What went wrong

[Wilf]

As I understand it and if anyone can clarify the process please do, there is a chain of communication because attempting to communicate with 100 or so people ( 25 drivers, 25 spotters, 25 team managers, 25 observers and tech members ) at the same time becomes an exercise in futility.

Race control can broadcast to all drivers, spotters, designated team manager, and IndyCar officials.

Race control receives broadcasts from IndyCar observers around the track and IndyCar tech members each assigned to two teams.

Designated team manger has verbal communication with IndyCar tech member who has to relay the information to Race Control. The response from Race control is broadcast to the tech member and relayed verbally to the team manager.

Inasmuch as so many of the teams have indicated they were objecting to the restart it is safe to say there was either a breakdown in this communication chain or the senior official made a bad decision based on the information given to him.

If and/or where the breakdown occurred probably will not be part of the appeal process because it is not germane to the appeal and while I still believe Randy Bernard has been a plus for IndyCar I doubt that the results of any post action review will be distributed. However, I am not sure fan confidence in IndyCar can be regained without a thorough airing.

[monadvspec]

Marshall Pruett I believe the man's name is stated on another website that at least three teams had contact directly with race control. Why are the not using IM'S as they do in other forms of racing. Clean and immediate. Also, it takes away the ability to make a statement that not one team contacted race control. The man making that statement sure must be very confident in himself to state something like that and to also say that the driver of the Pace Car said everything was fine when in fact the man called in and said it was worse.

[slorydn1]

NASCAR had an incident similiar to this at the all-star race at Charlotte (back then the race was called the Winston)in 2001. The weather had been threatening on and off all day, but they were able to get the showdown race in without issue. After driver intros for the main event there were just some light sprinkles at the track, with lightning off in the distance, but they ended pretty quickly, the track never got wet. They fired the engines, did the pace laps and between the time the pace car and the last car in the field came through turn 2 of the last pace lap it started to rain. The driver of that car reported the raindrops on his windshield, to his spotter who reported it to the official responsible for the spotters stand who began to call the control tower, just as the flagman gave the green flag. The cars got to turn 1 and into an absolute downpour, and several cars were wrecked. Since it wasn't a points race, NASCAR deviated from the normal rules and allowed the affected teams to pull out back up cars. In fact the race winner, Jeff Gordon, won the race in a back up car. There was some whining by the the losing teams about the fact that the race was won by a driver in a back up car, etc etc etc.

The big difference, though, was that there wasn't a persistent mist over the track like had been in place at Loudon last weekend, and there certainly wasnt a big hue and cry among the teams leading up to the green flag that the race shouldn't be started-and this was just the beginning of the race, not near the end of the race like at Loudon. As far as I can recall (sorry I have no documentation to back this up) the NASCAR spotters around the track never reported the sudden shower because it wasn't raining where they were stationed-and it hadn't yet started to rain on pit road, nor on the driver's spotters stand on top of the frontstretch grandstand.

I do agree wholeheartedly that something needs to be done to speed up communications from the track to the control tower-in all forms of motorsport. I'm still dumbfounded as to how the couch potato like me at home seems to be much better informed as to what's going on on the track than the people who are actually there. Do they not have access to the TV broadcast in the tower? Could they not see the water on the in car cameras? We could when they show the replays. Don't they have a live feed from every camera at the track? If not, WHY NOT?

Could IM have prevented the wreck at the all star race in 2001? Probably not, and I say that only because of the lateness of the 1 and only report of raindrops. BUT, I do believe that something of that nature would really have helped at Loudon, if race control didn't have any other way of figuring out whats going on outside other than communications from the teams.

[call_me_andrew]

Since it wasn't a points race, NASCAR deviated from the normal rules and allowed the affected teams to pull out back up cars. In fact the race winner, Jeff Gordon, won the race in a back up car. There was some whining by the the losing teams about the fact that the race was won by a driver in a back up car, etc etc etc.

Here's the more technical explanation: Per the 2001 rules of The Winston, caution laps do not count; therefore, the first lap did not count because there was a caution. Since the first lap didn't count, the race technically never started.

[numanoid]

Here's the more technical explanation: Per the 2001 rules of The Winston, caution laps do not count; therefore, the first lap did not count because there was a caution. Since the first lap didn't count, the race technically never started.

Really? So a pass made in turn 1 that yielded a turn 3 crash and yellow means the pass in turn 1 is removed? Not sure I like that idea either...

[call_me_andrew]

That's the nice thing about exhibition races. Someone finds a reason to write new rules every year.