3rd Place lost due to Speeding?

[Timmerman_Paul]

There was a story untold in these or any other pages, so I called
up a race offical on his cell phone and asked "What happened to get Drislane a DNF?". The answer is they got written up for 18 mph over the limit in a control zone by a peace officer, and the rest was history. Now,... you'r probably rearing back to fire one back that 18 mph isn't nuthin _or_ that all speeders should be casterated. I just did it for you so save it. Too bad John ruined a fine drive by making that simple mistake. They handed a nice third place to Mark Nelson, who appears to have really hung it out, and ended up with a podium finish. There are sure alot of ways to lose a rally, but this is one that is easy for teams to control. Two victims in two races, do you suppose there is someone fool enough to try speeding in Maine?

Paul Timmerman

[Gorgo]

This must've been a profitable weekend for law enforcement officers up here in the northeast. I got a ticket for 82 in a 65, a friend of mine coming up to see the event got a ticket for 71 in a 55 (he claims that he was passing a truck in a 65 zone and didn't see the sign at the top of the hill where it changed to 55, he just wanted to get past the truck before the 2 lanes merged back together), not a good weekend.

George Thompson
1982 Volvo 242 Performance Rally Toy

[RallyBrat]

Good drive? http://runnyegg.com/albums/album38/aab.avi ;)

Well, on the bright side, at least he didn't kill anybody...

Anyway, he had a good run this weekend and it is a bit of a shame, but the competitors should know that and Wellsboro police are ALWAYS on patrol during STPR.(even I know that, but this was also my 10th year going to STPR...) I mean if your going to make the proper time and get to the time control on time, it's setup so you follow the speed limit. Still, it's a bit too much of a price to pay for speeding, although it does get the organizer's messege across.

Drislane seemed to play through attrition and work his way up. Ramana was running well when he didn't have problems and eventually dropped out, Choiniere seemed to be running well at times but had electronic troubles for ALL of the night and still finished 6th, several quick guys were out from the start, etc. Even Rhys was pretty slow this weekend (until the night stages) and had a good finish. Nelson had 2 nasty scares and finished 3rd, so definitely lots of attrition. If you look at the results, the only guys w/o problems were D. Higgins and Lovell, about 8 minutes ahead of everyone else.

Point is, he had a good drive, but had even better luck with the guys in front dropping out, except for the speeding ticket of course :)

Thanks,
Alex

[markn]

John put in a fantastic drive with only 1 big moment, and more than deserved the 3rd place finish. Hopefully he will start receiving more notice for his great drives. Look for more to come at Maine...

As for us, there was the nature encounter on SS3, then the RF tire delaminated on SS7 (tread completely separated and destroyed the alum. fender), then the LR tire delaminated on SS10. I know Karl was taken out by a tire delaminating, and I believe Ramana had this problem as well. John Drislane also had a RF tire starting to come apart after SS7. Delamination/Tread separation seemed to be a common problem probably due to the incredibly high speeds which overheated the tires.

The pace needed to run near the top is unbelievable; just look at how many cars broke the previous stage record on SS1 and SS2. Average speed record for SS1 is now over 70MPH!! Brushing banks and trees are no longer minor at these speeds.

-mark

PS - Alex, it was good talking with you and your dad at STPR. Sounds like the Eclipse is coming along!

[Andy M]

Yea, that 71 mph average speed on one stage was incredible. But it seems like those kinds of speeds are just going to widen the gap between faster cars and slower cars. On slower rallies, I think the slower cars have more of a chance if they have good drivers behind the wheel. I'm not sure if that's necessarily a bad thing... but still, it does mean that anything but awd cars will have a tough time on fast rallies.

[Steve Nielsen]

Is there any concern amoung competitors or organizers or Scca safefty people that the average speeds are too high on some stages.

[rally to cave]

I noticed the results showed his results with the note of disqualification. If John gets the speeding citation overturned in court, then would his result be re-instated?

The rule book allows the organizers to access a time penalty (20 mph would be 17.5 min penalty) or "in addition, for greater than 15 mph over the speed limit, the Event Steward may exclude competitors who are deemed to be operating in an unsafe manner." (8.2.A.4)

If the citation was 10 mph, then his DQ may not be warranted.

If the standard is any citation over 15 mph over the limit is deemed to be unsafe and results in DQ, then I would like to see it published in advance. Hmm...time to send a letter to the rule makers?

Paul Nelson
Navie

[Timmerman_Paul]

Alex,

Thanks for putting the videos up, and to our man bill@runnyegg for
hosting them, the download speed is truely awesome.

Those spectators sure showed some quick footwork in the treetag.avi.
Perhaps they should not have been there, eh?

I noticed how Higgins8.avi showed the rear brake rotors glowing
while the fronts did not. I was somewhat confused by what I
was seeing. That would require ALOT of brake bias or much
different sizing of the brakes F/R. Both the Mitsu shots of
Mark and Rhys showed more even F/R rotor glow.

pt-

[John Vanlandingham]

>Is there any concern amoung competitors or organizers or
>Scca safefty people that the average speeds are too high on
>some stages.
Yeah, I think the averages on many stages are too high, way too high.

the winning cars on the on the WRC are often averaging around 90 km/hr excepting Sweden and Finland where it's higher and Corsica and Cyprus where it significantly lower.

Considering the general lack of experience and skill in driving and prep,(look at the number of DNFs, real "PRO" indeed!) the speeds are scary fast. What can be done, those are the way the roads are built.

And, IMHO, I really think that guys tend to like these simpler faster roads because they can then delude themselves into thinking they are approaching the speeds they see on TV. And then by extension the skill level. I have heard such drivel.
But get the cars on slower, twistier and rougher roads and then
THE HORROR! _Skill_ rears it's ugly head, can't have that!

Driving skill and some semblance of mechanical sympathy can't be what we want to show, can it?

ONE OBVIOUS SOLUTION is to make the events longer than the current little sprinty type things.

Thoughts?















John Vanlandingham

[daphne]

I heard it was 18 over, if that helps.

After what happened at Rim, is anyone shocked that the organizers would take a hard line on this?

Too bad, as John Drislane had an amazing run. I look forward to him kicking some butt in Maine this year!

[Bill Barfoot]

not a problem.. :) we are now at 100,000 hits in the last 4 days... things might be slower than normal... :)

[Bruce]

>If the standard is any citation over 15 mph over the limit
>is deemed to be unsafe and results in DQ, then I would like
>to see it published in advance. Hmm...time to send a letter
>to the rule makers?

If you run ClubRallies in Central Division, that's the standard. I can't think of a justification for greater than 15 mph over the limit. 20 mph over is felony speed in some states.

We may not consider speeding a big deal, but we have to remember that JUST ONE speeding ticket issued to a rally car might lose us an event. Ojibwe Forests just about lost the use of the City of Akeley because of where people were PARKED, fergoshsakes.

Bruce
CenDiv ClubRally Steward
OFPR Organizer

[guest]

Mark and John did well because of attrition? They were both setting top 5 times through the whole rally, I think their finishing places were due to a bit more than attrition. :)

[RallyBrat]

Mark DID have a pretty nasty tap with a tree, and didn't seem to turn it up until the night stages. Of course, that's just from the narrow view of a spectator (a couple corners)

Drislane seemed much better than last year, but seemed to be sprinting on the straights, driving into the corner, then powering out. It can work quite well at STPR, but not as well at Maine. I may be completely wrong though, and wait to be proven otherwise at there :)

Anyone notice how similar Drislane seemed to be to Burke last year around this time? Same style, there's a Burke on the window, a TAD prepped EVO VI, Irishman, etc. In fact, I thought it was Burke the first 2 corners I was at.

Putting my hand-me-down flame suit on...

Thanks,
Alex

[nialld]

dear brat

"it does get the organisers message across"
how do you figure that???

it seems to me the opposite is in fact true...
if you get caught speeding by the organisers...you get a very small time penalty...as in Mr Lovells case

however if you get caught by law enforcement you get thrown out of the rally...

to me that clearly states the opposite to your theory..

however you clearly have a problem with theory..

Drislane.. 2002 National Divisional Champion
1st o/v Sawmill 2002 (lets not get into that again)
1st o/v 2002 Sandhills Sandblast
1st o/v 2001 Irishhills
1st o/v 2001 Blackriver stages

why would you put such emphasis on the attrition...when referring to his result...
he ran stages 2/3 with no fans..and he got faster with each stage

in regards to your slight on his driving technique....

maybe you could give him a few lessons...
and post how many rallies and or championships you have won since you have been rallying..??? you have rallied i assume???

humble regards
niall d

[nialld]

hi paul

15 over from the horses mouth...
downhill section out of service..
5th gear no throttle...no speedo...
officer followed to get his speed...

the sad part is ....that a fellow competitor turned him in...
a big play to gain a spot for no reason....as this particular competitor did not make the podium...nor was he eligible for M/F
points....

regards
niall d

[randyzimmer]

Niall,
I'm no expert but I've looked thru the book lately...
---http://www.scca.org/amateur/performance_rally/02rulebook/Article8.pdf
---
look at the heading 8.2 "other penalties", it states these are typical but not binding penalties, so a ticket is suggested to get you 1/2 way to expulsion. I didn't even get a ticket but suffered the same fate as John.
I'm glad Mark got something for his efforts but the magnitude is pretty small in comparison isn't it?
If you keep going to 8.5C, "unsportsmanlike conduct" (that is what I was charged with for crossing a double yellow line) you'll see that I engage in "reprehensible behavior" and am under threat of censure so I'll quit typing now.
rz

[RallyBrat]

>dear brat
>
>"it does get the organisers message across"
>how do you figure that???

Brushes with the law make the area allowing the event to happen less likely to allow the event to happen in the future; therefore, organizers/SCCA use the maximum penalty while caught by law enforcement.

>it seems to me the opposite is in fact true...
>if you get caught speeding by the organisers...you get a
>very small time penalty...as in Mr Lovells case
>
>however if you get caught by law enforcement you get thrown
>out of the rally...
>
>to me that clearly states the opposite to your theory..
>
>however you clearly have a problem with theory..
>
>Drislane.. 2002 National Divisional Champion
> 1st o/v Sawmill 2002 (lets not get into that
>again)
> 1st o/v 2002 Sandhills Sandblast
> 1st o/v 2001 Irishhills
> 1st o/v 2001 Blackriver stages

I didn't actually say he was slow. His entries into corners looked slow and understeery, but he was very powerful on the exits and got on the power early (maybe a little too early where I was on 6) and made sure he was in good shape for the next straight. He also had the balls to keep his foot down and go at insane speeds. Also, he has one of the best cars that are running the Club Rally champ.

>why would you put such emphasis on the attrition...when
>referring to his result...
>he ran stages 2/3 with no fans..and he got faster with each
>stage

There was tons of attrition. Choiniere, Lagemann, M. Higgins, Burke, Scheible, Lawless, etc. were all out, and Millen seemed to be quite slow until night time. By the end of the night, he had Nelson, Shepard, and Kemp (possibly, but way inferior car) to compete with. That's 7 good drivers taken out of the equation. (Well, Drislane did look faster than Scheible, and I think he was, except for at night. Scheible always seems faster then) However, I was unaware of the fan problem and I'm not sure how possible it is to tell how much it effected him.

>maybe you could give him a few lessons...
>and post how many rallies and or championships you have won
>since you have been rallying..??? you have rallied i
>assume???

Of course none, just look at my D.O.B.! :)(If I was in the car, I wouldn't be able to make these observations) Anyway, I don't just enjoy watching rallying, I study it too, and I'm a bit too analytical for my good. Now, the person who brakes in less distance is the person who slows down sideways (you can dig in to dirt) the person who corners fastest is the person closest to a perfect 4 wheel drift and with the straightest and fastest line (look how straight Ramana and Lovell's wheels are at the entrence of the turn)). Now, what I saw from Drislane at 3 out 3 places this year and the previous rallies I've seen him in, in his EVO IV (I may be young, but I've been around for almost 10 years now :)) it was mostly straight braking, a little wiggle, a little understeer coming into the turn, then lots of power coming out. While it seems improvment is coming in the future (he's much faster than last year and like I said, I saw Burke doing this a lot too until about STPR/Maine last year) I don't think he's as fast as Lagemann, D & M Higgins, Lovell, Burke, Millen, Choiniere, Shepard, Nelson, Hadjiminas, McGeough, Perry, O'Sullivan, Havas, etc. etc. YET. And remember, I'm only talking about corner entry and cornering speed here. He's definitely fast on the straights and always had the right gear selected for a powerful exit, no doubt. I also watch these tapes when I'm bored (now you must figure I'm bored quite often :)) and study different people's driving styles and who's faster where, etc. It all fascinates me!

>humble regards
>niall d

Also, another Irish rallyist, McGeough, took me by storm this past Saturday. He came into some of those corners faster than what I thought was possible. For example, check out my clip of him on stage 3, amazing entry, although he doesn't have the correct gear on exit it seems. Still wicked fast, and finished 9th in a PGT Eclipse!

Thanks,
Alex

P.S. Just remember, these are my personal observations from the rally and rallies previous, if anyone else has other observations, I'd like to hear about them.

[daphne]

Randy, what would annoy you more? That John Drislane was DQed because of a traffic violation or if he had not been?

I don't know the whole story, just what was posted here. The rules say that anything over 15 can result in being DQed. So, the decision to DQ John has some foundation in the rules.

If another competitor turned John in, that's unfortunate. Rally used to be more of a community, but I guess the more cut-throat mentality is a predictable byproduct of more "professionalism" in the sport.

Didn't realize that Lovell got caught, and based on his penalty, I suspect he got caught at the O-control going 6 over. The rules do not suggest disqualificiation for 6 over...they do for 15 over.

John Drislane had an excellent run at STPR. I can't imagine how he feels having that taken away from him, but I'm sure it's no fun. Based on Niall's comments, it sounds like his speedo was toast, which has to make it all the more difficult.

BUT...how would you feel, Randy, if the story was out that John was caught speeding and nothing was done about it? Would you feel that you were being singled out and excluded from an event for no reason? I sure would!

Seems to me that Drislane's punishment at STPR was in line with Randy's at Rim. You can agree or disagree with how traffic violations are handled by organizers and the PRB, but you certainly can't complain about them not being consistent.

Note:My comments in no way pass judgement on the actions of other members of the rally community nor do they condone nor condem those of event organizers and/or the PRB. This post is based only on the limited information at hand regarding this incident.

[randyzimmer]

Being able to see both sides...
My cruel side says I hope they throw everybody but me out sometime and I'll take 1st, 2nd and 3rd and drown in a champagne drunk but the realistic/fair side says that there has to be a mechanism to bring all the facts together and make a fair and just decision along with the ability to appeal that judgement, (back to the old thread, like road racing does). At the run-offs, all this is accelerated so that the winners can be announced at the banquet but at the run-offs EVERYBODY is there, not just the Manager, Chief Steward, tech guy and the event organizers. That being said, I know that after hundreds of miles of running at such stupid slow speeds, the hum of the tires told me the speed I was travelling. 20 was 2nd at an idle, 55 was 5th at an idle. I also know that the 1st 1/2 mile of each transit - even at my heightened paranoia level, was the most dangerous - getting back into slow mode, listening for new noises and getting the route instructions. So to recap, I'm glad I wasn't the only one ever, but don't think I was delt with fairly and don't know about John's full situation but it seems extreme.
rz

[Mad Mike]

Gosh folks, it's obvious that breaking any law on transits will no longer be tolerated. Seems simple enough to just mind our P's & Q's when not onstage. The influx of cars to a given area on rally weekends plus all the spectator shenanigans enroute to the stages is ammunition enough for the folks who would prefer we not rally on 'their' roads, we certainly don't need contestants in full series livery breaking laws on transits.

Randy - Sorry I never got the chance to get with you for a chat in Wellsboro (I was staying in Coudersport and withdrew from the rally rather than put my navvie in the hospital after he got very ill), but if you really are having a problem "coming down" after a stage then let your teammate drive the transits. Perfectly legal if he/she has a driver's license and it sure seems like a manageable enough option.

Just a thought ...

Halley ...
http://www.realautosport.com

[randyzimmer]

Mike, it isn't a matter of coming down, its just being used to going faster than 20 and having a lot to think about other than crawling along, you let out the clutch, ask which way now? think about 20 other things and then ask if there's a special limit (Dave never seems to offer that for some reason, I have to ask - maybe he's busy). It happened a time or two of the 15. I was just saying it can happen to anyone.
------
"it's obvious that breaking any law on transits will no longer be tolerated"
As far as a shift in policy, it would have been nice to mention it - I'm not an old-timer and neither is John (rookie of the year 2001) but I seems to me this exclusion thing is something new. I'll have to say that sending a message this way is dramatic but it could have been delivered in a different manner. ie: road racing - at a driver's meeting - we had one at the pool at RIM.
rz

[daphne]

I never said it was fair (or unfair for that matter) but rather consistent. With all the grief the rally department has been getting about playing favorites, you have to look upon consistency as a step in the right direction.

It's clear that there is some confusion and concern surrounding the penalty/exclusion process and that really is the area we should focus on. If the process isn't good enough, we need to enhance it. If people don't know the process, we need communicate and educate.

If you think getting DQed from a rally for going 15 over the speed limit is wrong, write the PRB and recommend that rule be changed, because it is in the rule book.

If you think there should be a better process for handling DQs, recommend one. And Randy, this is where your road racing background is of great benefit - you come from a very structured racing series. Rally is pretty unstructured in comparison. Now that you have experience in both series, I'm sure you can add a lot of value here. And I really mean that.

[daphne]

DQing people for speeding on transits is not new. It happened last year at Summer Maine.

http://maineforestrally.com/mfr01-res.html

[Timmerman_Paul]

There seems to be a second side of this story coming out...
"Turned in by a competitor" would be a much different story.
When law enforcement writes a ticket they seem to always tell
the organizers ASAP. I am not sure what to think now...
If a competitor comes in and tells an official somebody else
was speeding on a transit it would not hold much water, but
if law enforcement comes by and says they wrote so and so up
that is hard to ignore.

It is really hard to keep the speed down on all those hills
at STPR. Up and down constantly. Much worse than anyplace
else I have been to. Don't they put there O Controls on a
steep down hill section?

paul t-

[Bruce]

>If another competitor turned John in, that's unfortunate.
>Rally used to be more of a community, but I guess the more
>cut-throat mentality is a predictable byproduct of more
>"professionalism" in the sport.
>

To look at it another way, a member of the community decided we need to practice some "tough love" so that the family can continue to function. He or she put the good of the whole community above the good of one competitor - friend or not.

Bruce

[daphne]

Could be, but my approach is a little different. If I have a beef with another competitor, I tell them privately. Gives me a chance to explain why I'm upset and to hear their side of the story.

That's just me, I guess.

[Mad Mike]

>Mike, it isn't a matter of coming down, its just being used
>to going faster than 20 and having a lot to think about
>other than crawling along, you let out the clutch, ask which
>way now? think about 20 other things and then ask if there's
>a special limit (Dave never seems to offer that for some
>reason, I have to ask - maybe he's busy). It happened a time
>or two of the 15. I was just saying it can happen to anyone.

I am as susceptible as anyone to speeding on transit thanks to inattentiveness, but the times I've been burned have been for just a few mph over, not 15. EMily, Josh, Ole and John all knew when I wasn't paying attention to the speedo and said something about it.

(Devil's advocate ON) Of course, I'm not sure how that helps explain passing a string of cars in SoCal. }> And let me use a road racing analogy against you (I'm a former national license holder too) if I may = What penalty would you expect if you're Crew Chief hopped in your car after a cool off lap and then distracted you enough that you raced through the paddock passing cars and speeding at a race track? (Devil's advocate OFF)

I guarantee you that superior procedures used in other facets of SCCA competition are finding their way into Performance Rally. Good, bad or indifferent it's obvious that the 'good ole boy' nature of policing our sport is no longer adequate. So far as penalties, protests and appeals are concerned I know we can learn a lot from Club Racing.

>------
>"it's obvious that breaking any law on transits will no
>longer be tolerated"
>As far as a shift in policy, it would have been nice to
>mention it - I'm not an old-timer and neither is John
>(rookie of the year 2001) but I seems to me this exclusion
>thing is something new. I'll have to say that sending a
>message this way is dramatic but it could have been
>delivered in a different manner. ie: road racing - at a
>driver's meeting - we had one at the pool at RIM.
>rz

That wasn't the best way for me to put it, was it? :+

I don't actually believe there is a shift in policy. I've been hearing about the necessity to behave ourselves on transits since the 1977 Sunriser 400. It's no more news than are paddock speed limits at every race track in the country. Just like the string of events that conspired to find me DNFed at STPR thanks to a sick navvie (first time I've ever loaded up a rally-ready car after logging a DNF) I'd chalk up your Rim experience to simple bad luck (someone had to be the first one DQed for such offenses). There have been warnings aplenty but it took concrete action to affirm they'd be enforced. Thanks to your experience I guarantee you I'm a lot more diligent tending to things on transits than I have been.

Anyway, keep pressing on. Fretting over the corner just blown will only dilute your chances of nailing the next one.

Halley ...
http://www.realautosport.com

[Morgan]

Come on!! Why are people defending them? The point of the transits (besides getting from one place to the other) is to follow the rules of the road. Originally, it was about presicion i.e. a TSD part of the rally, but it seems that has gotten a bit lax. If there speedo didn't work, doesn't the computer have speed indicated. If that did not work then they should have aired on the side of caution and driven slower than the limit. Any driver whom has driven for any amount of time should be able to estimate how fast they are going. Knowing that they were doing so well in the rally should have made them extra cautious. It is enough the spectators are speeding around, but the race cars speeding are really going to piss off the Locals. I apparently ran into one of the pissed locals, when he decided to drive 5 mph for 6-7miles down an access road and would not let us by, he just kept waving out the window, he even held up the cop behind me.

[Mad Mike]

I know no more details of this speeding incident than what has been shared here, but I can tell you that the O-control we encountered before withdrawing was after a crest at the top of a small hill in a reasonably populated piece of countryside. Were one to top that hill at extra legal speeds you could count on getting nailed thanks to the proximity of the radar gun and all those wonderfully parabolic reflectors arrayed across the nose of your typical rallye machine!

Halley ...
http://www.realautosport.com

[Trevor Donison]

Anyone who has been to STPR knows that there is always an O control after the first or 2nd stage, and always plenty of cops while there is still daylight (or maybe they just show up better in daylight).

Carl Merrill for years thought that Wild West owed him one because he and another competitor were dq'ed for going 15 over. Jeff Zwart got his first National win that way (1993 or 1994). Then Carl got a flat the next year. He did win one, but was still upset about the DQ, in fact he brought up that the event "owed him one" when he accepted his tropy.

Its happened before, and obviously it will happen again. Until competitors get the message about speeding on transits, expect more of this to happen. If you don't speed, then you don't get dq'd.

What is worse: 12 seconds for every minute you are late, or DQ from an event?

[Kartwheel]

>If you don't speed, then you don't get dq'd.
>
>What is worse: 12 seconds for every minute you are late, or
>DQ from an event?

That pretty much says it all. Even if your 10 min late, that 2 min time penalty is a heck of a lot better than DQ'd. If your more than 10 min late, how long would the transit have to be to make up any meaningful amount of time anyway? I'm sure this is much easier to reason out behind a computer, and not behind the wheel in an event, but like Mad Mike said, this is probably where a good co-driver comes into play.

[Dave Clark]

It was indeed the 1994 Wild West Rally that the 1st and 2nd place finishers (Carl Merrill and Doug Shepherd) were disqualified for speeding. At the driver's meeting the Clerk of the Course, Ron Barker, held up the radar gun and said something to the effect of "This is a radar gun. I will be pointing it at you on the transit between stage 5 and 6 (or whatever it was). The speed limit on that road is 35mph. Do not speed there!"

Well, guess who exceeded the speed limit there? That's right, Carl Merrill and Doug Shepherd. But they weren't the only ones caught speeding, they were just the only ones that got caught going more than 15mph over the limit. Other people received time penalties as prescribed by the rulebook according to how many mph over the limit they were. Back then it was 1 minute for every mph over 5 mph over the speed limit. Perhaps most significant was that for more than 15mph over the limit exclusion was mandatory back then.

This is where things get really interesting. Because it was the top two overall teams in a National event that were excluded this created a big brouhaha. This was the first time a winning team had been disqualified for speeding on a transit. Doug Shepherd was disappointed but agreed that the organizers had applied the rulebook correctly. Carl Merrill wasn't happy and his codriver was threatening to protest but in the end the disqualifications stood.

What did come out of it in the end was that the rulebook was rewritten the next year to make the penalties for speeding MUCH LESS severe!! The time penalties for less than 15mph over the limit were cut in half and exclusion was no longer mandatory for more than 15mph over the limit. The rule was reworded to the current: "In addition, for greater than 15 mph over the speed limit, the Event Steward MAY (my emphasis) exclude competitors who are deemed to be operating in an unsafe manner." Deemed by who it does not say. Apparently, back in 1994 those in power to change the rules felt that the penalties for speeding were far to severe. They apparently didn't want a situation where a team could be excluded for speeding on a transit. Funny, they didn't feel that way until a top team was excluded. The rules were the same for at least ten years before that. So keep in mind that the current rulebook reflects an attitude toward speeding that is more leniant than in 1994 and prior.

So there is your history lesson. What about the current state of affairs? Daphne brings up an interesting point about consistency in rules application. Unfortunately, I have to disagree with her. The way I see it the rules are absolutely NOT being applied consistently. First of all, in regards to John Drislane, he should never have been disqualified from the rally. The rulebook was absolutely not followed correctly in this case (but that's nothing new for the STPR rally.) According to the rulebook, if he was indeed 15mph over as Niall says, then he should have gotten a 7.5 minute time penalty. If it was 18mph over then it would be a 13.5 minute time penalty. According to the rulebook exclusion is only possible in this case if the competitor was MORE than 15mph over the limit AND the Event Steward deems the competitor was operating in an unsafe manner. If the Event Steward did not witness Drislane operating in an unsafe manner (I have heard no reports of such, only that he received a speeding ticket) then there is no basis in the rulebook for exclusion in this case. If the speeding ticket was indeed for 15mph or less over the limit then there is ABSOLUTELY no basis for exclusion and John Drislane should be reinstated into the results along with the appropriate time penalty. I hope John is appealing or protesting or whatever it is you need to do because it is clear that the organizers acted in clear violation of the rulebook in this case.

Back to addressing the subject of consistency. If Mark Lovell had received a speeding ticket do you think he would have been excluded from the rally? No way. We only have to go back to Rim of the World rally for the answer on that one. Lovell was caught speeding by the organizers at Rim. What I had heard was that they were able to tell from the time card that he would have had to average something like 100mph on the transit to make it to the control at the time he did. This is absolutely an unsubstantiated rumor and I have no idea how close to the truth it is or if it is utter BS. Probably an exaggeration. If anyone knows more maybe they could chime in. In any case, what is known is that he was caught speeding and it wasn't just a little bit. Did Lovell get excluded for that? No, of course not. Just a 5 minute slap on the wrist penalty.

Who did get excluded? Randy Zimmer as we all know now. What was his aggregious offense? Crossing the double yellow line and passing a string of cars. Was he being a naughty boy? Yes. Did he receive a traffic citation? No, no cops were present. Was he caught speeding in an observation control, or otherwise caught speeding by the organizers? No, he was not. Was he operating in more of an unsafe manner than Mark Lovell was when he was speeding? Probably not. Then why did Randy get kicked out of the rally when Mark Lovell did not? Well, for one thing Kurt Spitzner was in one of the cars Randy passed. And perhaps more importantly, Randy is not on a factory team. Neither is John Drislane for that matter.

I'm noticing at the beginning of section 8.2 OTHER PENALTIES the following: "The penalties listed in this section can be regarded as the normal penalty, however the Event Steward can apply any of the following as warranted by the offence."
Among these include:
"* Disqualification from competition"
"* Exclusion from competition"

This is a recent addition to the rulebook that gives the Event Steward supreme power to dish out nearly any kind of penalty he chooses for whatever whim he feels like. Even "Expulsion from SCCA" is one of the penalties allowed the Event Steward if he deems the offense warrants it. This seems like a dangerous amount of power to give the event steward and it sure seems like this power is beginning to be abused lately. Why is it only privateers that are being given penalties above and beyond what the rulebook prescribes? Shouldn't the factory teams be held to a higher standard? Aren't they supposed to be "elevating the sport"?

OK, I'll stop now. I've written too much.

-DC

[PeterSteinberg]

Actually, if you read the rule book a little more carefully, the penalties for speeding are only for "Exceeding the speed limit at Observation Controls" (2002 ProRally rules, 8.2.A.4, page 78).

8.2.A.5 mandates a 5 minute penalty for a traffic citation, other than speeding.

There is no other reference to speeding in the rules.

Peter

[daphne]

Dave, you raise some very interesting issues and since it's Friday morning, I'm up for a debate.

First, the issue of consistent application of punishment. PA's rules regarding reckless driving are odd and subjective, but there are hints as to what officers are looking for embedded in other regulations. 15 over, for example, is considered reckless and unsafe in any commercial vehicle and may result in license suspension.

So, if you grant me a little leap of faith here, let's say that 15 over is considered a serious traffic violation here in PA. Now, I think we've already gone through a few scenarios regarding California law in Mr. Zimmer's case, and I think we all agreed that the combination of speeding and crossing a double yellow may also be considered serious, although Randy was not cited. So, in the eyes of our men in blue, 15 is a big deal.

We all speed every day. (I know I did on the way to work this morning. Tailgated some idiot in a chevy, too!) Perhaps because speeding is so commonplace, we all downplay the reality that it is breaking the law. Come on, we all do it. We say to ourselves, speeding isn't such a bad crime. Rolling a stop sign isn't that bad. Come on, there are murderers out there. Why bother with simple traffic violations!

But when it comes to rule enforcement, there can be no subjectivity. We cannot look at a competitor's intent and excuse them because they didn't mean to break the law. Rules must be clear; black or white, if you will.

The PRB/PRD/Organizers drew the line when Randy was excluded. They clearly said that excessive speed or other "serious" traffic violations would be taken seriously. They administered the same punishment to John Drislane as they did Randy Zimmer.

Does it suck? Sure.

Now, as to Mr. Lovell's O-control speeding, I don't think it would be appropriate to exclude him for going 6 over. PA law doesn't support that, and certainly the rule book does not consider 6 over to be a crime befitting capital punishment.

Should Subaru make all attempts to behave in the best way possible? Absolutely!

Should the PRB/PRD/Organizers hold Mark Lovell to a higher standard than other competitors? No!

This is America. Land of the free. Home of the brave. We treat people equally, or at least we try.

[Mad Mike]

>Now, as to Mr. Lovell's O-control speeding, I don't think it
>would be appropriate to exclude him for going 6 over. PA
>law doesn't support that, and certainly the rule book does
>not consider 6 over to be a crime befitting capital
>punishment.

Dave mentioned the 100mph-average-speed-per-the-team's-time-card gig but it was shared in another thread how that simply was some bogus entries that were later straightened out.

Halley ...
http://www.realautosport.com

[rally to cave]

I am surprised no one responded to a point in my original post.

If John gets the citation overturned, is the disqualification reversed? If the reason for DQ is a traffic citation for 15 mph above the limit, and the ticket is overturned, then there was no longer a citation.

As I mentioned earlier, and Dave too, the rules state time penalties for speeding above 15 mph. It also says the organizers MAY DQ someone if the speeding was deemed unsafe. These are two different issues. Going 55 in a 40 zone, which is straight, no cross traffic, no houses, no business, etc is not in my opinion unsafe. (I got hit in Nevada's little speed trap!)

The point I was trying to make is that if 15 mph above the limit is deemed to be unsafe, then put it in the rules or sup regs so everyone knows in advance.

Paul Nelson

[daphne]

John Drislane's recourse if his ticket were overturned is pretty simple - give him the finish he earned. But if someone is DQed in the middle of an event, it's more complex.

But, Paul, why should the punishment for speeding be in the supps? Organizers currently have the right to boot someone from their rally if they are not behaving appropriately. Taking away that power from organizers is a dangerous thing. When someone is penalized, there should be no question as to the rules violated and the punishment administered. An appropriate process should be in place for a competitor to explain their actions, and the resulting decision should be final.

Should the rule book be cleaned up and clarified around traffic violations? You bet, and I suspect the PRB is well on their way to doing just that. And I certainly hope that they are also reviewing the process surrounding disqualifications. But don't take away an organizer's right to react to something that is not in the rule book. I can think of hundreds of things that are not in the rule book but would certainly be improper and an organizer should have the right to react to my actions, if necessary.

Rules should be clearly defined and understood, enforcable, and absolute. When grey areas get into the picture, we end up with these long threads on SpecialStage.

[rally to cave]

>But, Paul, why should the punishment for speeding be in the
>supps?

Because the SCCA rules don't say "speeding greater than 15 mph limit resutls in a DQ." Instead it has time penalty, and IF deemed to be in an unsafe manner then a DQ results. If the organizers want to be upfront and clear that any speeding over 15 mph will not be tollerated and results in a DQ, then TELL EVERYONE in advance! Best way to do that is in the supp regs.

>Organizers currently have the right to boot someone
>from their rally if they are not behaving appropriately.
>Taking away that power from organizers is a dangerous thing.

I am not suggesting taking away the power of organizers to boot someone. I agree they need the power to take the appropriate actions. They should be allowed to DQ someone even if they are going 5 mph over which was reckless, ie near a playground with a bunch of kids playing ball and almost hit someone.

Paul

[Jerry Brownell]

Unless I'm mistaken, it IS Burke's car from last year.

[Turini]

Hello to Everyone!

What is the reason to allow the entry of Open Class cars which, as we all know, have very "tempermental racing engines" (David Richards, 2000 Monte Carlo) and are not suited for slow driving and then excercising sometimes "ridiculous" speed limits? We all know that the engines in these cars can overheat quickly with not enough airflow to the motor.

I also agree that John Drislane should be reinstated as the third place finisher and receive the points that he earned with such a good run. I am a firm believer that there is a difference between fast driving and reckless driving, even on public roads with normal traffic. We all know when a given speed on the public highway is too high for the conditions (weather, traffic etc). There is NO doubt in my mind that John Drislane was not driving in an unsafe manner. As some people have already mentioned, the issue of consistency is not being implemented in a fair way. No offense to Mark Lovell at Rim (I'm sure he was also driving in a safe manner when he got "caught") but the simple fact that he is a "works" driver should not give him preferential treatment. If this unhealthy atmosphere does not improve, then the SCCA will lose credibility as it favors the works teams. If our sport is to truly grow, this must change!!!!!!!!!

Simon Rapala
Turini
Oregon

[daphne]

Unlike most parts of the world, rally isn't always embraced by the local communities. We Americans don't like people driving fast on our roads (yet we speed on other roads...yes I see the irony!) Many Americans do not have an understanding of rally, and their lack of education surrounding our sport causes them to object to our use of their local roads and facilities.

STPR is a great event and the organizers have, in the past, had a great relationship with the local officials. But that might be changing. We lost the use of 2 roads this year. Last year a rally car and service crew damaged a local car wash and then fled the scene. The year before (I think) a local sign was stolen and it was blamed on the rally. Spectators are now getting out of control, with the woods often littered with rolled or damaged cars owned by fans who decide to play rally driver, with disasterous results.

We are guests in the communitites that host events, and we have to behave like guests. We should not speed, destroy property, make a mess, or use poor table manners. At least not unless we do not want to be invited again.

So we have things like transits where we cannot check in early without a significant penalty. We have O-controls to catch competitors speeding so they learn to behave. And on the practice stage, there is an organizer sitting on the transit with a radar gun making sure people get the point...don't speed on transits!

Now, to your arguments that John Drislane's DQ should be overturned:

First, you argue that open class cars cannot go slowly. Hmmm...my racing brakes are cold on transits. Does that mean I should not stop at red lights and stop signs? Of course not! Rally cars are supposed to be street legal. As such, if they cannot go the legal limit, then I guess they shouldn't be in rally, right?

Second, your reference to equality and Mr. Lovell. My understanding from other posts on this board is that the 100mph average speed at RIM was a rumor, later proven to be incorrect. Show me proof Lovell was going 100 on transits.

There were more police at STPR this year than in the past. I thought the message was pretty clear - don't speed or disrespect the town of Wellsboro and surrounding areas. You will be caught.

[randyzimmer]

Sorry Simon, I can't agree with you.
The sport shouldn't be changed to fit the faster cars. NASCAR now has a one engine rule and they have to build new motors that last longer or else blow up too soon and lose. Rally cars have to endure anything they encounter and low speeds shouldn't be the hard part for them. Although I haven't done many, TSDs are all about keeping a perfect speed and to ask us to go somewhere just NEAR a certain speed is part of the sport too, maybe it needs to be more a part of it? I hate TSDs but incorporating a TSD element into the transits would get rid of this thread wouldn't it?
rz

[sandman]

Daphne

I hadn't heard about STPR losing the use of roads this year. Do you know what roads they were and what the reason for losing them was?
_____________________________________________

Sandman's Rally Page
http://rally.sandmansoftware.com
Contact us for Team, Club or Event websites
_____________________________________________

[daphne]

It was in the supps, I believe. A couple of stage roads from the evening stages were lost. Something about people using more road than there was road, so to speak.

[Mad Mike]

Thanks Daphne, that was VERY well explained! About all I'd add to that would be asking comnpetitors to keep in mind that we pay our entry fees to race on roads closed to the public, not the highways we share with the public fromn stage to stage.

Halley ...
http://www.realautosport.com

[starion887]

I can't tell yo the roads, but the offense was using the ditches as hooks to help turn them at faster speeds. I would guess theis did more damage than normal and the road repairs were probably high, so no more time on those roads. I would guess that the wet road conditions in 2001 had a lot to do with it.

Mark Bowers

[starion887]

>
>The point I was trying to make is that if 15 mph above the
>limit is deemed to be unsafe, then put it in the rules or
>sup regs so everyone knows in advance.

Thanks for saying this Paul. I think you make the real point that may be bugging some people. If it's a rule, spell it out in the rules. That is similar to the reasoning why I submitted the proposal to define "unsportsmanlike conduct" as a disqualifying offense more clearly after the "Zimmer affair": to avoid abuse of power or perceptions of treating competitors differently according to favoritism. If this is ever does happen, it is always very damaging in a group setting.

I think 15 mph is a fair cutoff for the DQ decision; above that reaches or approaches the level of reckless driving in many states. It should be spelled out in the rules that it is a black and white, automatic disqualification. I also think it should be based on a citation being issued by law enforcement, OR on radar reading by an O control. (I think the O control will be safe from favoritism; I would not fear Kurt being behind the gun; he might shoot himself....ooooo, I'm bad....)

I would also not reinstate the finish position if the citation was thrown out in court; we all know how those things can be twisted on technicalities. If the citation for 18 mph speeding was issued from a police officer, then it was certainly for something that was pretty close to those speeds, and is bad enough to maintain the DQ ruling.

I do feel very badly for John, and I am sure he will get lots of sympathy to help him ease the loss. I also believe that if he feels he was bad, he'll take the rap and move on.

Mark Bowers

PS: The biggest difference that I see in this case and the Zimmer case is that a law enforcement official issued the citation. I believe they will be much more objective than us, as they are not involved with the internal politics of the sport, and not concerned with making anyone happy, or setting an example. The Zimmer incident was only based on a non-law enforcement person's observations, a person who has shown an amazing degree of subjectivity on a wide variety of issues; the Drislane case is far more objective.