You Will Respect My Authoritah...

[GTRMagic]

Interesting to see that V8SC has rewritten the rulebook (again) to make the handling of penalties less prescriptive, to allow more leeway for the DSO to make his own judgement on incidents as they may occur

Story Here

Perhaps not surprisingly, Mr Jones Here and Mr Dane Here fully support the new system...

The funny thing is, the prose in each of the teamowners' stories talks to consistency of penalty, yet allowing the penalty to be at the discretion of the DSO actually likely has the potental to make the outcomes even more ambiguous (i.e. polarising, and wrong/right depending where you sit) than ever before.

The new 2014 penalty list is Here for your reference

You might have thought this stuff should be VERY straightforward and simple. But it hasnt played out that way so far. Rules on the run suck.. and confuse the teams, confuse the fans, makes a messy pot of stew

So... why cant the powers that be, with the input of their teams, list every rule failure that is possible, how it shall be detected, whether it is to be reviewed during or after the race, the punishment to be inflicted for each of these.

Clarify the wording in the main operations manuals to clearly state that a car controller CANNOT touch a car at any time (unless it runs him over, which might inspire another, pit lane foul penalty) so as not to make that event interpretational.

Write the rules tightly. Enforce them consistently.

They should be invisible, if X happens, Y is the result.. and the #7-ites dont need to be judge and jury as to whether an event was a foul or not.

Or is that too simple?

[Trevor]

well said

[Umai Naa]

Decisions should not made from TV coverage, unless it's footage captured from the compulsory in car camera.

[GTRMagic]

Originally Posted by Umai Naa

Decisions should not made from TV coverage, unless it's footage captured from the compulsory in car camera.

Absolutely, but how many times does #7 dwell on some event or other in the broadcast, talk as if something has happened, and then the powers that be call in that car for an infringement...

If the blokes & blokettes dishing out the penalties cannot receive all of the information (vision, data traces, driver testimony) when it comes time to make a decision about an incident, it NEEDS to be AFTER the race when the event is adjudicated upon!

[chavez]

Originally Posted by GTRMagic

Absolutely, but how many times does #7 dwell on some event or other in the broadcast, talk as if something has happened, and then the powers that be call in that car for an infringement...

If the blokes & blokettes dishing out the penalties cannot receive all of the information (vision, data traces, driver testimony) when it comes time to make a decision about an incident, it NEEDS to be AFTER the race when the event is adjudicated upon!

The problem is that the officials are far too involved.

Unless there is a breach on safety grounds I am not sure the officials need to be involved at all.

On track incidents should stay with the hands on the drivers / teams to manage.

Nerf you fellow competitor off a couple of times then don't complain if the same happens to you.

It is how NASCAR has been run for over 50 years and while at times we see a little craziness the top drivers race each other clean out of respect - I can't see why V8 Supercars drivers can't do the same.

But perhaps more important is that this changing of results after the race has concluded has got to stop.

Which other sports (well there is one) regulary changes the scores after the game ended as much a V8 Supercars?

If a matter can't be adjudicated prior to the conclusion of the race then let the results stand.

[Axeman444]

Originally Posted by chavez

The problem is that the officials are far too involved.

Unless there is a breach on safety grounds I am not sure the officials need to be involved at all.

On track incidents should stay with the hands on the drivers / teams to manage.

Nerf you fellow competitor off a couple of times then don't complain if the same happens to you.

It is how NASCAR has been run for over 50 years and while at times we see a little craziness the top drivers race each other clean out of respect - I can't see why V8 Supercars drivers can't do the same.

But perhaps more important is that this changing of results after the race has concluded has got to stop.

Which other sports (well there is one) regulary changes the scores after the game ended as much a V8 Supercars?

If a matter can't be adjudicated prior to the conclusion of the race then let the results stand.

Ludicrous. To take your NASCAR comparison, remember a certain altercation between Ambrose and R. Gordon at Montreal several years ago, almost certain win for Ambrose taken away due to Gordon being of the belief Ambrose had wrecked him. Your also suggesting last corner banzai moves should go unpunished?

[chavez]

Originally Posted by Axeman444

Ludicrous. To take your NASCAR comparison, remember a certain altercation between Ambrose and R. Gordon at Montreal several years ago, almost certain win for Ambrose taken away due to Gordon being of the belief Ambrose had wrecked him. Your also suggesting last corner banzai moves should go unpunished?

Yes, because history has shown they are so rare because most rational people understand that the short term gain of such antics does not lead to respect amongst one's peers.

And the need for respect amongst one's peer is a natural human characteristic.

Remember under the current NASCAR system a driver could conceivably run into every car on the track in a attempt to win, but it doesn't happen.

Most drivers display a healthy competitive respect with their fellow racers and I see no reason to believe why V8 Supercar drivers cannot show the same respect.

[Axeman444]

and respect was why Marcos Ambrose thumped Casey Mears 2 weeks ago?

[chavez]

Originally Posted by Axeman444

and respect was why Marcos Ambrose thumped Casey Mears 2 weeks ago?

An unusual and rare occurrence.

How many times have drivers come to blows in top level Australia racing? Perhaps a mere handful.

[eduardo1]

Originally Posted by chavez

An unusual and rare occurrence.

How many times have drivers come to blows in top level Australia racing? Perhaps a mere handful.

The problem with your theory is that by removing sanction everybody you're assuming drivers will still behave themselves. That also assumes that both parties of an incident would have the same perspective of fault.

Take Russell Ingall and David Wall - Ingall actually blames Wall for that because Wall defended his position. So if David Wall performs a get-square at Perth, Ingall will then think he owes Wall two shots instead of being even.

Most competitors in all sports treat each other with respect. But there are always incidents.

Nearly all head-high tackles in NRL are accidental and at worst careless. So would you advocate that the penalty for committing an accidental head-high should be paid for with a deliberate one by your victim and both should go unpunished by authorities? Because that's basically what you're saying should happen in V8s.

People make mistakes and sometimes they act intentionally. But in a sport that has a high potential risk factor such as motorsport, the idea that deliberate retribution should be tolerated is dangerous.

You can argue the merits of individual incidents or a trend of officials being over-zealous in punishing minor incidents - but you can't possibly argue for a law of the jungle, eye-for-an-eye approach where everyone just performs their own get squares.

[275 GTB-4]

Originally Posted by chavez

Yes, because history has shown they are so rare because most rational people understand that the short term gain of such antics does not lead to respect amongst one's peers.

And the need for respect amongst one's peer is a natural human characteristic.

Remember under the current NASCAR system a driver could conceivably run into every car on the track in a attempt to win, but it doesn't happen.

Most drivers display a healthy competitive respect with their fellow racers and I see no reason to believe why V8 Supercar drivers cannot show the same respect.

What a crock

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by eduardo1

The problem with your theory is that by removing sanction everybody you're assuming drivers will still behave themselves. That also assumes that both parties of an incident would have the same perspective of fault.

Take Russell Ingall and David Wall - Ingall actually blames Wall for that because Wall defended his position. So if David Wall performs a get-square at Perth, Ingall will then think he owes Wall two shots instead of being even.

Most competitors in all sports treat each other with respect. But there are always incidents.

Nearly all head-high tackles in NRL are accidental and at worst careless. So would you advocate that the penalty for committing an accidental head-high should be paid for with a deliberate one by your victim and both should go unpunished by authorities? Because that's basically what you're saying should happen in V8s.

People make mistakes and sometimes they act intentionally. But in a sport that has a high potential risk factor such as motorsport, the idea that deliberate retribution should be tolerated is dangerous.

You can argue the merits of individual incidents or a trend of officials being over-zealous in punishing minor incidents - but you can't possibly argue for a law of the jungle, eye-for-an-eye approach where everyone just performs their own get squares.

Agree with this - anarchy when we're talking about cars of this weight and power is going to lead to mayhem and worse.

Many of your points support the need for the DSO and stewards to have some discretion as some incidents might be accidental, some careless, some wilful etc and there are often differences in regard to circumstances - discretion allows the officials to deal with that and (hopefully) still manage consistency.

Whether or not they are achieving consistency at the moment is I guess a point of debate........

[chavez]

Okay guys, so motor racing was run for a hundred years - that's right, one hundred years, before the widespread introduction of driving standards observers, drive through penalties for on track behaviour or driver mistakes etc.

It must have been absolute carnage with drivers constantly running each into each other or off the road.

There were the extreme cases where officials had to take action, 3 incidents involving Tony Longhurst come to mind, but there was never a need to investigate every incident or contact between drivers.

And it worked.

[eduardo1]

Originally Posted by chavez

Okay guys, so motor racing was run for a hundred years - that's right, one hundred years, before the widespread introduction of driving standards observers, drive through penalties for on track behaviour or driver mistakes etc.

It must have been absolute carnage with drivers constantly running each into each other or off the road.

There were the extreme cases where officials had to take action, 3 incidents involving Tony Longhurst come to mind, but there was never a need to investigate every incident or contact between drivers.

And it worked.

The first auto race was in 1887. So there were no driving standards enforced until 1987? Nobody got a black flag, bad sportsmanship flag, suspended, fined or other sanctions for poor driving before 1987 except in what you vaguely describe as 'extreme' circumstances?

Is that really your argument?

[Tourer]

Originally Posted by chavez

Okay guys, so motor racing was run for a hundred years - that's right, one hundred years, before the widespread introduction of driving standards observers, drive through penalties for on track behaviour or driver mistakes etc.

It must have been absolute carnage with drivers constantly running each into each other or off the road.

There were the extreme cases where officials had to take action, 3 incidents involving Tony Longhurst come to mind, but there was never a need to investigate every incident or contact between drivers.

And it worked.

Sorry mate - not even remotely correct.

There were plenty of punishments handed out, black flags, disqualifications, driver bans etc etc going back to even pre war days.

[chavez]

It is the constant requirement to review every incident that is my concern.

Officials have always had a role to play but since the early to mid nineties the role and influence has dramatically increased. Correct?

On track incidents that would have hardly raised an eye prior to that time now result in penalties. Correct?

To give an example, there were a number of incidents involving Jim Richards in the '87 ATCC that went unpunished - it would have been highly unusual had they resulted in penalties at that period of time - but under today's rules he would have received penalties that may have costed him the championship.

The '85 Calder ATCC round is often cited has one of the best ATCC races of all time. Under today's rules it would have resulted in numerous drive through penalties and would not be remembered as fondly.

And could the result of Bathurst '85 been different, if as under today's rules, John Goss had received a drive through penalty for turning around the lapped Barry Jones Commodore (I hope I have that right), letting Brock through into the lead?

You may not agree that we should return to the way things were, but I am finding difficult to believe that the level of influence officials have today is the same as it has always been.

[Tourer]

I was at Calder in 85 and really don't recall it being all that special although it was definitely spiteful with plenty of panel work - mostly minor though and not tipping other cars off the track.

I'm not saying that the level of influence today is the same as always - that is just the way the world turns as technology and expectations change. Back in the mid 80s, road traffic tended to roll for the most part above the speed limit unless there were blue lights about, trucks didn't have speed limiters etc - now we have cameras of all kids, limiters, laser etc. The monitoring tools are more advanced these days so more things get seen.

It's the same on the race track with many more cameras for the TV feed, in car cameras, judicial cameras in cars, data logging on every car etc etc.

It's just the way of the world in general - the important thing is to use those various information sources in a consistent manner.

[eduardo1]

I'd add that back then officials could only judge what they actually saw, and usually it was off the back of the flag marshall reports.

So by circumstance official action was far more subjective and inconsistent.

With the extra professionalism and technology, the ability to review all incidents and arrive at a confident conclusion is increased.

So if there's a lot more official intervention, which I don't disagree there is, it's due to the ability to actually do that rather than any overwhelming change in attitude.