What the FIA’s measures on Red Bull’s controversial tool could really mean

When will something happen in Formula 1? illegal? If it is designed with the intention of circumventing a rule, if it is fitted to a car (whether or not it is used) or if it is ultimately used in a Grand Prix event in a way that that violates the rules?

It is certainly the last scenario: If there is something on the car that does not comply with the rules and is also being used in violation of the rules. That’s the turning point, when a device/idea/trick or whatever you want to call it goes from something that the rule makers will remind teams of that it can’t become something that requires punishment .

The potential for abuse does not prove the abuse itself. And with the hot topic of Red Bull having a device activated in the cockpit that can change the height of the leading edge of the floor – the “bib” or the “tea tray” – the likelihood is that It is used or not, crucial to understand whether this was an action to protect against paranoia or an actual crime.

McLaren’s Lando Norris said it well: “It’s one thing to have it on the car. It’s another thing to know how much you exploit and use it, which we have no idea about.”

If there is evidence that Red Bull is using its mechanism in parc ferme conditions – between qualifying and the race – then action would be expected to be taken.

The FIA ​​​​could have reacted more seriously to this. At the last race in Singapore, a rival team could have protested. The fact that this never happened would suggest that it is potential that Red Bull actually did this, which alarmed people. And it’s simply better to rule out this possibility entirely.

If the device is essentially used as a preparatory element to make it easier to make a setup change when building the vehicle and adjust it for certain types of tracks, then this shouldn’t be a problem. The point here is not to prove the main purpose. The question is whether it will be used under parc ferme conditions at all. And no one seems to be able to say that.

Given that the device exists in an open source environment visible to all competing teams, and that is how it became an issue in the first place, it would be absurd for Red Bull to have designed and deployed it in an illegal manner. It’s about hiding in plain sight, and then the evidence of your alleged crime must be revealed to your competitors! That’s probably why Max Verstappen was so completely baffled by this.

“It’s a simple tool and everyone can see it. Once the parts are removed it’s easy to adjust, but once the whole car is assembled you can’t touch it anymore,” he said.

“That doesn’t change for us. When I read it.” [the original story that didn’t name a team]I don’t think it has anything to do with our team. It’s just a simple customization tool.”

At first, the FIA’s approach seemed to be a strange interim solution. If the device existed and was used, it was obviously illegal. When it didn’t exist or wasn’t used, it seemed like a mountain out of a molehill. Maybe the FIA ​​simply did enough to make it seem like they were taking action without actually suspecting/knowing/being able to prove that it was a real problem.

But it seems quite simple. The FIA ​​has received no indication that such a system is being “used” during parc ferme changes. But in theory it could be used in a way that violates the regulations. Therefore, it is best to simply get rid of this prospect.

“As part of this, we have made procedural adjustments to ensure that the front number spacing cannot be easily changed,” the FIA ​​said.

“In some cases, the application of a seal may be required to further ensure compliance.”

This means taking measures to eliminate the mere possibility of illegal use of a device.

This seems like a good solution unless evidence of actual wrongdoing emerges – because suspicion alone counts for nothing and “potential illegality” isn’t actually a thing.