|
|
Post by Shai-tan on Feb 9, 2013 14:26:17 GMT 12
Nope not the wrong thread.. although I did have to go back and read it again to make sure  When people say that drivers were using the wall to their advantage knowingly against the rules, then other drivers saw them doing this so did the same thing to gain adavantage then they are implying that all these drivers are cheating. Just without the Balls to say what they really want to say. Then all the talk about "where are the refs from" and how they let some things go and pick up on others again implying that it depends on the which team is implying that they are cheating also. Sorry I have used the word imply way too much in one post  Fair enough. I guess if the refs start enforcing rules they need to enforce them all and make sure its fair. Dion Mooney was in the wrong no denying that but by definition that also puts last years infringers in the wrong also. |
|
|
|
Post by justafan on Feb 9, 2013 14:29:29 GMT 12
are the refs the same as last year? Have they had further training in regards aspects of what happened last year? have they had word from higher up ie snz to enforce certain things? we dont know the answer to any of this. |
|
|
|
Post by pfloyd on Feb 9, 2013 14:37:16 GMT 12
The refs have to make the call as they see it and will never please everyone. i think what makes Miers issue last year different was the conditions.If I recall rightly the Miers effort was during the rain on a very slippery track and he was not the only driver who used the wall (intentionally or not). Mooney did not have that excuse last night - did he actually have a steering problem ? yes we all would like consistancy but in a sport where the conditions play such a big part you will always get differences from year to year.
|
|
|
|
Post by Shai-tan on Feb 9, 2013 15:04:24 GMT 12
The refs have to make the call as they see it and will never please everyone. i think what makes Miers issue last year different was the conditions.If I recall rightly the Miers effort was during the rain on a very slippery track and he was not the only driver who used the wall (intentionally or not). Mooney did not have that excuse last night - did he actually have a steering problem ? yes we all would like consistancy but in a sport where the conditions play such a big part you will always get differences from year to year. From what I seen last year Palmy started using the wall well before the brits. The brits were still on the pole line for the majority of that race. Did palmy gain an advantage - Yes. If the rule was to be suspended surely both teams should have been told |
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Feb 9, 2013 15:59:42 GMT 12
watched it at home last night and yes peter Rees did use the wall to his avarntich more than once too.he was not taken out to the wall he used it to his avarntich  sorry spelling Use spell check then............... Bottom of page, third button. post reply-- preview -- spell check -- reset. |
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Feb 9, 2013 16:03:08 GMT 12
I think that you will find that the ref pulled him for Excessive use of the wall to his advantage. Where the line is drawn between excessive use and normal racing is the question that only the ref can answer. (Bugger that ... I'd never want the ref's job, you'd be dammed if you did .... or dammed if you didn't!)  But there is NO rule for EXCESSIVE USE of the wall. Quite often a palmy car will get closer or on the wall if that is where the hit is going to take them, as this should lessen the impact and car distortion. |
|
|
|
Post by MadMarty13B on Feb 9, 2013 17:27:51 GMT 12
Yes there is and its usually brought up at the drivers meeting
|
|
|
|
Post by haygar on Feb 9, 2013 17:43:05 GMT 12
I think that you will find that the ref pulled him for Excessive use of the wall to his advantage. Where the line is drawn between excessive use and normal racing is the question that only the ref can answer. (Bugger that ... I'd never want the ref's job, you'd be dammed if you did .... or dammed if you didn't!) But there is NO rule for EXCESSIVE USE of the wall. Quite often a palmy car will get closer or on the wall if that is where the hit is going to take them, as this should lessen the impact and car distortion. you sure ? r12-3-5 (f) Any Competitor using a concrete wall or bank to an advantage, in the opinion of the Referee, may be penalised. |
|
|
|
Post by MadMarty13B on Feb 9, 2013 17:48:43 GMT 12
well his name is Tank after all sums it up bahahaha
|
|
|
|
Post by Brett85p on Feb 9, 2013 18:35:30 GMT 12
Dion just used the wall again To tip a tank over! |
|
|
|
Post by Brett85p on Feb 9, 2013 20:23:17 GMT 12
Dion is having a lot of fun in the all in races, they really need to keep the camera on him.
|
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Feb 9, 2013 21:49:30 GMT 12
But there is NO rule for EXCESSIVE USE of the wall. Quite often a palmy car will get closer or on the wall if that is where the hit is going to take them, as this should lessen the impact and car distortion. you sure ? r12-3-5 (f) Any Competitor using a concrete wall or bank to an advantage, in the opinion of the Referee, may be penalised. Yes sure.... Any advantage...doesn't say only excessive use, it say any advantage. |
|
|
|
Post by B4DBQY on Feb 9, 2013 22:51:20 GMT 12
Well I think that the way he used the wall gave him a big advantage and the refs delt with it as they should have. Just cos the rules don't say you can't, doesn't mean you can. It's just like saying putting someone up the wall is using it to your advantage wich it is so like I said just cos it doesn't say you can't, it doesn't say you can? ;D |
|
|
|
Post by deanwatts88 on Feb 9, 2013 22:59:43 GMT 12
As above... In the opinion of the Referee and MAY be penalised are the 2 most important phrases. It would have to be "Exessive" IN THE OPINION OF THE REFEREE for the driver to be penalised would it not.. This basically means it is not necessary to put the word Excessive in the rule.
The other important fact that Marty has stated a couple of times but people seem to be ignoring is that in the Drivers Meeting it is generally CLEARLY stated what will be deamed excessive use of the wall along with clarifications of any other rules that are pretty specific to teams racing, such as the hitting a parked car rule that changes for teams racing compared to normal racing.
THE DRIVERS are left in no doubt what the rules are and the way the refs will be policing them.
|
|
|
|
Post by busterbell on Feb 9, 2013 23:05:49 GMT 12
THE DRIVERS are left in no doubt what the rules are and the way the refs will be policing them. that's most of the problem. i lost count of the amount of inside passes that were made on the infield. none of them seemed to be policed and obviously giving way, disengaging, and circling back behind your opponent has been thrown out the door too. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 9, 2013 23:09:14 GMT 12
THE DRIVERS are left in no doubt what the rules are and the way the refs will be policing them. that's most of the problem. i lost count of the amount of inside passes that were made on the infield. none of them seemed to be policed and obviously giving way, disengaging, and circling back behind your opponent has been thrown out the door too. Is it in the rules you must circle back behind your attacker?, thought they just did that to be safe from the Ref and a way to get some distance from the other car. |
|
|
|
Post by busterbell on Feb 9, 2013 23:21:14 GMT 12
that's most of the problem. i lost count of the amount of inside passes that were made on the infield. none of them seemed to be policed and obviously giving way, disengaging, and circling back behind your opponent has been thrown out the door too. Is it in the rules you must circle back behind your attacker?, thought they just did that to be safe from the Ref and a way to get some distance from the other car. as far as i am aware yes it was just an agreed recommendation of the best way to avoid any infringement that may occur when leaving the track during combat. still not sure of your point thou....... it still says in the rulebook you cannot pass on the infield. ie first onto the infield has to give way , not roar off ahead of the driver who put you there. this happened repeatedly over both nights. seemingly, after all the fuss in past seasons it is now acceptable. ( well this weekend anyway) |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 9, 2013 23:26:24 GMT 12
Is it in the rules you must circle back behind your attacker?, thought they just did that to be safe from the Ref and a way to get some distance from the other car. as far as i am aware yes it was just an agreed recommendation of the best way to avoid any infringement that may occur when leaving the track during combat. still not sure of your point thou....... it still says in the rulebook you cannot pass on the infield. ie first onto the infield has to give way , not roar off ahead of the driver who put you there. this happened repeatedly over both nights. seemingly, after all the fuss in past seasons it is now acceptable. ( well this weekend anyway) I did spot what seemed like a couple of infringements that probably had no effect on the outcome of the races. It could be the Ref gave a warning/fine or 3 that we were not told about . |
|
|
|
Post by busterbell on Feb 9, 2013 23:38:28 GMT 12
lol do you not remember all the fuss from past seasons........  passing on the infield gains that driver the advantage, how can that not have a bearing on the outcome?? sounds like you have your broom out mr macgor. how much stuff is under that carpet now?? ;D  |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Feb 9, 2013 23:50:10 GMT 12
lol do you not remember all the fuss from past seasons........ passing on the infield gains that driver the advantage, how can that not have a bearing on the outcome?? sounds like you have your broom out mr macgor. how much stuff is under that carpet now?? ;D I can't say I remember any actual incidents that gained an advantage and with only watching what was on camera it's hard to be sure of anything much . I think I saw what looked like a car seeking sanctuary one time. I think I saw what looked like a attack on the grass once. I heard the commentators say one UK car was excluded but not what for. It's certainly a downside of not being there and only watching cameras that were chopping about quite a bit. |
|
sorry spelling
