has been a clampdown to protect against paranoia, or an actual offence.
McLaren’s Lando Norris put it quite well when he said: “It's one thing having it on your car. It's another thing on how much you exploit it and use it, which we have no idea on.”
If there is any evidence of Red Bull using its mechanism in parc ferme conditions – between qualifying and the race – then the expectation would be for action to be taken.
The FIA could have responded to this more seriously. A rival team could have protested at the last race in Singapore. That this never happened would suggest it is the potential for the parc ferme-breaching adjustment to be made, rather than strong evidence Red Bull has actually done so, that has alarmed people. And it is simply better to eliminate the possibility altogether.
If the device exists as, essentially, a preparation item to more easily make a set-up change when the car is being built, to set it for certain track types, then that would not seem to be a problem. Proving its primary purpose isn’t the issue here. It is whether it gets used during parc ferme conditions at all. And nobody seems able to say it was.
Given the device exists in an open-source environment for all rival teams to see, and that is how this became a topic in the first place, it would be absurd for Red Bull to have designed and employed it in an illegal manner. There’s hiding in plain sight, and then there’s making the evidence of your supposed crime available to your competitors! Which is probably why Max Verstappen was so bluntly nonplussed by it.
"It is an easy tool and everyone can see it, when the parts are off it is easy to adjust but once the whole car is built together you can’t touch it," he said.
"For us it doesn’t change. When I read it [the original story that didn't name a team], I did not think it was related to our team. It is just an easy tool for adjustment."
Initially the FIA's action seemed like an odd halfway house solution. If the device existed and was being used, it was obviously illegal. If it didn’t exist or wasn’t being used, it seemed to be a mountain from a molehill. Perhaps the FIA was just doing enough to look like it was taking action, without actually suspecting/knowing/being able to prove there was a real problem.
But it does seem quite simple. The FIA hasn’t received any indication of such a system being "employed" for parc ferme changes. But, theoretically, it could be used in a way that would contravene the regulations. So, best to just scrub that prospect from existence.
"As part of this, we have implemented procedural adjustments to ensure that front bib clearance cannot be easily modified,” the FIA said.
"In some cases, this may involve the application of a seal to provide further assurance of compliance.”
That means taking steps to remove the mere possibility of a device being used in an illegal way.
Which seems like a neat solution unless any evidence emerges of actual wrongdoing - because suspicions alone count for nothing and 'potential illegality' isn't really a thing.
