Brown attacks timeshares in F1: “They must be eliminated as soon as possible.” And Ferrari is also in the crosshairs

Zak on the attack It was a decidedly attacking Zak Brown who spoke on Wednesday in a press conference organized by McLaren with the publications that usually follow F1, at which he was also present. The CEO of the world champion Constructors’ team touched on various topics, but what seemed to ‘hot’ him the most was the thorny issue of the AB teams on the grid and of timeshares, i.e. those teams which are theoretically competitors but which in practice share the same owner or which – despite being under different management – carry out a massive exchange of information and personnel between them, trying to help each other. The American manager’s main opponent from this point of view is obviously Red Bull, which in addition to its own team has also managed the Racing Bulls team for 20 years now: “I believe we should abandon the A and B team system as quickly as possible – thundered Brown – as far as timeshare is concerned – currently there is only one group that has it [la Red Bull appunto, n.d.r.] – I understand how and why we arrived at this situation. But nowadays it is a practice that is not allowed in almost all, if not all, major sports. I think it carries a very high risk of compromising the integrity of sporting fairness.” Red Bull in the crosshairs, but not only “It was a much debated topic in the last Concorde Agreement – ​​added the CEO of McLaren – last year I wrote to the FIA ​​and Formula 1 on this very issue, because we continually see things like this and we report them. I believe there is now greater awareness and greater control from the FIA. Frankly I’m happy to see that Racing Bulls and Red Bull no longer look like the same car. I think I talked about it with Laurent. I’m not mad at him specifically, but he’s the only guy who has two teams and has been very open and transparent about saying, ‘Hey, if you see something you don’t like, let’s talk about it.’ So I think they are aware of that and don’t want to push the limits. In the Concorde Agreement there has been discussion about the possibility that, over time, one of the teams will be sold, but there is also a huge appreciation for what they have done for the sport and how they did it a long time ago. Therefore, I believe that, while managing and monitoring the situation, a further expansion of these timeshares would be a mistake for the sport.” A clear message, the latter, to the negotiations for a possible entry of Mercedes among the shareholders of the Alpine team, which Brown certainly would not see favorably. The criticism of the Ferrari-Haas relationship But Brown’s criticism is also aimed at the ‘alliances’ between teams with different ownership and in this sense Ferrari also ends up in the crosshairs, targeted by the manager Californian for his extremely close collaboration with the Haas team: “We have seen situations occur on the track that have a clear impact on the sporting result. Daniel Ricciardo [quando correva in Racing Bulls] he deducted a point for the fastest lap to help the other team [la Red Bull]; we have seen intellectual property violations with Aston Martin/Racing Point regarding brake ducts; we have seen employees move from one team to another from one day to the next, while we are forced to wait before making a hire and sometimes to conclude financial agreements that then affect our spending cap. So when you see people moving from one team to another without any financial compensation, that’s an unfair advantage. We have seen Ferrari and Haas exchange personnel and there is the issue of intellectual property which is very important. Can you imagine a Premier League match where there are two teams owned by the same group and one of them will be relegated if they lose, while the other doesn’t need to win that match? Here you are”.