Oh no.Quote:
Originally Posted by wwbroe
Printable View
Oh no.Quote:
Originally Posted by wwbroe
INFORMATION ABOUT SS 15Quote:
Originally Posted by erikli2
Stage is cancelled, other crews will obtain notional times.
Stage is stopped because of crash st.no.42.
retired (42 - Johnston Sean / Kihurani Alex): accident in SS 15
link
I didn't say it was related with that same event, i even mentioned the rally where the accident took place. The important thing is that yet another codriver passed away in this same weekend.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rally Power
Cred to Sordo, coming in and winning on gravel, after a long time without a rally at this level!
I need to adjust him up for future pickems!
For God's sake; the rally you've mentioned, Rallye Vidreiro, was the one that was cancelled yesterday, after the young girl unfortunate accident.Quote:
Originally Posted by wwbroe
Sorry for that mistake Rally Power, it was not at all my intention, that is what i read.Quote:
Originally Posted by Rally Power
Seems it happened at Rally del Sosio, my mistake.
How come? Sunday was now exactly the same as four previous years. Friday and Saturday were both shorter than normally, so his starting position advantage would have been longer, but also the time he drove in equal starting position on Saturday would have been equally longer. The biggest difference was the absence of any super specials, which could have made the difference of those few seconds!Quote:
Originally Posted by mknight
I just know it ;) (joke)Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
You are right, both legs were 40km longer. So it's not certain at all.
Sordo again jumping in the sea
https://twitter.com/rallyssimo/statu...10996299419648
https://yle.fi/urheilu/3-11590112
This says Sordo's car hasn't passed final scrutineering
https://www.petrolheads.gr/images/sm...smooth/omg.gif
Dani Sordon Hyunda has found something illegal during the final inspection. Official results have not yet been published. The jury is apparently considering the matter at the moment. #rally #mmrally
https://twitter.com/T_Tuominen/statu...46734416003074
Text to it by Ogier: No winners on board this time..but proper bottles! ��
https://twitter.com/sebogier/status/...845017089?s=21
Andre was faster.
...
https://twitter.com/AndreaKaiser/sta...63469462568961Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
I just love it how these dudes are still such friends although biggest rivals in rival teams :)
this is not friendly though...Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
Scott Martin
@scottmartinat
·
2m
I’ve seen exclusion in the past but times have changed I guess.
Ooh.. shut up..Quote:
Originally Posted by dimviii
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Oliveira
This is a thing for which everyone bar works team would be immediately excluded. That's simply a fact and we have seen that gazillion times.Quote:
Originally Posted by TypeR
Even last week FIA in their decision about exclusion of Lindholm from Latvia wrote that it is irrelevant how much a measured value cross the tolerance limit. The tolerance is there to give no discussion about breaching it. They also clearly wrote in the very same decision from last week that any consideration of the competitive advantage coming from the breach of the tolerance must not be considered an excuse.
At least it was just a fine, it would have been silly if they had taken the win away from Sordo.
No, it would not have been silly. It would be perfectly by the rules applied to everyone else.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kradovech
Again, this decision completely contradicts last week decision about exclusion of Lindholm from the Rally Liepaja and about hundreds of other cases.
It's irrelevant how much a value cross the tolerance. The tolerance is set exactly to avoid any discussion about the size of infringement and about any competitive advantage.
There’s also the high possibility it would have taken Hyundai away from the championship too. Hurts to say it, but the last thing that the FIA want to do is piss off one of two manus that are part of the championship, very much especially at the moment.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kradovech
It would have been justified, yes. But it would have been a silly situation nonetheless - a very small mistake by the team and major consequences.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
I would say that since no real advantage was gained, a fine is reasonable punishment.
Mirek is right,while there is no advantage to this particular case,rules are rules.
Plenty of others disqualified for the same reasons.
I wouldnt like Sordo to withdraw,but everyone must play with same rules.
Ogier opened his mouth ,and i am sure he didnt think twice what he said.
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EkEmhECX...pg&name=medium
Do You agree when the very same rules are applied in a different way in relation to the manufacturers and the privateers and when FIA completely contradicts their own statements in matter of days?Quote:
Originally Posted by Kradovech
What about unlimited testing in neighbourhood of Jyvaskyla?Quote:
Originally Posted by dimviii
Transcript of the post-event press conference organised by the FIA for the 2020 Rally Italia Sardegna.
https://www.fia.com/news/wrc-d-sordo...ng-really-hard
Not anymore in two years, and never on the route of Rally Finland the same year...Quote:
Originally Posted by wwbroe
I would like to hear Ogiers opinion about thisQuote:
Originally Posted by dimviii
Sorry, I am not informed enough. What particcular incident do you have in mind?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mirek
In general I agree that the rules are same for everyone, and all transgressions should be followed by a punishment. However it seems fair that the severity of the penalty depends on the severity of the transgression of the particcular rule. In this instance the limit is set to 2%, Hyundais value was 2,3%. Had it been say 4%, a more severe penalty would be natural.
So where would I draw a line? When should it be a fine, when a time penalty, when a disqualification of the driver or when should it be a disqualification of the entire team? Its a difficult question as any line, although necessary, would be arbritary. Luckily its a a question which is not up to me to answer.
That being said, obviously the rules should be applied the same way to privateers. If anything, the fine should be reduced for a similar transgression (In this instance exceeding the limitation by 0,3%)
euhm, no.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
some square corners, but no hairpins or chicanes. it has mostly fast flowing corners.
its narrow, slippery, has many tricky place and deep cuts everywhere. but most importantly has deep ditches almost everywhere.
wrong thread
What would lead them to inspect the subframe? It’s a fairly integrated part in terms of what is bolted to it, isn’t it? Would they have spotted something / totally random / had a tip off?
Let’s face it, 25g is pretty much invisible isn’t it.
It was not 25 gramms lighter but 211 gramms lighter.Quote:
Originally Posted by T16
You guys mix nominal homologated value with lower tolerance limit. That is two different things. Guess why there is the tolerance?