Renault managing director Cyril Abiteboul says Racing Point should be stripped of all the points they scored in the races where his team protested them.
Last week the stewards penalised Racing Point for using a rear brake duct design which was based on parts they obtained from Mercedes.Renault originally protested Racing Point’s cars in the Styrian, Hungarian and British Grands Prix, during the course of which they scored 14, 18 and two points respectively. Racing Point were handed a 15-point deduction, which is believed to be the first time a team has been penalised a set number of points, rather than losing all the points from a race or races.
Abiteboul’s team lost all its points from the Japanese Grand Prix last year when it was protested by Racing Point. Renault believe their rivals deserve a similar penalty, said Abiteboul, following the confirmation of their appeal against the stewards’ verdict.
“We were expecting a consistent sanction with other sanctions that we’ve seen in the past, the most recent point being the one that we accepted last year after Suzuka, when we were found in breach of the sporting regulations and not the technical regulations, and excluded from that event and therefore losing all our points,” he said.
“There was no discount for Renault so I don’t know why there should be a discount for Racing Point. It should be all the points of the events that we’ve protested.”
Abiteboul also queried why the stewards have allowed Racing Point to continue using the disputed brake ducts, but will continue to reprimand them after each race.
“We’re going to be in a bit of a strange situation where after every single event Otmar [Szafnauer, Racing Point CEO] will be called to the stewards, his brake ducts will be found similar to what they were and unchanged, and he will again receive a reprimand. So we are facing the prospect of 10 races, something like that, where his cars will be reprimanded.
“It’s a bit of a strange situation and I think we would like to have also a bit more clarity about that. I’m not necessarily saying that they should be excluded from the season but from a communication standpoint, to the fans, to the public, explaining why a car is still somewhat in breach because it will receive a reprimand but it’s OK to be part of the championship and therefore to be eligible for points, we think it’s a bit awkward.”
Advert | Become a RaceFans supporter and
2020 F1 season
- Pictures: Wrecked chassis from Grosjean’s Bahrain fireball crash to go on display
- Bottas vs Rosberg: Hamilton’s Mercedes team mates compared after 78 races each
- F1 revenues fell by $877 million in Covid-struck 2020 season
- Hamilton and Mercedes finally announce new deal for 2021 season
- F1 audience figures “strong” in 2020 despite dip in television viewers
Adam (@rocketpanda)
14th August 2020, 13:02
I’m sure it’ll be an unpopular opinion but I kinda agree with him. If they’re guilty of being in breach of a regulation and carrying an ‘illegal’ part, why are they allowed to continue using it? Why drag them to the stewards and ‘reprimand’ them for all the remaining races but do nothing about it? Why were they only docked a small number of their overall points if they’re allowed to continue anyway? Either it’s illegal or it’s not – either it’s a punishment or its not. At the moment it’s kinda half-hearted.
Simon (@simon999)
14th August 2020, 13:15
I reckon they’re trying to walk a tight-rope between not being overly draconian on any single team whilst still being seen to do something. Even before the pandemic hit, it seemed clear it was their priority not to lose any teams, given how they handled the Ferrari engine situation. Now, it’s even more of a priority for them.
I’d also argue they are correct to prioritise the viability of the sport overall, during a time when finances will be massively squeezed, if that’s what they’re doing.
Arrows98 (@arrows98)
14th August 2020, 14:21
pretty much, yeah… and didn’t $troll $r. buy out of RP hinge on them ‘finding a way to be competitive’ or something like that?
in retrospect, the permission to race this car probably should have not been given. now the FIA is struggling to find a middle of the road solution that will please absolutely no one
RP (@slotopen)
14th August 2020, 14:40
@simon999
This is what I worry about, Racing Point walking away. RP took a clear risk with their approach, but the mess over what is permissible per FIA vs stewards could be discouraging to other potential teams, or teams questioning their current participation.
I think the qualifying engine mode restrictions are even more dangerous. Merc customers must feel this is a blatant attack on their success. They were finally competitive but Ferrari and Renault won’t allow it. Not only can you not compete with the manufacturer team, but you can’t beat other manufacturer teams or the rules will change.
Hiland (@flyingferrarim)
14th August 2020, 16:56
So are you saying Merc customer teams are only competitive because of Merc and not their own innovation? I don’t think the qually mode restrictions are more dangerous my any stretch of the imagination. That mode gives little value to the racing (considering its only used on a couple laps a weekend) and is a “manufactured” speed that is not reflective of their true pace. The Merc engine without that qually mode is still the strongest engine in the field. So I do not understand why everyone is so up and arms on this restriction! They don’t use qually modes in the race, hence “qually mode”!
You also state that “Not only can you not compete with the manufacturer team, but you can’t beat other manufacturer teams or the rules will change”. They are still not going to beat or compete with the manufacturer that supplies their engines, so your point is almost mute. I could flip your argument around and say that other manufacturers have customer cars as well (more Ferrari than Renault now) and they don’t get an opportunity to compete?
anon
14th August 2020, 17:42
@flyingferrarim as others have noted, there have been radio transmissions that have indicated some teams have used those maximum power modes in a race when they wanted to set a particularly fast lap (e.g. going for a particularly quick inlap or outlap), so those modes are used in the race.
In fact, didn’t Norris use that mode in order to take both the point for the fastest lap in the Austrian GP and to manage to sneak onto the podium by ensuring that he finished just close enough to Hamilton so he’d take 3rd once Hamilton’s penalty was applied? Did that give “little value to the racing” when he used those modes?
Hiland (@flyingferrarim)
16th August 2020, 2:55
anon: okay, but that doesn’t mean that “maximum power modes” is equivalent to “qually mode”! Radio transmissions provided via radio to driver to use maximum power could be multiple settings that adjust the likes of ERS, fuel mixtures (rich setting for more power), and other performance settings. Hence, the laundry list of setting changes the driver is instructed to make. So you are only making assumptions that maximum power modes is equivalent to qually-mode/party mode.
grat
15th August 2020, 0:44
I wouldn’t worry too much about Racing Point– but I could see Aston Martin heading elsewhere.
*IF* Renault gets their way, Racing Point will have to hire a new team of engineers to design rear brake ducts, and even then, it’s going to be virtually impossible to prove those brake ducts weren’t influenced by the brake ducts that are “illegal”.
JohnH (@johnrkh)
14th August 2020, 15:44
@rocketpanda I agree especially seeing as Merc has been given an instant penalty by having the ‘qualy mode’ being banned as of the next race. How much consultation went into that? Yet it appears RP have been able to negotiate their penalty as have Ferrari, nothn sus there.
chimaera2003 (@chimaera2003)
14th August 2020, 16:22
@rocketpanda I fear that I have to agree with him as well and I dont say that lightly (I know someone who has worked under him and they said he is basically useless).
The current get-out that FIA & RP are using is that they breached the sporting regulations and not the technical regulations and that there was nothing technically illegal with the component itself so couldn’t be disqualified on that basis.
However it seems that Renault were not found in breach of the technical regulations at the Japanese GP and were penalised on sporting grounds. Therefore logic would dictate that an equivlant penalty should be applied unless someone from the FIA can present a new clause that has applied from the beginning of this season.
anon
14th August 2020, 17:49
@chimaera2003 it does come across as a bit of a hypocritical position for Renault to take given that Abiteboul has made it quite clear that Renault had been using their automatic brake bias adjustment mechanism for years before it was ruled to breach the sporting regulations in the Japanese GP last year.
By his own admission, the team has been running in an illegal configuration for every race up until the Japanese GP – if he believes that Racing Point should be stripped of points for the previous races, should Renault have been stripped of their points from the start of the 2019 season until the Japanese GP given they used a car in an illegal configuration for all of the previous races?
chimaera2003 (@chimaera2003)
14th August 2020, 18:33
Good point in that he could be accused of hypocrisy but there is a key difference in that Renault were only disqualified from the single event at which their car was protested.
I’m not sure FIA allow retrospective punishment for issues like this, otherwise it would be an absolute free-for-all and with the cars changing race-by-race it would be impossible to prove what was on the car at each race.
If RP protested them at every race of 2019 then they would lose all their points but they didn’t. I presume that the process mechanism has provisions in it to prevent bad-faith protests based on hearsay, otherwise it may have been done before. In this case Renault got away with it as no-one pulled them up on it.
What Renault should have done was take the offending item off the car as soon as they knew (if they did know) that a protest was likely. This is what MB did with their fancy rear wheel rims to reduce tyre overheating, as soon as RB looked like they would protest they took them off as they didn’t want to risk disqualification even through they thought they were legal.
grat
15th August 2020, 0:42
This is the problem– The stewards not only made up a penalty, they made up the infraction too.
The brake duct design was legally given to Racing Point. The front brake ducts worked on last year’s car, so Racing Point used them, and that’s OK. Then the parts were changed from “unlisted” to “listed”, and now, the *rear* brake ducts are “illegal”, because even though Racing Point’s had the designs for over a year, they didn’t USE the design last year. Since they used the fronts (from the same transfer of knowledge) last year, those aren’t illegal.
Crofty was muttering about shoplifting sweets, but it’s more like the store gave you free candy, and then when you didn’t eat it quickly enough, charged you with shoplifting.
This needs to go before legal-minded people who understand intellectual property, because IP is a legal area best described as “here there be dragons”.
Yaru (@yaru)
15th August 2020, 8:28
Its not an illegal part. They’ve already clarified on that. Thats why they can run it.
Bart
14th August 2020, 13:09
That would be ‘Racing’ then.
ruliemaulana (@ruliemaulana)
14th August 2020, 14:36
lmao
Green Flag (@greenflag)
14th August 2020, 15:14
That’s a pointless joke.
Pedro Andrade
14th August 2020, 15:19
I actually thought it was quite on point.
OOliver
14th August 2020, 16:07
I get your point.
Mihir
14th August 2020, 16:49
Point taken
TurboBT
14th August 2020, 13:28
It’s in gray area, I think RP found a loophole and just used that. FIA penalized them so that other teams don’t cry, and the penalty was not harsh in that extent because RP is not entirely to blame.
So, Renault can cry as much as they want, but taking all points will be too harsh and unfair. They couldnt do it to the big teams like Ferrari or mercedes.
Daniel K (@binny)
14th August 2020, 14:47
Yeah, tough to make these decisions where you know everyone is going to disagree.
It’s understandable, though, that Renault is eager to see harsher punishment. Their Suzuka disqualification was silly.
DAllein (@)
14th August 2020, 13:42
Totally disagree.
If we follow the same logic – then Renault should have been excluded from multiple seasons.
It didn’t happen
The regulations which Renault and RP have “broken” are different – Renault broke “driving aids”, RP – something about design, and as such they have different penalties.
I think it is totally normal.
There’s no justification for taking all of RP points.
Not to mention that the whole “guilty” decision is utterly wrong and must be reviewed.
bob (@riptide)
14th August 2020, 13:59
Did I just hear Renault right? They welcome Ferrari on their side given Ferrari’s integrity when it comes to the rules?
bosyber (@bosyber)
14th August 2020, 14:14
Just to sort of show it is not quite about principles but profit too @riptide
Fer no.65 (@fer-no65)
14th August 2020, 14:07
This makes too much sense for the FIA to actually so anything about it. I’ve been wondering what’s the point of reprimands if it’s okay to use the part. Why are they getting reprimands for after all? It’s like, “okay, you can use it, but this is the last time” but they keep getting “last times” every race. Makes no sense at all.
Daniel K (@binny)
14th August 2020, 14:49
I wonder if the reprimands are part of a longer term strategy. Can’t quite put my finger on it, but I’m sure lawyers are involved.
Roger Ayles (@roger-ayles)
14th August 2020, 15:51
@binny @fer-no65 I think it was on Sky last weekend where one of them made the point that the FIA likely went with a reprimand rather than anything more serious in part as an admission that the regulations weren’t clear enough to begin with.
I believe Racing point had the Mercedes rear brake duct designs since late 2018 but simply never used them & there was seemingly nothing in the regulations to cover that scenario when the brake ducts became a listed part for this year.
Racing point felt/still feel that since they already had the designs from when buying them off Mercedes was legal that they were free to use them & that there was nothing in the regulations specifically saying that it had to have been a part they actually ran on the cars previously. There appeal stems from that belief.
drmouse (@drmouse)
14th August 2020, 16:38
This is a tough one. I can see all sides.
However, I tend to come down on the side of RP here. They already had the designs and had already studied them. They know they are better than anything they could come up with without that knowledge, and now that they know that, they would design something very similar even if they started from scratch. The genie is out of the bottle, you can’t erase the knowledge from the designers’ brains, and they gained this knowledge while it was legal to do so.
Yaru (@yaru)
15th August 2020, 8:29
Renault used their system for the entire year though and only had that one race taken away from them. That may have been because nobody protested them before but in terms of punishment they got something similar to what RP got.
RP is getting some leniency because stewards agreed (as in their full report) that the rule should have been clarified narrowly earlier. While they disagreed with the broad interpretation RP used for “design” and should have asked the FIA about it (which is why they re getting punished at all), the lack of clarification beforehand gave them some leeway. The stewards also noted in the report that its unreasonable to expect RP to “unlearn’ what they have alrrady gotten legally from last year RP (with the physical delivery of brake ducts parts they already know and have only six days after the dateline considered a non issue they said). Renault by contrast could easily build a new standard shift system.
TLDR, RP is getting leeway because a) the change from Unlisted parts to Listed parts and b) the lack if clarification from the rules beforehand both blend to create a unique situation.
Homerlovesbeer (@homerlovesbeer)
15th August 2020, 11:14
But Renault ceased using the part deemed to go against the regs while RP continue to use it every race.