[Foghorn]

During and Post race inspections found five competitors to have class non-compliance issues with their cars: 20, 59, 98, 429 and 491. Because theer were no clear cut regulations in place as to the appropriate penalty for such violations, all will keep their respective placings for the rally but RA said it is taking immediate steps to ensure that non-compliant cars are penalized placement positions in future situations.

You can read the details on the RA forum.

Edit: spelling

 

[Jens]

It's tough to be strict about minor stuff like that when most (if not all) cars have illegally modified emission control systems.

 

[2023maple]

Wow! Just read the R-A posts. Glad J.B. has jumped in firmly and sternly. It's a shame for the legal competitors this time, but hopefully this will help clean things up. This is racing so I really doubt it though.
Kudos to Mike H. for the posts and identifying the cars. I think public humiliation will be the best enforcement of the rules.
Bryan

 

[Eric Burmeister]

>I think public humiliation will be the best enforcement of the
>rules.

For the teams or for the stewards?

 

[Anders Green]

I had always imagined that non-compliant cars would simply be moved to the appropriate class. (In the cases of these PGT cars, I would guess move them to Open.)

Having the results stand is quite surprising. It seems as though one could have showed up in an monster car, entered it in production class, win, and then just take three months off.

Would anyone have been upset with officials just saying, "Oh, looks like this isn't a production car. No problem, we'll just score you in open class, since this car is legal for open class."

(this post does not address illegal fuel issues, i haven't read the rules on those lately)

Cheers,
Anders

 

[2023maple]

>>I think public humiliation will be the best enforcement of
>the
>>rules.
>
>For the teams or for the stewards?


ultimately....the teams.

This time...I find it hard to lay into the stewards since they may not have had a proper guideline to follow for such incidents/violations. Common sense says they should have been more aggressive in penalty, but is it their position to set precedence?

Just stoking the fire!

Bryan

 

[Mike Hurst]

>It's tough to be strict about minor stuff like that when most
>(if not all) cars have illegally modified emission control
>systems.
>
Uh,.. Jens, the EPA is not sending me to remote regions of America to enforce their rules, R-A is.

On an ice rally, no other violation (other than spiked tires) could give a more significant advantage than removing weight or quicker steering.

 

[Mike Hurst]

The competiton has a right to know who they're racing against. If you're trying to limp a wounded car home, or playing it smart, or giving up a bit of a big class lead so you can make sure you make it to the end and clinch a championship, would it be fair to find out, an hour after the event was over, that there was someone else you were racing against?

The proper penalties for class violations should be class position or disqualification.

 

[Eric Burmeister]

>The proper penalties for class violations should be class
>position or disqualification.

I agree completely. You can fine 'em too, but not as an alternative to adding minutes.

 

[Jens]

That was poor wording on my part. I don't think it should be your job to police EPA compliance.

However, I think rally sanctioning bodies should strongly recommend competitors have EPA legal cars. I would like to see car owners replace their greed for finishing position with a true attempt at compliance with federal motor vehicle laws.

I should have made it a separate thread. I'll spank myself.

 

[JC_595]

>>The proper penalties for class violations should be class position or disqualification.<<

One HUGE YUP from me on that one. Personally I say DQ - the car was illegal as raced. Period.

Good job Mike.

Bad job stewards.

JC
#595
www.gnimotorsports.com

 

[Mike Hurst]

Put yourself in the steward's shoes.

Ignite a firestorm of controversy by altering the results, or a firestorm of controversy of not altering the results. It's a tough decision and the consequences are tough to deal with either way.

The steward's task was further complicated by the number of violations, I believe it would have been much easier to deal with if they only had the PGT violations, but each violation was in my opinion, clear and indisputable, and worthy of report. The post event inspection was limited to only 2 or 3 items per class, but we were lucky (unlucky?) that the items we happened to check this time turned out to have violations.

The stewards were put in a no-win situation. Can you imagine the outcry if ACP had been penalized and Pastrana awarded the victory?

My at-event job, as only a finder of fact, is much easier than the steward's job.

 

[MN_Rallymaster]

It's hard to argue that the stewards did not follow the rules in this case. They applied the rules (8.2 I believe) as written. The problem is that the rules provide more latitude than should be allowed in this situation.

I think we all would like to have seen a more agressive attack on this type of blatant rule breaking, but its not the stewards who broke the rules. The full blame and wrath of all should be directed at the competitors who were knowingly operating non-compliant vehicles.

I fully expected something like this to occur eventually given the higher level of scrutiny that the cars are being given. Now that it has happened and the weakness of the current rules have been shown, those issues will be addressed and further incidents will be dealt with in a manner more consistent with the popular opinion on cheaters.

Brad Odegard

 

[Jens]

Penalties for cheating

>I think public humiliation will be the best
>enforcement of the rules.


That is an interesting idea. In addition to letters of reprimand and various penalties.... Maybe something like a public apology at a driver's meeting of the next event the competitor attends, or other such gathering, being a requirement prior to being allowed to compete.

If they don't want to apologize.... public flogging might work

 

[rotten]

>>The competiton has a right to know who they're racing against.
> If you're trying to limp a wounded car home, or playing it
>smart, or giving up a bit of a big class lead so you can make
>sure you make it to the end and clinch a championship, would
>it be fair to find out, an hour after the event was over, that
>there was someone else you were racing against?

I don't know about that. If you're limping a wounded car home you're just going to get what you can get.

Don't the rules state that the car will be bumped up into Open? If so all the Open class competitors know what could happen and should be prepared for that eventuality.

 

[Dave Clark]

>>>The competiton has a right to know who they're racing
>against.
>> If you're trying to limp a wounded car home, or playing it
>>smart, or giving up a bit of a big class lead so you can
>make
>>sure you make it to the end and clinch a championship, would
>>it be fair to find out, an hour after the event was over,
>that
>>there was someone else you were racing against?
>
>I don't know about that. If you're limping a wounded car home
>you're just going to get what you can get.
>
>Don't the rules state that the car will be bumped up into
>Open? If so all the Open class competitors know what could
>happen and should be prepared for that eventuality.<<


I agree. If a PGT car is found to be not legal for PGT, bigger brakes or something, then it should be bumped into Open. This is what was done in the past, there is precedent for it. In more recent years it seems the stewards have gone to extremes sometimes and excluded cars outright with no appeal when they could have just bumped them into Open class. If someone in Open class is going to get their ego shattered over losing a trophy or position in class because they got beat by a non-compliant PGT car that bumped into their class then they need to look in the mirror. The fact is, had that car been found legal then they still would have been beat by a PGT car!

 

[BenSlocum]

I was thinking someone was going to be busted about the bumper beams when I noticed a missing bumper cover with no beam on stage 12. That's not to mention the half dozen or so cars with windows down more than 3 or 4 inches, including atleast one competitor I saw at Tall Pines, wich I thought would be warning enough to someone about that if someone watchs (I know, CARS vs. RA, but the rules the same between them)If that rule was enforced, the results for both national and club rallies would have been vastly different on its own from those penalties.

 

[Foghorn]

>I agree. If a PGT car is found to be not legal for PGT,
>bigger brakes or something, then it should be bumped into
>Open. This is what was done in the past, there is precedent
>for it. In more recent years it seems the stewards have gone
>to extremes sometimes and excluded cars outright with no
>appeal when they could have just bumped them into Open class.

There may be appropriate situations where you bump a non-class-compliant car into Open, BUT I don't think it's appropriate when the car was intentionally prepped illegally for its class in the first place. In the case of the Jetta, I don't know the details but it might be the result of mixing trim or such parts from various years just because that was what available at the boneyard. Maybe it wasn't that either but nothing dastardly has apparently been revealed. However, in other cases you don't accidentally forget to reinstall the rear bumper beam or accidentally insert a steering quickener or quick ratio rack and not know that it has been done. Intentional cheating should be dealt with by penalization, not reward of placement in another class.

 

[Mike Hurst]

>
>Don't the rules state that the car will be bumped up into
>Open? If so all the Open class competitors know what could
>happen and should be prepared for that eventuality.
>
>
No.

"8.2.C.11.
If a vehicle is found not to be in compliance with the Class rules,
the entry can be changed without penalty to a compliant Class, if
this is done before the first Time Control."

The competitors should be able to know who they are racing against, and that entries will not be added to their class contests during or after the event.

Redundant / too many / non-competitive classes, slow drivers and cars, is an entirely different subject.

Edit: Why do we have an "open class" anyway, why not just have overall scoring for these cars, and no class scoring? Would this solve the problem? Cars that don't meet their class rules would place overall, but not in any class.

 

[RobBohn]

And the great thing about all this is we all learned from it:

* Certain competitors know what needs to be changed (no ifs, ands, or buts)

* All competitors know the rules in more depth, and are more apt to "err on the side of legality"

* R-A improved the rules where they were weak

* The stewards know where the knife-edge of decisions lies

Did anyone read the book "The Goal"? The subtitle was something along the lines of "Constant Improvement"... Highly recommended...