No wheels off...
Discussion
tristancliffe said:
Quite a few drivers were penalised for Exceeding Track Limits at Snetterton. Several of which were having a minor accident and losing chunks of time in the process. I'd have thought that was penalty enough, but apparently not. You don't have to gain an advantage or do it on purpose to suffer the wrath of the rules.
And that's just daft.
That must be an interesting conversation then. Any guesses about what "justifiable reason" actually means?And that's just daft.
Bert
The rule change is pretty simple. It changes how far off the track a car is allowed to go. Last year a car needed to have some part of it (usually a wheel) actually on the track inside the white line. So you could run wide provided some part of your car was still n the circuit.
This year, none of the car is allowed over the white line, unless there is a curb. You are allowed to run over the white line onto the curb, but not part may go past the outside edge of the curb.
This is all a bit arbitrary and now different to the rest of the racing world.
The other thing that has changed is the enforcement regime. The powers that be (vaguely a mixture of MSA and circuit owner) have decided to put in place a rigorous enforcement of this rule.
As the person with "I started this thread so it's mine" rights, I assert that the circuit limits didn't need changing, but the rules needed to be consistently and properly enforced.
HTH
BErt
This year, none of the car is allowed over the white line, unless there is a curb. You are allowed to run over the white line onto the curb, but not part may go past the outside edge of the curb.
This is all a bit arbitrary and now different to the rest of the racing world.
The other thing that has changed is the enforcement regime. The powers that be (vaguely a mixture of MSA and circuit owner) have decided to put in place a rigorous enforcement of this rule.
As the person with "I started this thread so it's mine" rights, I assert that the circuit limits didn't need changing, but the rules needed to be consistently and properly enforced.
HTH
BErt
The penalties are the same this year as last year.
woof said:
The penalties are severe.
First offence - no action
Next report: warning flag (difficult to spot)
Next report: 5 sec penalty
Next report: Drive-through penalty
Next report: Black flag.
And it's simply doesn't improve the racing. All it does is make life for officials and racers more difficult.
First offence - no action
Next report: warning flag (difficult to spot)
Next report: 5 sec penalty
Next report: Drive-through penalty
Next report: Black flag.
And it's simply doesn't improve the racing. All it does is make life for officials and racers more difficult.
Munter said:
I don't think the circuit limits have changed really. Just what's considered legal car positioning has.
When it suits drivers (crossing the finish line), then any part of the car over the line is considered right. When it doesn't suit drivers (cutting corners/running wide to carry speed), any part not over the line is right.
So it's not made it arbitrary at all. It's now far more in line with what a general person would consider within or outside of the track limits. For the old rule not to be arbitrary, the winner of a race would be the person where the rear of their car crossed the finish line 1st.
As it is now the driver can aim to stay inside the lines, and the kirb is their legal safety margin because nobody is inch perfect every lap. 1st nose across the line wins. Much less arbitrary to my eyes.
That's just daft talk.When it suits drivers (crossing the finish line), then any part of the car over the line is considered right. When it doesn't suit drivers (cutting corners/running wide to carry speed), any part not over the line is right.
So it's not made it arbitrary at all. It's now far more in line with what a general person would consider within or outside of the track limits. For the old rule not to be arbitrary, the winner of a race would be the person where the rear of their car crossed the finish line 1st.
As it is now the driver can aim to stay inside the lines, and the kirb is their legal safety margin because nobody is inch perfect every lap. 1st nose across the line wins. Much less arbitrary to my eyes.
The limits have changed. Read them on page 1 of the thread.
Crossing the line to finish is completely irrelevant.
It mostly suits drivers to do all they can to win the race. That's what racing is. This involves driving within the rules and maximising what you can do under them. Anything else is daft. It involves cheating to the extent you can get away with it if you are so minded. That's what rule enforcement is about.
This all has absolutely nothing to do with what a general person thinks. It is to do with how the rules are written.
I didn't say the new rule was arbitrary, I said the change was fairly arbitrary.
HTH
Bert
Dave Brand said:
No they are not - last year the black & white flag was not shown until the third infringement.
You could well be right, my mistake - I never saw any for me last year.Apparently I got loads, I'm so short-sighted, I could hardly see the black and white flag and certainly couldn't see the number
Bert
Well I can certainly see your point. But what about the curbs then? And do you think it was really done to fall in line with what the public would think makes more sense?
I think the general race watching public are completely at home with the old definition. They don't get confused by formula 1.
Hey ho, interesting debate!
Bert
I think the general race watching public are completely at home with the old definition. They don't get confused by formula 1.
Hey ho, interesting debate!
Bert
I just don't think that rule "no part of a car can leave the track, unless it's a curb or unless the driver has a justifiable reason" has any more logic than "the driver may not deliberately take all 4 wheels over the white line".
I'd argue the second is no better than the first and certainly it doesn't bring any benefits to the driver or the spectator that justify the bother of the change. Cost/benefit if non-existant.
But I'm just going round and round on this one
Bert
I'd argue the second is no better than the first and certainly it doesn't bring any benefits to the driver or the spectator that justify the bother of the change. Cost/benefit if non-existant.
But I'm just going round and round on this one
Bert
nooooooo, you don't understand the vision of the great Lord Palmer. Our places of racing should be places of beauty and tranquility. All beautifully ordered and not a blade of grass out of place.
FFS get a grip guys. We are there to go racing. If it needs to be that pristine, create proper runoffs like we see at proper circuits. If it's grass, it'll get eaten up.
Words fail me.
Or maybe they don't.
Bert
FFS get a grip guys. We are there to go racing. If it needs to be that pristine, create proper runoffs like we see at proper circuits. If it's grass, it'll get eaten up.
Words fail me.
Or maybe they don't.
Bert
NJH said:
Definitely, only driven there once four years ago and Corum instantly became my favourite corner in the country now of course ruined into something completely different.
I rather like the current Corum. In fact I love the Snett 300. In the Radical it's excellent. Getting flat from Nelson as far as you can before the madness of braking for Murrays is just utterly intoxicating.On the topic of JP bashing, I'm very critical of his approach with the new rule, but I think what he has done generally with the MSV circuits is excellent. So I'm not bashing him *just* because it's good sport!
Bert
Gassing Station | UK Club Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff