Hot air hullabaloo: Mclaren counter-protest Red Bull with “too fast car” accusation

Tit-for-Tattington: Woking-based F1 car tinkerers, Mclaren have sensationally upped the stakes in their blowhole whittling aerodynamic controversy by accusing Red Bull of deliberately building a car much faster than everyone else, writes our fat, dead snooker playing tedious legal machination correspondent, Bill Werbeniuk.

Following protests about Mclaren’s complicated Heath Robinson aerodynamics tweak, the Surrey squad sensationally hit back at their tormentors with a counter claim accusing the mobile drinks cabinets of deliberately exploiting the rules to produce a car significantly faster than the rest of the paddock.

Mclaren’s system relies on complicated, high-tech series of holes

“Under rule whatever-it-is of the FIA’s sporting regulations, I can confirm that we are officially protesting Red Bull’s car”, ex-fatso F1 Racing Editor and current fatso head of McLaren Communications, Matt Bishop told reporters.

“We believe it has an unfair “excess speed” advantage and would like everyone to start scrutinising them rather than blaming us for everything. Again”.

The reaction immediately sent shockwaves through the paddock.

“Mclaren have been very clever”, legendary paddock gossip, Celine Ian told us. “Before that moment, the other teams had the moral upper hand as they felt Mclaren had been devious and cynical in manipulating arcane aerodynamic rules to their own advantage.”

“Now though”, she crescendoed, “everyone realises they just dislike losing regardless of how it happens so have switched their hatred to Red Bull instead for having the temerity to simply do a better job than everyone else”.

For their part, the Milton Keynes squad have yet to respond to the accusations in detail, preferring to busy themselves in preparation for the next race in Oz by taking loads of ‘E’ and dancing about till the early hours in a beatific, sweaty, flatulent trance.

Legal experts meanwhile, felt it was a risky move but one which might pay off for the Surrey chassis shavers; “it’s a risky move but it may pay off”, said top sports lawyer, Benson Fist-Penguin.

Has the Woking team’s actions unleashed legal lunacy?

“My worry however, would be that the team has also opened a Pandora’s box”, he worried, “this sort of protest could now easily escalate into all sorts of advantages being challenged: from Lewis being better than the other drivers to Ferrari having access to an unfair heritage and Renault being unable to use photographs of their drivers in publicity shots in case they terrify the public”.

Despite these concerns however, there was no sign last night that the paddock stood on the edge of a litigation precipice. “

If there is a litigation precipice”, one commentator noted, “and you could measure the risk by how close it was I’d say we were standing a good 50 feet from it. But if there isn’t one then I’d say the risk was a lot less than that”, he concluded.

Leave a Reply