|
|
Post by Aaron Drever on Dec 7, 2008 22:10:24 GMT 12
Now the dust has settled is there any reviews on the Saloon Car Title?
Was the 2nd Running of this event better than the first?
Do you think that the format needs to be looked at?
Perhaps an American Style similar to what Willy Kay ran at Bay
Park for the Super Saloons?
Was it Value for Money?
What do you predict the results to be if the re-run was not the case and if the Valvoline #3nz turned up (still not sure why he didn't, when he has 2 cars? It would not be the same without him?)
Wandering Minds want to know............ (thanks Mike ;D)
|
|
|
|
Post by Murray Guy (Grandad) on Dec 7, 2008 22:49:35 GMT 12
Now the dust has settled is there any reviews on the Saloon Car Title? Was the 2nd Running of this event better than the first? Do you think that the format needs to be looked at? Perhaps an American Style similar to what Willy Kay ran at Bay Park for the Super Saloons? Was it Value for Money? What do you predict the results to be if the re-run was not the case and if the Valvoline #3nz turned up (still not sure why he didn't, when he has 2 cars? It would not be the same without him?) Wandering Minds want to know............ (thanks Mike ;D)  The common denominators which destroyed the events both years for many (obviously not all), SNZ officials, and just a few at that! The majority, poor buggers, are getting tarred with the same brush Why anyone would want to revisit the format at this time confuses me. Focus on what we have and sort that out first. The FORMAT WAS NOT THE PROBLEM. This format, to quote Nigel Wilton (& others) allows the best opportunity for the cream to rise to the top, as has happened this year and last. It is just so frustrating that those rising to the top do so with the 'helping hand' of select officials. Equally unpleasant is the fact that it aint just cream that's rising, but a fair bit of other stuff as well! Nobody can run a replacement car, not even Steve Williams. Steve, like myself, spectated, but he had no choice! Had the first heat continued as per the rules, we certainly would have seen a different line up of victors. At best 3NZ would have (should have) started off the rear if still mobile. Not sure what McClymont would have been but chances are he still would be sporting a 1NZ on his car today, subject to avoiding any more incidents! Absolutely awesome that our sole southern friend achieved 2NZ and was well deserved. Being still mobile after the heat 1 incident he was still a strong contender, as would have been Phil Towgood. Phil Towgood and Steve Louden 9a contact which resulted in Phil retiring with a flat front right a few laps later amid a cloud of dust ...    
Aaron, the dust has far from settled and I hope that those who give a d**n about speedway, and not just their own ego power trip, whip the dust up into storm that will result is SNZ finally taking a progressive and proactive look at itself and where it's heading. |
|
|
|
Post by Aaron Drever on Dec 7, 2008 23:05:10 GMT 12
Thanks for the insight Murray, I was in attendence a the Friday meeting and thought that Huntly had done a good job of that, everything was well organised and even old Nigel was smiling at little...... It is dissapointing that an event such as this or any other can be infulenced by things outside the promotions team control  I am not sure where nexts year Saloons are heading but lets hope that they can continue the good work that the first two titles have done...... |
|
|
|
Post by Murray Guy (Grandad) on Dec 7, 2008 23:30:18 GMT 12
We have 20 saloons hurtling around a track at 140 plus KPH hell bent on being first to see the flag at the end. We have a ref in a box above that appears to be able to see very little with assistants on the ground that see even less, and apparently with little influence over outcomes! Rugby has 30 blokes chasing a ball. For the most part the ref just has to keep an eye on the general location of the ball. He has an assistant ref on either side of the field and another watching a TV screen ... and our sport doesn't even allow video evidence. GO FIGURE that out! A host track for an NZ title should have mandatory video coverage and support in 2008. The cars are getting faster, the cheats more sophisticated (on and off the track), and the stakes higher - SNZ has to prioritise their energies, and where they spend OUR money. To have drivers extending their cars length to make them legal hours before a SNZ final is ludicrous, at the same time as putting other competitors on their trailers for alleged irregularities without the right to attempt to replace or modify is straight out BS. On the length of cars - when was the last time (if ever) the transmitter location was checked  Surely a critical factor at a championship event On saloons it is supposed to be no closer than 1800 from the front of the bumper. But no, our folk focus on an air gap under a spoiler or a mirror they consider incorrectly fitted. It's time to 'kick up a dust storm!' But be warned, you won't be popular with the cheats or a few officials! |
|
|
|
Post by eddiek on Dec 8, 2008 0:03:59 GMT 12
.. and the Aussie refs still can't make a fair call ;D It's not that simple. Many tracks and most events have a single bloke with one camera who generally looks after these things - Huntly being one of these tracks, and at this point of time I'm the recognised cameraman from the club's POV. Of course some classes do attract interest from the TV production units that dot the nation, but for the most part speedway classes except the glamour classes tend to slip under their ratings radar. They can also be contracted by the club - again, expensive and the clubs are more interested in producing a DVD. For finals night, I had a second cameraman in the Tile Warehouse box (At Nigel's suggestion). Not once have I ever been approached by SNZ or the Promotors about producing video for an incident. And that in my mind is a good thing because I'm simply not in a position to turn over the camera every time someone gets snotted on the track in dubious circumstances, and be able to fulfil the requirements of which I had been contracted to do. On a few occasions after a meeting I've been asked to check something and that has invariably been by the drivers themselves. You yourself were one of them  The difficulties in video reffing by us guys arise because of the equipment we use - standard cameras being handheld camcorders - some guys use more upmarket models than others. But they all have one thing in common - they are not instantly accessible for on the spot decisions. If an incident were to be reviewed by a video ref, it would require the cameraman to leave his station, locate the clip (bit harder in my case because I havent advanced beyond digital tape) and make it back before things went green again. Not possible. Either the rest of the race goes unfilmed or several thousand people have to wait for me to cough and wheeze my way between the refs box and the video spot. A possible solution would be for SNZ themselves to station their own refs about the place for this purpose, and let them do the running, at least promotions wont miss out on their footage that way - however this still introduces an unreasonable delay to proceedings. The most practical solution therefore would be a digital recorder in the refs box, connected either by wireless link or cables to the cameramen. Most security recorders are capable of recording multiple channels simultaneously. Sounds expensive? It is. I certainly don't have the capital required to set something like that up. I sympathise with anyone who's copped a penalty unfairly and especially as I've been known to have caught the moment which would have exhonorated them, but the logistics involved using the track's own video jokers is just too great. Just while I'm on the subject of track video, someone from the Fan Van had some enquiries about the teams video from a couple of weeks back - please be patient, it is coming out, but at this time its looking unlikely to be a pre-xmas release at the track at least. Refer to the NZ Stockcar Crazy website for updates for more news about this but time is against us at the moment  |
|
|
|
Post by Murray Guy (Grandad) on Dec 8, 2008 0:17:19 GMT 12
The difficulties in video reffing by us guys arise because of the equipment we use - The competitors job isn't simple either, but we have to do it right! My suggestion / thinking re video refs was just to illustrate how some sports take the ref role seriously and invest accordingly. I did not envisage a row of amateur cam users around the track! |
|
|
|
Post by MadMarty13B on Dec 8, 2008 0:21:07 GMT 12
"I did not envisage a row of amateur cam users around the track!"
lol
|
|
|
|
Post by eddiek on Dec 8, 2008 0:29:20 GMT 12
The difficulties in video reffing by us guys arise because of the equipment we use - The competitors job isn't simple either, but we have to do it right! My suggestion / thinking re video refs was just to illustrate how some sports take the ref role seriously and invest accordingly. I did not envisage a row of amateur cam users around the track! That could be awkward with SNZ imposing a limit of infield people Seriously thats a matter that probably should be brought up with SNZ themselves but it most likely would be a couple of years before anything becomes implemented owing to all of the red tape involved. |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Dec 8, 2008 6:28:34 GMT 12
Now the dust has settled is there any reviews on the Saloon Car Title? I somehow doubt the dust has even finished rising yet.......
Was the 2nd Running of this event better than the first? Wasn't at both nights, so can't really say. There were certainly tragic similarities with cars passing scrutineering on the first night, qualifying, then found to be illegal on night 2.
Do you think that the format needs to be looked at? No.....
Perhaps an American Style similar to what Willy Kay ran at Bay Park for the Super Saloons? Personally not a great fan of American style formats at all.......although like any format, sometimes they work and sometimes they don't.
What do you predict the results to be if the re-run was not the case and if the Valvoline #3nz turned up (still not sure why he didn't, when he has 2 cars?) It never ceases to amaze me, and there were comments in the earlier thread on the meeting as well, that some people think you can change cars during a meeting.
|
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Dec 8, 2008 6:36:13 GMT 12
Not once have I ever been approached by SNZ or the Promotors about producing video for an incident. And that in my mind is a good thing because I'm simply not in a position to turn over the camera every time someone gets snotted on the track in dubious circumstances, and be able to fulfil the requirements of which I had been contracted to do. Well as video evidence is presently inadmissable........but I'm picking Murray means having people film specifically for use as evidence if necessary, which would probably mean filming from different loocations/angles than what current camera people would when, for example, preparing a DVD for public consumption. |
|
|
|
Post by porry41 on Dec 8, 2008 7:13:32 GMT 12
i dont think the dust has settled .may try to sweep it under the carpet.but some very vicious rumours around .what is needed re refs is 4 spoters.1 on each corner in radio contact with the tower .ref in tower has assistant but he is no good in the infeild he sees less than the one in the tower ???suggest at huntly 1 in pit crew stand 1 on corners 2 & 3 & 1 in fanvan /main gate erea these are high up positions & have excellent views of the track .hic
|
|
|
|
Post by lunchbox on Dec 8, 2008 8:17:46 GMT 12
Refs on the infeild have a very narrow veiw angle,and the overall picture is missed.(from personal experiance)
They must be put at the top of the enbankment on each corner.That way more things that go on will not be missed.
Refs are not needed in the infeild anymore.Clerk of The Course and his assistant do all the running round at start and yellows.
SNZ why not trail the idea?Look at horse racing,they have towers all round the track with cameras and assistants in them.
Something positive from Lunchbox.
|
|
|
|
Post by carwrecker on Dec 8, 2008 8:32:27 GMT 12
In car cams are now legal for use and as a result the footage must be made available to SNZ upon request .
As a point of interest also I do not think it says any where in the rule book that Video evidence is not admisable in a protest situation (happy to be corrected if I am wrong).
Perhaps we are nor as far out of date as some would suggest
|
|
|
|
Post by Abb0 on Dec 8, 2008 9:11:12 GMT 12
Something positive from Lunchbox. You say that as though it's unusual |
|
|
|
Post by sherylandrobert on Dec 8, 2008 10:27:15 GMT 12
As i said in a previous thread its a shame that we log in in search of nz title results and we have to wade thru politics and disillusioned competitors & spectators,i have said for years (racing since 1980) that we need refs on outfield,like other sports but i have the wrong name & am just a small fry.WHY? is it so hard to instigate change in our sport,why wont people try new things?!!!!!!!!ROBERT
|
|
|
|
Post by tank11 on Dec 8, 2008 12:24:38 GMT 12
In the past, refs have borrowed my camera to view evidence, although it was to back their view.
I was told they had made their decision and just wanted to check.
|
|
|
|
Post by rebel1 on Dec 8, 2008 16:43:47 GMT 12
Aaron from our point of view the meeting was ok. Good, but not great. We enjoyed the racing and congratulations to Brent, 26E and 46M. As in just about any champs there is luck, misfortune, frustration and anguish and this event certainly had all of that and more. A lot has been said about the officiating and the rulings that were made and I will leave that to those with far greater knowledge and experience than I in such matters. IMHO the most frustrating issue was the track, on both nights. The first nite was one laned and as I have stated in a earlier thread the talent of Phil, Brent and Steve was evident on a track that didnt allow a lot of passing. They were definitely the stand outs and qualified top in each group. The second nite saw more water sitting on the surface of the track which was fine but there wasnt enough wheel packing done to remove it. In fact there was a 20 minute period prior to 7pm when Mel Hills gave a very interesting and informative talk when there was no cars on the track and the track was obviously in no state to race on then there was a 35 minute wheel pack prior to the repercharge which was just farcial ! To have two cars that were trying to be the first to finish on a track where one commentator said he had not seen saloons race so slowly was a complete farce. I felt sorry for the second car ( 29m ) who was on a hiding to nothing when he got behind. Things we liked about the NZ champs : Racing was good Commentators did a very good job and there were some excellent interviews The commemorative glasses were a nice idea Support classes offered some good racing Prizes put up by Placemakers Nigel Ross trying to race in the consolation race ;D Things we didnt like : The track. The programme. For a NZ champs it was disappointing. No Tshirts. The lady in the fan van told my wife that she didnt know if someone was doing them or not on Friday night I know there was none last year at WP either but this is the NZ champs and surely a chance to promote the event. We would have bought two had they been available. Was it good value Aaron? From our perspective we gave it a 6.5 out of 10 for the two nights. The racing when it finally happened was good. I am not sure why but Red really seems to be struggling in preparing a track that offers consistency in racing from week to week despite working really hard to do so. He deserves more success than he is getting currently. |
|
|
|
Post by Aaron Drever on Dec 8, 2008 18:59:55 GMT 12
Aaron from our point of view the meeting was ok. Good, but not great. We enjoyed the racing and congratulations to Brent, 26E and 46M. As in just about any champs there is luck, misfortune, frustration and anguish and this event certainly had all of that and more. A lot has been said about the officiating and the rulings that were made and I will leave that to those with far greater knowledge and experience than I in such matters. IMHO the most frustrating issue was the track, on both nights. The first nite was one laned and as I have stated in a earlier thread the talent of Phil, Brent and Steve was evident on a track that didnt allow a lot of passing. They were definitely the stand outs and qualified top in each group. The second nite saw more water sitting on the surface of the track which was fine but there wasnt enough wheel packing done to remove it. In fact there was a 20 minute period prior to 7pm when Mel Hills gave a very interesting and informative talk when there was no cars on the track and the track was obviously in no state to race on then there was a 35 minute wheel pack prior to the repercharge which was just farcial ! To have two cars that were trying to be the first to finish on a track where one commentator said he had not seen saloons race so slowly was a complete farce. I felt sorry for the second car ( 29m ) who was on a hiding to nothing when he got behind. Things we liked about the NZ champs : Racing was good Commentators did a very good job and there were some excellent interviews The commemorative glasses were a nice idea Support classes offered some good racing Prizes put up by Placemakers Nigel Ross trying to race in the consolation race ;D Things we didnt like : The track. The programme. For a NZ champs it was disappointing. No Tshirts. The lady in the fan van told my wife that she didnt know if someone was doing them or not on Friday night I know there was none last year at WP either but this is the NZ champs and surely a chance to promote the event. We would have bought two had they been available. Was it good value Aaron? From our perspective we gave it a 6.5 out of 10 for the two nights. The racing when it finally happened was good. I am not sure why but Red really seems to be struggling in preparing a track that offers consistency in racing from week to week despite working really hard to do so. He deserves more success than he is getting currently. Good Honest Post - Great Points on here and food for thought for any promotion team |
|
|
|
Post by eddiek on Dec 8, 2008 19:13:59 GMT 12
Well as video evidence is presently inadmissable........but I'm picking Murray means having people film specifically for use as evidence if necessary, which would probably mean filming from different loocations/angles than what current camera people would when, for example, preparing a DVD for public consumption. Although Murray specifically said that the hosting tracks should provide coverage of nationals for this purpose. Huntly did precisely that. Red was very specific with what he wanted. I agree with the idea in principle - but I believe that should be SNZ's responsibility, not the track's by virtue of the fact that it IS an SNZ national title. And then what happens when a call has to be made? Do they assess it during the 10 minutes post race and ammend the results before they become official? Or try and deal with it on the spot, incurring delays to proceedings? The idea certainly has its merits and I too would like to see it implemented. back on topic, once the track came right I believe I watched some of the best racing in a very long time. Its only a pity that the track has been a bit of a handful lately (if that's not understating the obvious what is?) because of that - and the consequent reshuffling of the schedules many times afterwards led to a bit more of a hurried procession between the classes, one driver complained to me about the lack of time he had to adjust the setup of his car in between the consolations owing to the reshuffling that went on - his performance suffered a little as a result. I think with the way the meeting went, things were handled fairly well considering what Huntly must have been up against at the start of the night. The dealings with a soggy track was certainly a lot better managed than it was the week before. Friday: faultless, everything looked good, ran even better, the track slicked off a bit during the races a little, but for the most part the cream certainly rose to the top, with the defending 1, 2 and 3nz's topping their respective group tables. |
|
|
|
Post by BarryB on Dec 8, 2008 19:16:49 GMT 12
Well as video evidence is presently inadmissable........but I'm picking Murray means having people film specifically for use as evidence if necessary, which would probably mean filming from different loocations/angles than what current camera people would when, for example, preparing a DVD for public consumption. Although Murray specifically said that the hosting tracks should provide coverage of nationals for this purpose. I agree with the idea in principle - but I believe that should be SNZ's responsibility, not the track's by virtue of the fact that it IS an SNZ national title. Agreed, 100% |
|
Surely a critical factor at a championship event 
