overtaking under safety car rewarded?
Discussion
3rd place snatched under safety car warning – opinions?
Snetterton Porsche Club event 5th June 2021 apparently – 3rd place taken under both safety car board and yellow flags when the car in 3rd slowed (after heeding the warnings) and the one in 4th passed – allowing the 4th placed car to keep the new 3rd place because the previously 4th placed driver “didn’t see the warnings”?
Just wondered what you all think about that when the officials admitted that despite the 3rd place car being clearly ahead at the safety car board, and yellow flag, despite the 4th place driver apparently admitting the result should have been swapped round, despite recent Championships being decided on one or two points – the 4th place driver was rewarded for “not seeing the warning signs”.
Not suggesting for one minute that the 4th place driver did see the warning signs – I don’t think that is as important as what I think could become a dangerous precedent set that could inevitably reward drivers who in future “do not pay enough attention” or “take chances” under safety conditions?
How things have changed. 10 years ago at the last deciding event of the season at Silverstone - a privateer barely leading the same Championship had his qualifying time discarded because he unknowingly overtook in a corner because he “didn’t see a yellow flag” (which his on board camera proved he could not in the position he was in). He was then forced to start at the back of the grid. Despite then coming far enough through the field to still stand a chance of winning the Championship – that was taken away because in his euphoria thinking he had still won it – he apparently removed his racing gloves (and possibly his helmet) while slowly driving back to the pits - in the pit lane. Not defending him – or arguing against it - just pointing out the different standards over a 10 year period.
Snetterton Porsche Club event 5th June 2021 apparently – 3rd place taken under both safety car board and yellow flags when the car in 3rd slowed (after heeding the warnings) and the one in 4th passed – allowing the 4th placed car to keep the new 3rd place because the previously 4th placed driver “didn’t see the warnings”?
Just wondered what you all think about that when the officials admitted that despite the 3rd place car being clearly ahead at the safety car board, and yellow flag, despite the 4th place driver apparently admitting the result should have been swapped round, despite recent Championships being decided on one or two points – the 4th place driver was rewarded for “not seeing the warning signs”.
Not suggesting for one minute that the 4th place driver did see the warning signs – I don’t think that is as important as what I think could become a dangerous precedent set that could inevitably reward drivers who in future “do not pay enough attention” or “take chances” under safety conditions?
How things have changed. 10 years ago at the last deciding event of the season at Silverstone - a privateer barely leading the same Championship had his qualifying time discarded because he unknowingly overtook in a corner because he “didn’t see a yellow flag” (which his on board camera proved he could not in the position he was in). He was then forced to start at the back of the grid. Despite then coming far enough through the field to still stand a chance of winning the Championship – that was taken away because in his euphoria thinking he had still won it – he apparently removed his racing gloves (and possibly his helmet) while slowly driving back to the pits - in the pit lane. Not defending him – or arguing against it - just pointing out the different standards over a 10 year period.
Moderator edit: no advertising please
I can only report on what I have been told (awaiting the video) but Yes the driver did appeal (twice as I understand it) and spent an hour arguing about it with the officials who apparently agreed he was in the right but said sine they had already made their decision it could not be overturned. Apparently another consideration was that if they upheld the appeal it would put 3 points on the other drivers race licence?
In view of the fact that at the end of the race the 4th place driver was only 0.013 seconds behind the 3rd place driver - surely a time penalty would have been appropriate and fair?
After all that the driver narrowly missed winning the next race (finishing 2nd) and missed his prize giving as well while in with the race stewards.
My own personal view is that a dangerous precedent has been set that will endanger drivers in future who learn that if they "didn't see" warnings and snatch a place they can keep it because of the stewards handling of at best an unfair situation and at worst a dangerous one!
Baz
In view of the fact that at the end of the race the 4th place driver was only 0.013 seconds behind the 3rd place driver - surely a time penalty would have been appropriate and fair?
After all that the driver narrowly missed winning the next race (finishing 2nd) and missed his prize giving as well while in with the race stewards.
My own personal view is that a dangerous precedent has been set that will endanger drivers in future who learn that if they "didn't see" warnings and snatch a place they can keep it because of the stewards handling of at best an unfair situation and at worst a dangerous one!
Baz
Perhaps my logic is different to your DRUMROLL - the report you posted the link to confirms the exact facts as I reported them and I asked what others thought about it. unless I am missing something - not sure what part of my post is "wading in before I am sure of the facts". it seems you are agreeing that as long as a competitor "didn't see the warning signs" there is no penalty applicable and if that is correct I am not sure why I cannot ask the opinion of others about that position - this is how things become improved and safety becomes more of a priority - which cannot be a bad thing.
If I am missing some other point or issue - please state it directly so I can understand it rather than become abusive.
Baz
If I am missing some other point or issue - please state it directly so I can understand it rather than become abusive.
Baz
So it would seem from your previous posts that you are an official at the circuit? and from your post on Tuesday 5th May that you support the benefit of "reporting issues" stating "must report if cars are not compliant if not you are part of the problem".
Pot and kettle comes to mind.
So the record from the Clerk of the Course (not sure how correct it is for that to become public knowledge without the participants approval?) shows that all the facts I presented were absolutely correct (not wrong as you so rudely imply).
The record also shows that the most lenient response for "failing to comply with a Safety Warning" appears to be a verbal warning and was applied (must have really scared the driver involved lol!).
Other options seem to include a stop and go penalty, being formally reprimanded, Loss of a lap time(Q), Grid place penalty, a fine, seconds added to the race time, Being disqualified from the results and being disqualified from the meeting?
I didn't reveal names or positions - just reported some facts that were accurate and my only opinion was to question if such a lenient response could set a dangerous precedent and to suggest that in view of it being a Championship, and the places ending up less than 0.2 of a second apart - a time penalty might have been more appropriate and invited the opinion of others.
I didn't realise that the public are not allowed to have an opinion (and perhaps that is part of the problem) and I didn't resort to abusive comments.
If you are an official I think your conduct should be brought into question and I am now going to take matters further - to find out if my post was indeed out of order or your response to it - not because I wanted to - but because your response is typical of the problem you alluded that I was causing.
If I am then found to be in the wrong I will withdraw my post and publicly apologise.
Safety issues should IMHO never be rewarded by it benefitting those responsible and whether you personally like it or not - officials do sometimes need to be reminded of their responsibilities and not feel so isolated from criticism that they can do whatever they want and abuse anyone questioning the outcome.
Just so we all know what part of your diversionary accusations we can ignore - for the record - please state that you think it is right to only receive a verbal warning for taking a place under a safety car and keeping it when the car in front slowed because of it (regardless of whether they saw it or not) and also say you don't think that could possibly set a dangerous precedent - then I will know how best to address the issues ahead.
.
Pot and kettle comes to mind.
So the record from the Clerk of the Course (not sure how correct it is for that to become public knowledge without the participants approval?) shows that all the facts I presented were absolutely correct (not wrong as you so rudely imply).
The record also shows that the most lenient response for "failing to comply with a Safety Warning" appears to be a verbal warning and was applied (must have really scared the driver involved lol!).
Other options seem to include a stop and go penalty, being formally reprimanded, Loss of a lap time(Q), Grid place penalty, a fine, seconds added to the race time, Being disqualified from the results and being disqualified from the meeting?
I didn't reveal names or positions - just reported some facts that were accurate and my only opinion was to question if such a lenient response could set a dangerous precedent and to suggest that in view of it being a Championship, and the places ending up less than 0.2 of a second apart - a time penalty might have been more appropriate and invited the opinion of others.
I didn't realise that the public are not allowed to have an opinion (and perhaps that is part of the problem) and I didn't resort to abusive comments.
If you are an official I think your conduct should be brought into question and I am now going to take matters further - to find out if my post was indeed out of order or your response to it - not because I wanted to - but because your response is typical of the problem you alluded that I was causing.
If I am then found to be in the wrong I will withdraw my post and publicly apologise.
Safety issues should IMHO never be rewarded by it benefitting those responsible and whether you personally like it or not - officials do sometimes need to be reminded of their responsibilities and not feel so isolated from criticism that they can do whatever they want and abuse anyone questioning the outcome.
Just so we all know what part of your diversionary accusations we can ignore - for the record - please state that you think it is right to only receive a verbal warning for taking a place under a safety car and keeping it when the car in front slowed because of it (regardless of whether they saw it or not) and also say you don't think that could possibly set a dangerous precedent - then I will know how best to address the issues ahead.
.
Where did I say "nothing was done" which you have quoted me as posting? this is the problem with those who think they are above criticism - stick to the facts please and don't attribute words to me that I did not post.
Now back to the salient point - do readers think a verbal warning is right, sufficient, fair and correct in all the circumstances or not?
If most think it is sufficient then I am proven to be out of touch with the majority (and I can accept being wrong) i am old and as I explained right at the beginning I accept that times might have changed.
If most think I am right - then the officials need to give more thought to their decisions.
Due to this being escalated by someone who appears to be an official - I will find out what Motorsport UK think about it as well (just in case I am completely in the wrong to dare suggest such things need thinking about) and if they agree with the decision then I am also happy to apologise (something others would do well to reciprocate).
I should also add that nothing in trying to discuss the protection and the safety of drivers means I do not include the officials as well and can I state clearly that really appreciate ALL the people who give up their time to support racing - I do and in many ways my post was trying to protect them rather than criticise them. However doing things for nothing doesn't give others the right to make poor decisions that influence a driver taking part in a points Championship who without them and the funds they pay in and the contribution of their own sponsors - there would also be no need for officials anyway.
Now back to the salient point - do readers think a verbal warning is right, sufficient, fair and correct in all the circumstances or not?
If most think it is sufficient then I am proven to be out of touch with the majority (and I can accept being wrong) i am old and as I explained right at the beginning I accept that times might have changed.
If most think I am right - then the officials need to give more thought to their decisions.
Due to this being escalated by someone who appears to be an official - I will find out what Motorsport UK think about it as well (just in case I am completely in the wrong to dare suggest such things need thinking about) and if they agree with the decision then I am also happy to apologise (something others would do well to reciprocate).
I should also add that nothing in trying to discuss the protection and the safety of drivers means I do not include the officials as well and can I state clearly that really appreciate ALL the people who give up their time to support racing - I do and in many ways my post was trying to protect them rather than criticise them. However doing things for nothing doesn't give others the right to make poor decisions that influence a driver taking part in a points Championship who without them and the funds they pay in and the contribution of their own sponsors - there would also be no need for officials anyway.
Edited by hartech on Tuesday 8th June 15:03
Edited by hartech on Tuesday 8th June 16:44
Thanks Drumroll, lets leave it at that shall we - both made our points and perhaps we could have been more thoughtful in our responses.
So can I possibly just get back to my original question which is what do others think about the situation in which a driver might eventually lose his Championship because someone overtook on a safety car (because he didn't see it) and then only received a verbal warning, kept the place he took and the extra points and therefore now has more points than he might have had if he had followed the safety regulations regarding a safety car warning.
More importantly - does that or does that not possibly send a message to other drivers that might make them more inclined to take the same chance in the same circumstances and as a result become more dangerous. Also if you think it could make things more dangerous (for officials, the public and competitors) is that is or is not setting a precedent that might lower safety standards.
If you agree it was too lenient - I am interested to know what penalty you would think is more appropriate and more likely to preserve safety standards and improve safety in the future.
If you think it was the right penalty - then times have changed and I need to try and change with them.
So can I possibly just get back to my original question which is what do others think about the situation in which a driver might eventually lose his Championship because someone overtook on a safety car (because he didn't see it) and then only received a verbal warning, kept the place he took and the extra points and therefore now has more points than he might have had if he had followed the safety regulations regarding a safety car warning.
More importantly - does that or does that not possibly send a message to other drivers that might make them more inclined to take the same chance in the same circumstances and as a result become more dangerous. Also if you think it could make things more dangerous (for officials, the public and competitors) is that is or is not setting a precedent that might lower safety standards.
If you agree it was too lenient - I am interested to know what penalty you would think is more appropriate and more likely to preserve safety standards and improve safety in the future.
If you think it was the right penalty - then times have changed and I need to try and change with them.
You see - in my logic - it doesn't matter if the driver behind did or did not see it - it is really probably impossible to know for sure - but the driver in front did and slowed and the driver behind had an advantage unfairly - so to my way of thinking - he only needs to give the place back or if he will not do that (and he didn't) then a time penalty equivalent to the relative positions would be the only fair result - not harsh at all - just redressing the balance without unfairly penalising him or discriminating against the driver that overtook.
Not doing so rewards the driver that overtook for not seeing the warnings and as he will have done so unfairly it discriminates against the driver that was in front and obeyed the rules and that to my mind is wrong and gives out a more dangerous message.
But them I am old fashioned I know! lol
Not doing so rewards the driver that overtook for not seeing the warnings and as he will have done so unfairly it discriminates against the driver that was in front and obeyed the rules and that to my mind is wrong and gives out a more dangerous message.
But them I am old fashioned I know! lol
I was once faced with a difficult decision when a verbal agreement over a technical matter with the organisers was reneged on at the last minute and I threatened to officially protest only to be informed by the clerk of the course that if I did our car would be put to the back of the grid pending the outcome - (which he said he had the power to do) and since it was the last day of a championship - that obviously wasn't an option.
It has been explained that those that help us race (marshalls and the like) get regular updates and training to help them administer the rules but busy sponsors and drivers don't have time to keep up with all that in the same way and depend on fair play and common sense to rule. Yes you could say it is their own fault then if they don't know how to protest but it is supposed to be a sport and the essence of sport to me is fairness for all and no really poor decisions, cheating or favouritism - which in this case I feel was lacking.
Oh well - it's too late now I suppose.
Baz
It has been explained that those that help us race (marshalls and the like) get regular updates and training to help them administer the rules but busy sponsors and drivers don't have time to keep up with all that in the same way and depend on fair play and common sense to rule. Yes you could say it is their own fault then if they don't know how to protest but it is supposed to be a sport and the essence of sport to me is fairness for all and no really poor decisions, cheating or favouritism - which in this case I feel was lacking.
Oh well - it's too late now I suppose.
Baz
That's right I am not a competitor or entrant but am involved on the outskirts and have a perfect right to express my comments are observations and invited opinion - that's all. It just seems to me that if it takes training and frequent updates to keep the people involved in running things safely and fairly informed and up to date - where are the courses for drivers and entrants. If it is so easy to read up on all the rules then why the need for training and reminders anyway. It is clear to me from the response of one particular individual exactly why unfair decisions can be made - no tolerance - no reasoning and always blaming everyone else if they have a different view of things - and i must say the vast majority of those running things do - do a fantastic job fairly and with care and integrity - but in my opinion (which I have a right to express) this particular example showed poor decision making, unfairness and did set an example that you can gain a Championship point if you overtake on a safety car warning - and should never have been allowed.
What a balanced, realistic and reasonable response from you Notwen - thank you very much for that.
My own view (having also raced in my youth but on motorcycles) is that pretty well all racers are risk takers by nature - want to win and take chances and that I feel it should be the responsibility of those running things to ensure that what is obviously a very competitive and risk taking pastime does not endanger others unnecessarily and that therefore breaches of the rules that result in a benefit in the final track or Championship results should be a top priority for them to clamp down on and that in this case the report itself carries enough information to see that the penalty was far too lenient.
I hope that by raising the issue in public - the officials involved may reflect on their positions and improve their reactions to similar events in future.
Baz
My own view (having also raced in my youth but on motorcycles) is that pretty well all racers are risk takers by nature - want to win and take chances and that I feel it should be the responsibility of those running things to ensure that what is obviously a very competitive and risk taking pastime does not endanger others unnecessarily and that therefore breaches of the rules that result in a benefit in the final track or Championship results should be a top priority for them to clamp down on and that in this case the report itself carries enough information to see that the penalty was far too lenient.
I hope that by raising the issue in public - the officials involved may reflect on their positions and improve their reactions to similar events in future.
Baz
Gassing Station | General Motorsport | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff