Who is at fault here?

Who is at fault here?

Author
Discussion

Sea Demon

Original Poster:

1,156 posts

212 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
A race at Brands Hatch yesterday, the driver of car behind took to the grass coming up to the flag to try & win the race, didn't work out.

The car filming took the win 0.7 seconds ahead of the Escort which crossed the line in 2nd place whilst crashing etc - no contact between the 2 cars apart from a slight tap to the front left of the BMW when the Escort goes across it.

Driver of the Escort appealed the win of the BMW and was then handed the win, the driver of the BMW was handed a 5 sec penalty - right or wrong? You decide.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrwJDchf6yQ&fe...

Edited by Sea Demon on Monday 6th November 11:15


Edited by Sea Demon on Monday 6th November 11:39

fat80b

2,242 posts

220 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
Sea Demon said:
A race at Brands Hatch yesterday, the driver of car behind took to the grass coming up to the flag to try & win the race, didn't work out.

The car filming took the win 0.7 seconds ahead of the Escort which crossed the line in 2nd place whilst crashing etc - no contact between the 2 cars apart from a slight tap to the front left of the BMW when the Escort goes across it.

Driver of the Escort appealed the win of the BMW and was then handed the win, the driver of the BMW was handed a 5 sec penalty - right or wrong? You decide.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lrwJDchf6yQ&fe...

Edited by Sea Demon on Monday 6th November 11:15


Edited by Sea Demon on Monday 6th November 11:39
You've edited the post twice but I still don't understand what you are saying happened.

The car filming - this is the escort?

There was contact - in that the BMW coming round the outside came across the car filming and they touched?

what do you mean in the last sentence. Why did the escort driver have to appeal anything - he crossed the line first right ?

Please have another go at explaining.

Sea Demon

Original Poster:

1,156 posts

212 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
fat80b said:
You've edited the post twice but I still don't understand what you are saying happened.

The car filming - this is the escort?

There was contact - in that the BMW coming round the outside came across the car filming and they touched?

what do you mean in the last sentence. Why did the escort driver have to appeal anything - he crossed the line first right ?

Please have another go at explaining.
Read it again and it makes sense to me laugh

The video shows what happened, the Escort crossed the line in 2nd place 0.7 secs behind the car filming which is the BMW.

I'm asking, was the driver of the car that crashed, right to appeal and was it right that he was then handed the win and the race winner stripped of his win and given a 5 sec penalty?

liner33

10,642 posts

201 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
Looks to me that the Escort turned into the BMW and that the BMW was not at fault , but video cant be deceiving and I wasn't there

Trev450

6,314 posts

171 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
If, as you say, the Escort took to the grass in an attempt to overtake, surely track limits were exceeded.

HustleRussell

24,602 posts

159 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
Sea Demon said:
Read it again and it makes sense to me laugh

The video shows what happened, the Escort crossed the line in 2nd place 0.7 secs behind the car filming which is the BMW.

I'm asking, was the driver of the car that crashed, right to appeal and was it right that he was then handed the win and the race winner stripped of his win and given a 5 sec penalty?
The BMW did not move to defend early enough and was not on the normal racing line

The Escort was IMO sufficiently alongside to have been afforded racing room i.e. a car's width

Ergo the Escort driver was right to appeal and the stewards' decision to reverse the result was justified.

geeks

9,122 posts

138 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
No real way to tell who is at fault without onboard from the Escort(?) car and a useful onboard shot of the BMW (i.e seeing his inputs)

Its the main reason our regs (BMW Compact Cup) mandate that there must be a camera onboard and that it must show a clear view out of the windscreen and of the drivers controls.

chunder27

2,309 posts

207 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
You would think Birley would have more patience, he has probably won hundreds of similar races at Brands and clearly had a huge performance advantage. He pretty much always wins this race series and did at Lydden too.

BMW was blocking a little to close the gap, but knew he could not really block too much.

Birley clearly went the long way round, and tried to perhaps chop off a little early, most passes on that straight are on the right, Birley maybe decided to go left to fool the BMW man.

The main factor here would be did the BM turn to the left at all once the move was being made, as that would be a deliberate move to block and then to spin.

chunder27

2,309 posts

207 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
What you also need to know is that there is previous between the two.


fat80b

2,242 posts

220 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
HustleRussell said:
The BMW did not move to defend early enough and was not on the normal racing line

The Escort was IMO sufficiently alongside to have been afforded racing room i.e. a car's width

Ergo the Escort driver was right to appeal and the stewards' decision to reverse the result was justified.
I've looked at the video a few times now and agree. Also listened to the audio which is quite telling...

My reading of it is that the driver of the lead car was watching his mirrors (evidenced by the scream of "arrgh" as soon as the Escort starts coming round the left hand side)

At which point, the driver of the lead car knew he was squeezing the second car towards the grass and shouldn't be surprised that it ended with an incident. i.e it was somewhat deliberate.

Based on this, the stewards probably got it right.

chunder27 said:
What you also need to know is that there is previous between the two.
Yes smile Interesting that the next clip youtube showed me was another incident between the same pair of drivers.

cat with a hat

1,484 posts

117 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
Escort driver was at fault in both of those clips.

He also seems to think hes playing Forza/Gran Turismo with the damage setting off.






Edited by cat with a hat on Monday 6th November 13:43

Jacobyte

4,718 posts

241 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
This angle appears to show that the BMW gave the Escort plenty of room to its left and the Escort turned across the front of the BMW:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gKHomynorGc


Thurbs

2,780 posts

221 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
100% the BMW fault. There was room as exampled by the external view. You can see on the BMW video the driver turns in to the Escort. At 57s the BMW closes the door way too late and tips the escort around.

Having raced against the Escort and seeing the performance differential on the video, the BMW should have made one move, admitted defeat and come second (which is what happened, just without the big bill for the circuit and drivers.

Thurbs

2,780 posts

221 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
Watched the second video. BMW driver at fault there also.

HustleRussell

24,602 posts

159 months

Monday 6th November 2017
quotequote all
Agree with Thurbs, looked to me like the BMW driver very much saw the Escort coming, saw that it was going to beat them to the line, knew that a decisive defensive move one way or the other would be futile and resorted to crowding it off the track.

Steve H

5,225 posts

194 months

Tuesday 7th November 2017
quotequote all
geeks said:
No real way to tell who is at fault without onboard from the Escort(?) car and a useful onboard shot of the BMW (i.e seeing his inputs)

Its the main reason our regs (BMW Compact Cup) mandate that there must be a camera onboard and that it must show a clear view out of the windscreen and of the drivers controls.
^^^ This. The onboard and the video taken from trackside really don't show the detail required to know how the drivers were reacting to each others proximity.

chunder27

2,309 posts

207 months

Tuesday 7th November 2017
quotequote all
The thing people are ignoring here is the massive performance difference between the cars.

Not sure why Birley was so far behind, but you can tell from the footage his car has considerable more power, and that requires a different approach from the BMW driver, he has to block and cut off as there is no way he can combat the power difference.

That allied to the fact there I clearly needle here, as you can tell from the second clip when Birtley rams it up the inside of Druids and the BMW closes the door as much as he can and clearly doesn't mind contact, you can tell there is more to this than simply racing.

Do they use a handicap system?

Sea Demon

Original Poster:

1,156 posts

212 months

Tuesday 7th November 2017
quotequote all
Birley started the race last - the grounds of the appeal were dangerous driving & that would constitute more than a 5 sec penalty, Im sure its in the MSA book as a ban or a disqualification but the series is as bent as Birleys car.

andrewcliffe

936 posts

223 months

Tuesday 7th November 2017
quotequote all
I don't know why but Birley did not set a time during qualifying, so started at the back of the grid (17th).

At the end of lap 1 he was 4th, 4s off the lead.
Lap 2 - 3rd, 5s off the lead
3 - 2nd 5s
4 - 3.8s
5 - 1.4s
6 - 0.7s

It was a shortened 6 lap race - was there an incident in a previous race which delayed things, so they shortened races?

Birleys lap time was almost 2.5s faster than the man who took the flag.

Trying to win from the back in 6 laps rather than 10 means bigger risks.

HustleRussell

24,602 posts

159 months

Tuesday 7th November 2017
quotequote all
Sea Demon said:
Birley started the race last - the grounds of the appeal were dangerous driving & that would constitute more than a 5 sec penalty, Im sure its in the MSA book as a ban or a disqualification but the series is as bent as Birleys car.
Your language is pretty heavily loaded against this Birley character... and if the decision to give him the win was due to the series being 'bent', does that mean the independent MSA stewards are also 'bent'? It's all a conspiracy?

The stewards aren't interested in previous episodes of the soap opera, they have been asked to investigate an incident and have done so- similarly you asked us PHers to do the same OP.

If this driver is demonstrating consistently poor driving standards then aggrieved parties should raise their concerns with the organising club who can choose to deduct championship points, reject race entries etc.