Questions (Read 8,779 times)

[broardside]

In a teams race if a car stalls is a team mate allowed to come in behind to give it a push thanks.

[bowee51v]

Feb 9, 2015 19:55:47 GMT 12 broardside said:

In a teams race if a car stalls is a team mate allowed to come in behind to give it a push thanks.

i am sure that well be answered here

[BarryB]

Feb 9, 2015 20:12:25 GMT 12 bowee51v said:

Feb 9, 2015 19:55:47 GMT 12 broardside said:

In a teams race if a car stalls is a team mate allowed to come in behind to give it a push thanks.

i am sure that well be answered here

Yes. I don't know why more teams don't do it more often.

Barry B

[steeldog]

Feb 9, 2015 12:04:57 GMT 12 tank11 said:

Can there be some contact between the ref's box and commentators to keep the public informed?
Example American Grid Iron.

When I read this I was thinking the "contact" you were referring to was physical - only because the subject is the teams champs and that's what "contact" is all about

[Deleted]

When an incident is missed by the referees, is there a review/debrief system in place after the meeting is finished to discuss why and how incidents were missed? If so could Ross explain, and if not - why not?

With teams becoming so close and competitive now, is it now time to look at a specific teams protest formula, which would allow missed incidents to be dealt with following available video evidence etc? A time frame could be included i.e 30 minutes following the chequered flag. Some teams miss out due to incidents going unchecked on track, then video footage shows a breach of rules etc which go unpunished. If not, why not?

Technology has provided a major boost for competitors and their cars in the last decade, what current technology could be made available to referees to better assist in their decision making process?

What process is in place to select referees for this specific meeting?

[Deleted]

Feb 10, 2015 16:26:42 GMT 12 @mediadog said:

When an incident is missed by the referees, is there a review/debrief system in place after the meeting is finished to discuss why and how incidents were missed? If so could Ross explain, and if not - why not?

With teams becoming so close and competitive now, is it now time to look at a specific teams protest formula, which would allow missed incidents to be dealt with following available video evidence etc? A time frame could be included i.e 30 minutes following the chequered flag. Some teams miss out due to incidents going unchecked on track, then video footage shows a breach of rules etc which go unpunished. If not, why not?

Technology has provided a major boost for competitors and their cars in the last decade, what current technology could be made available to referees to better assist in their decision making process?

What process is in place to select referees for this specific meeting?

Sorry Richard I disagree, Things happen so fast that what looks a minor, unintended discression live, can look compleatetly diffrent at 300+ frames per second.

Not saying vid should never be used but as I said yesterday there would not be a driver all weekend who didn't infringe some rule at some stage. look at all the vid around hard enough and you will find them all.

[Deleted]

Thanks for your opinion Rammer, perhaps if drivers knew that their actions were being "officially" recorded and could be used to penslise them, then perhaps they wouldnt be so quick to, as some say "bend the rules".

I'm not sure how accurate your generalisation "there would not be a driver all weekend who didn't infringe some rule at some stage. look at all the vid around hard enough and you will find them all" is, but if it's true then that means that either lots of incidents are going unchecked or unspotted, or the refs don't believe that the breach of some of the teams racing rules need to be policed.

I'll take a stab in the dark that it's my first assumption that is most accurate, but you know what they say about assumptions. If it's the later then there is really no need for a rulebook at all is there?

The days of any team facing an "easy beat" or "guaranteed win" are long gone, so rule breaches in the past that were possibly looked at being "unlikely to change the result" or "would have made no difference, because team "A" were always going to win" are now redundant, and no longer reflect where we currently are in the teams racing environment.

Set rules regarding video evidence could be introduced etc, but Im keen to hear what Ross has to say on the issue, either for or against, and his reasons.

[Admin]

Chaps I should be removing the two above posts as they aren't questions. Try and keep it on topic please.
It's easy enough to start another thread to discuss points raised in this thread.

[bowee51v]

Feb 10, 2015 16:26:42 GMT 12 @mediadog said:

When an incident is missed by the referees, is there a review/debrief system in place after the meeting is finished to discuss why and how incidents were missed? If so could Ross explain, and if not - why not?

With teams becoming so close and competitive now, is it now time to look at a specific teams protest formula, which would allow missed incidents to be dealt with following available video evidence etc? A time frame could be included i.e 30 minutes following the chequered flag. Some teams miss out due to incidents going unchecked on track, then video footage shows a breach of rules etc which go unpunished. If not, why not?

Technology has provided a major boost for competitors and their cars in the last decade, what current technology could be made available to referees to better assist in their decision making process?

What process is in place to select referees for this specific meeting?

question 1 yes there is a debrief
video footage was used and SNZ select the referees as i only have a 1 hour show and 4 other guests on my show we can only take a limited amount of questions we will do our best to get as many as we can to him but if you want to you can contact Ross on 0274488288 he will be happy to answer your questions cheers

[screaminV8]

Question:

If a car is immobile on the track, and the entire field has gone past it, ie they all know it's there after that, why isn't the race allowed to continue?
(Assuming of course 1/ there isn't a thumbs down, and 2/ it isn't in a specifically dangerous spot ie turn 1 or 3 wall).

[bowee51v]

Feb 10, 2015 19:39:50 GMT 12 screaminV8 said:

Question:

If a car is immobile on the track, and the entire field has gone past it, ie they all know it's there after that, why isn't the race allowed to continue?
(Assuming of course 1/ there isn't a thumbs down, and 2/ it isn't in a specifically dangerous spot ie turn 1 or 3 wall).

a you talking teams or just racing in general i guess being immobilized any where on the track is unsafe especially
if you have a big field coming round the chances of another car being pushed into you would be high and safety comes first
you cant compromise safety

[huttparkracing]

My question is when you only have 3 races between a blown diff and trying to fix it would you rather see the driver out there or not after having worked our arses off to work on it or maybe we shud just put it in the bus and all go home just asking thanx

[goldcoastsam]

Good point Hutt Park team-there are some serial 'experts' on this forum who haven't spent time in the pits trying to send a steel cage with a plastic body on out into the teamschamps arena to get demolished or slide/control a wild beast and smash someone at high speed.

[goldcoastsam]

Including me!

[huttparkracing]

Thank you we were keeping in touch with the powers that be the entire time we were fixing the car stress levels were pretty high lol

[huttparkracing]

And thank god some people realise the work the money and the heartache and tears that go into it hey may not have thrilled some peeps but they opened the gate so thanx to them

[BarryB]

Not trying to pick on any particular car, but it's always easier to cite a case when you have an actual example. It was obviously a huge effort to get the car back out, and my question to the referee was not meant to demean that effort. But my question is; where do you draw the line?

Imagine the outcry if the gate was opened for a Panther. If a Panther car got a second 3-minute bell after their opponents had already used one up. And if the Panthers then went on and won the race, helped in no small part by that extra car that the gate was opened for. To be fair to all, where do you draw the line? Is it okay when a team only has 3 cars out there, but not if they already have 4? Is it, or should it be, a discretionary power? Or is it, or should it be, a black and white rule?

Barry B

[huttparkracing]

Can't answer that one Barry we weren't a panther and we are only talking about the first night here not a semi or a final

[huttparkracing]

And there were only 3 cars out there

[Deleted]

Feb 10, 2015 23:07:17 GMT 12 BarryB said:

Not trying to pick on any particular car, but it's always easier to cite a case when you have an actual example. It was obviously a huge effort to get the car back out, and my question to the referee was not meant to demean that effort. But my question is; where do you draw the line?

Imagine the outcry if the gate was opened for a Panther. If a Panther car got a second 3-minute bell after their opponents had already used one up. And if the Panthers then went on and won the race, helped in no small part by that extra car that the gate was opened for. To be fair to all, where do you draw the line? Is it okay when a team only has 3 cars out there, but not if they already have 4? Is it, or should it be, a discretionary power? Or is it, or should it be, a black and white rule?

Barry B

I think it has to be black and white, as you correctly asked - where would you draw the line?

And from memory, a few years back the gate was opened for a Panther who wasnt even belted in, or in the car, or something to that effect....and there was quite the uproar about it.

Sadly heartbreak often happens in motorsport, it's the nature of the game.