Super Rally Regulations.

**BertMk2** · 23 Jan 2006, 11:40 (Ref:1507218)

In the light of Loebs comeback from "retirement" to finish second on the Monte what do you think of the Super Rally regulations? A good idea or a complete travesty?

As far as I'm concerned they're just plain wrong. At club level if a car retires they are sometimes allowed to rejoin and take the remaining stages but they'll not feature in the final results. That's a good thing - competitors get more stage miles but the overall result is not influenced.

At WRC level retirement should see the car excluded from the results, if they want to run the remaining stages I don't have a problem with that - but a car that's retired finishing second? It's just wrong.

shambles · 23 Jan 2006, 12:09 (Ref:1507264)

I think it needs a penalty, that is more severe. I think a hefty time penalty should suffice, twenty seconds or so. I don't think the car should be excluded from the results, rather more that the chances of success are greatly reduced.

Roundy Mooney · 23 Jan 2006, 12:22 (Ref:1507274)

Quote:

Originally Posted by martin-1

I think it needs a penalty, that is more severe. I think a hefty time penalty should suffice, twenty seconds or so. I don't think the car should be excluded from the results, rather more that the chances of success are greatly reduced.

Presume you mean 20 minutes Martin.

redshoes · 23 Jan 2006, 13:45 (Ref:1507334)

As I said in the Monte Carlo thread, you could lose more than 5 mins through a simple puncture. The penalty isn't enough.

That said the top ten were still fairly close and Loeb is a very good driver. It will be interesting to see how it works at other events.

shambles · 23 Jan 2006, 17:22 (Ref:1507460)

haha yeah I do Roundy - jeez, I always do that.

silver bullet · 23 Jan 2006, 18:52 (Ref:1507521)

I agree totaly with martin-1. Yes let them back in by all means but there is no way, I say, no way, that a car under the super rally ruling should get on the podium.

peespeed · 23 Jan 2006, 19:58 (Ref:1507572)

They should be allowed back into the event but not to score points or get on the podium, minimum of 15 - 20 mins of a time penalty.

On a similar topic would people think the same if Matt Wilson had been in a points scoring position and clawed his way back up the leaderboard after his "retirement"??

rdjones · 23 Jan 2006, 20:40 (Ref:1507604)

As I said yesterday I am not fan. For me if you make a mistake and crash out or have a problem you shouldn't be able to re-start the event.

If you are out you are out, looking at the Monte, Solberg went out with a blown engine and couldn't re-start on Saturday morning, where as Leob slide off and could. So why couldn't Solberg put a fresh engine in overnight and re-start on Saturday morning like Loeb did?

shambles · 23 Jan 2006, 21:16 (Ref:1507630)

I think that for me, if it was Loeb, Wilson - or anybody else, i'd be fundamentally opposed to the system as it stands at current. They could get a perfect situation in rallying if the simple change in the rules making it twenty minutes. In that, we could still see full fields - and great drives, but we'd also see fair results.

The problem comes when driver's say, no I can't be bothered to risk my life - for no reward.

chunder · 23 Jan 2006, 22:52 (Ref:1507709)

I think the system needs looking at, what is the point in a twenty minute penalty for the works cars, they will still probably pullout coz if they cant score points they will retire anyway!
I think Loebs case is pretty unique though, he is a master of Monte and Marcus has never won a tarmac event before I think.
I think it should be relevant to the error made aswell, if its a huge accident then a bigger penalty than say losing a wheel on a rstage and being stopped on the road section for instance!

WJM · 23 Jan 2006, 23:09 (Ref:1507716)

Quote:

Originally Posted by chunder

I think the system needs looking at, what is the point in a twenty minute penalty for the works cars, they will still probably pullout coz if they cant score points they will retire anyway!

If he crashed at the first stage of the day he would have gotten 30 mins penalty. But even teams who retire early, return the next day, so your argument is already proven wrong. I think the whole rule is ridiculous and takes the sport out of the sport. But if they really want to continue with this rule they should make it something like half an hour penalty fixed, regardless if it's the first or last stage of the day. That way the rule is 'fair' and we won't see travesties like this.

silver bullet · 25 Jan 2006, 10:32 (Ref:1508690)

Quote:

Originally Posted by peespeed

They should be allowed back into the event but not to score points or get on the podium, minimum of 15 - 20 mins of a time penalty.

On a similar topic would people think the same if Matt Wilson had been in a points scoring position and clawed his way back up the leaderboard after his "retirement"??

Yes I would feel the same whoever the driver was. I also agree with chunder the penalties should be less severe for a road section breakdown. I mean, a car is allowed to restart a rally if it crashes on a stage, but another one may be excluded if one of the service crew as much as touches it on a road section.

View Poll Results: Are Super Rally Regulations a good idea?
Yes.	1	3.70%
No.	8	29.63%
Yes but the penalty should be more severe.	18	66.67%
Not bothered.	0	0%
Voters: 27. You may not vote on this poll

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Fia Regulations	REALIST	Racers Forum	3	26 Jan 2005 13:18
'New' GTS Regulations	JAG	Sportscar & GT Racing	17	14 Jan 2004 23:10
Regulations	Edmonton	Formula One	12	14 Dec 2003 12:42
New Regulations	Cobra	Formula One	7	7 Mar 2003 06:15
LM Regulations	Abs	Sportscar & GT Racing	1	21 Jan 2002 17:38