|
|
Post by nogrip-31gm on Jan 22, 2013 14:55:25 GMT 12
do you still have to re enter the track where you left it onto the grass?
cos i saw one car go to the infield on turn 2 or 4 and re enter down the other end...
others i saw loop back and go back on where they went off..
|
|
|
|
Post by Regan O'Brien on Jan 22, 2013 16:22:33 GMT 12
by hokey i think i have got it!!  the only non attacking car is one on the infield!! everything else is fair game. yes?? but only in a teams race. CORRECT we are all fair game on the track ;D ;D You got it Buster |
|
|
|
Post by mcfly on Jan 22, 2013 17:02:57 GMT 12
No, I believe I'm reading the intent of the rule..... how do you get that from this?? "Attacking from a stationary position or hitting a stationary car is not permitted." effectively you are saying lets throw the rulebook away cause what it states is not how you want to race. its up to the ref to know the rules and enforce them, not alter, ignore, or make up different ones. i see this particular rule as being very explicit. am i the only one?? you are not the only one, i fully agree with you. |
|
|
|
Post by boner87 on Jan 22, 2013 17:35:44 GMT 12
Come on busterbell gotta look at both sides of coin here. If I'm parked up I can cause the running car to have doubt slow down letting my team cars catch up. If I'm moving see a parked car gonna try and "disable" it so it definately can't make the pendulum swing.Anything on the track facing forward...ish fair game. drivers discretion as to how hard and where the hit is
|
|
|
|
Post by busterbell on Jan 22, 2013 18:20:37 GMT 12
Come on busterbell gotta look at both sides of coin here. If I'm parked up I can cause the running car to have doubt slow down letting my team cars catch up. If I'm moving see a parked car gonna try and "disable" it so it definately can't make the pendulum swing.Anything on the track facing forward...ish fair game. drivers discretion as to how hard and where the hit is yes something i haven't seen yet, is a car that is lodged up the wall but not over and can be collected by another car and finished off. providing the green light is still on and the race has not been stopped. similarly i haven't seen (or rarely) a team mate trying to get one of their own off the wall. all would be seemingly legal under my new understanding.  i can now also see why seemingly why stationary hits have occurred. so some of the (normal) racing rules are used and some are not, how does one know which? |
|
|
|
Post by nolimits on Jan 22, 2013 21:33:28 GMT 12
Mcfly stationary cars in teams racing is NOT illegal! The stationary car issue was brought up in drivers meeting on 1st night and made very clear that block cars were allowed to sit and wait stationary so i have no issue with that! I do think however stationary cars against walls should not be hit only my opinion funny the rulebook i have clearly states you may not attack from a stationary position......... you must have a copy of the palmy one.......  You may find this rule book tucked in with the one nelson used when removing dale Robertson from the track after he seemed to be having a shot at the nelson drivers? =p |
|
|
|
Post by PantherFan87 on Jan 22, 2013 21:38:27 GMT 12
funny the rulebook i have clearly states you may not attack from a stationary position......... you must have a copy of the palmy one....... You may find this rule book tucked in with the one nelson used when removing dale Robertson from the track after he seemed to be having a shot at the nelson drivers? =p Hehe thank you nolimits.. was waiting for someone else to say that! |
|
|
|
Post by beachboy on Jan 22, 2013 21:46:00 GMT 12
Wasn't it a Miers that Robertson had a go at?
and did the job by the look of it.
|
|
|
|
Post by busterbell on Jan 22, 2013 21:54:35 GMT 12
Wasn't it a Miers that Robertson had a go at? and did the job by the look of it. yes it was, and from what i have read he had a insecure wing which caused a red light. unfortunate for him it eventually fell off but after the red light was bought on. |
|
|
|
Post by beachboy on Jan 22, 2013 22:03:26 GMT 12
lol i seem to have caused enough angst. everyone will read what they want to read (even if it isn't there.) but yes.......everyone has been saying you can,you can, but no-one has pointed me to 'that' rule. i have shown what i have seen/read/understood and the refs are suppose to enforce rules that are 'in' the book including the code of ethics..... obviously this is another of those phantom rules. Regan has explained it for you buster.......and I've hi-lighted one of the two rules that YOU posted, and still you don't grasp it. Accepted, the rules you posted do appear to conflict each other a little, and people (including some drivers) have explained how drivers briefing always clarifies those issues so everybody understands. What more can you want? If the ref's change/clarify rules at the drivers briefings because they know there are misunderstanding over a few rules at teams champs meetings then it would be a good idea to let the crowd know so they can understand the referees decisions. |
|
|
|
Post by rustytim on Jan 22, 2013 22:04:48 GMT 12
I think the rules need to be looked at in a similar way to the laws of this great land of ours. While the clowns down in wellington make up the rules its up to the police or the refs to decide how to apply the rule. In teams racing the level of policing is set out at drivers briefing. In the same way as the law says thou shall not speed to police decide what tollerance they will allow. 4kmh on long weekends and 11 on normal days or about 15kmh less than we all need sometimes.
The hit on regan was an interesting one. While you must disengage once on the infield how does that work when 2 cars are locked together and move to the infield to try and seperate from each other. I forget the number of times I have seen a few stockcars/superstocks doing donuts etc on the infield to split up I forget. Does it make any difference if your hooked inbetween front bumper and wheel or got the whole car on your front bumper?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dirt_Fan on Jan 22, 2013 22:19:17 GMT 12
It would come down to the intent behind the hit. As Regan has said, he would do the same thing. When your in the heat of the moment and you've got the opportunity to roll an opponent I think the last thing you will be looking for is the pole line. In this case he seems to have "skidded" across the pole line and not deliberately driven over forcing regan over. Refs would have taken this into account. When a child steals candy you smack him on the backside or hand (provided no one is watching these days  ) you don't cut their hand off just like you have a stern word with a driver after a teams race rather than sending them off for a minor infraction (possibly a bad analogy but you get the point- extremes) |
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Jan 22, 2013 22:27:38 GMT 12
He didn't stop in the centre of infield, he only just(after carrying Reg across the track) made it past the pole line. Try carrying Reg, he ain't lite...........  ;D  |
|
|
|
Post by muncho on Jan 22, 2013 23:25:44 GMT 12
Wasn't it a Miers that Robertson had a go at? and did the job by the look of it. Correct but AFTER he took miers out he was on the brakes waiting for anything with a "N" on there car.This is what nolimits is refering too i suspect............(the blocking and intent to attack any nelson car) |
|
|
|
Post by mcfly on Jan 23, 2013 6:11:18 GMT 12
Wasn't it a Miers that Robertson had a go at? and did the job by the look of it. Correct but AFTER he took miers out he was on the brakes waiting for anything with a "N" on there car.This is what nolimits is refering too i suspect............(the blocking and intent to attack any nelson car) Well for that he should have been taken off! we all know the saying "smash the P, not smash the N  |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 23, 2013 10:36:50 GMT 12
Come on busterbell gotta look at both sides of coin here. If I'm parked up I can cause the running car to have doubt slow down letting my team cars catch up. If I'm moving see a parked car gonna try and "disable" it so it definately can't make the pendulum swing.Anything on the track facing forward...ish fair game. drivers discretion as to how hard and where the hit is yes something i haven't seen yet, is a car that is lodged up the wall but not over and can be collected by another car and finished off. providing the green light is still on and the race has not been stopped. similarly i haven't seen (or rarely) a team mate trying to get one of their own off the wall. all would be seemingly legal under my new understanding. i can now also see why seemingly why stationary hits have occurred. so some of the (normal) racing rules are used and some are not, how does one know which? The Team Racing Code of Ethics prevail over the normal racing rules. If something crops up that isn't covered in the Code then normal racing rules apply. If the only way a car can move is against the racing direction then that car is a non attacking car and can't be attacked nor can that car attack from that position. To be honest I think the code is reasonably easy to understand, the referee talks to the drivers before the meeting to assist their understanding, he doesn't make the rules up meeting by meeting. |
|
|
|
Post by Admin on Jan 23, 2013 10:43:23 GMT 12
Can someone show me where the thread is about the GOOD SNZ Calls is. |
|
|
|
Post by kiatoa on Jan 23, 2013 11:16:53 GMT 12
Can someone show me where the thread is about the GOOD SNZ Calls is. How can you miss it- Its right below the Busterbell/Beachboy " We Love the Panthers and Bruce's teams draws are as honest as Abe Lincoln" thread |
|
|
|
Post by busterbell on Jan 23, 2013 11:27:28 GMT 12
yes something i haven't seen yet, is a car that is lodged up the wall but not over and can be collected by another car and finished off. providing the green light is still on and the race has not been stopped. similarly i haven't seen (or rarely) a team mate trying to get one of their own off the wall. all would be seemingly legal under my new understanding. i can now also see why seemingly why stationary hits have occurred. so some of the (normal) racing rules are used and some are not, how does one know which? The Team Racing Code of Ethics prevail over the normal racing rules. If something crops up that isn't covered in the Code then normal racing rules apply. If the only way a car can move is against the racing direction then that car is a non attacking car and can't be attacked nor can that car attack from that position. To be honest I think the code is reasonably easy to understand, the referee talks to the drivers before the meeting to assist their understanding, he doesn't make the rules up meeting by meeting. clearly the two rules clash with one another, but if you omit the one in the racing section, then the one in the teams rules makes sense. the teams rules also state "any inference that one can legitimately hit all stationary cars has been removed from the rules" i now understand that means you can hit anything that is stationary as long as it is a non attacking car, which is one that is on the infield, or as you pointed out one that is moving in the wrong race direction. i spose i should add one on its roof. |
|
|
|
Post by boner87 on Jan 23, 2013 14:11:22 GMT 12
Can someone show me where the thread is about the GOOD SNZ Calls is. Good SNZ calls are where races that involve one car that doesn't jump start completes all the alotted laps without using the wall, going over the pole line. All of this happening with a clear night sky and we pay $100 to watch. I cant wait! If there was a rule book that had a black and white ruling on hitting no one would do it in case they were "told off". How about all us keyboard racers go teams racing and see how we would all go? |
|
) you don't cut their hand off just like you have a stern word with a driver after a teams race rather than sending them off for a minor infraction (possibly a bad analogy but you get the point- extremes)
;D 
