And there is no answer, pittyQuote:
Originally Posted by steve.mandzij
Printable View
And there is no answer, pittyQuote:
Originally Posted by steve.mandzij
I don't know how much more you want me to say. It's fairly simple really: cutting a chicane made with hollow plastic barriers deliberately after testing their rigidity on the first pass through the stage is penalty worthy because it's a time gaining situation.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
How you could argue that hitting a rock or a couple of potted trees gives you and advantage like cutting the chicane makes no sense at all. Because, whereas hitting the chicane makes you go through the obstacles faster by moving them, hitting rocks or solid pots make you slow down because they're hard objects that could also damage your car.
It's a shame you're trying to defend your point at this stage because it really makes no sense. Or at least you haven't made it clear yet. This is as easy as I can make it to understand.
A simple question - since when cutting a corner (no matter hitting something or not) or use a snow bank to preserve speed are new to rallying?Quote:
Originally Posted by steve.mandzij
Since never.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
But cutting excessively receives penalties.
You're never not supposed to cut a corner, as long as you don't completely skip it you're probably fine.
If you're not supposed to cut a chicane and go through it without knocking the obstacle around, why should you not be punished?
If you're doing a race where you're not supposed to knock over cones or you'll get a penalty, why shouldn't you get punished for hitting cones? It's the same principle. You're explicitly not supposed to move the chicane, never explicitly not allowed to have one or two wheels off the road or in a snowbank. You're baffling me.
I was little curious about the broken rule, and here it is:
"14.2 ROAD BOOK / ITINERARY
All crews will receive a road book containing a detailed description of the compulsory itinerary which must
be followed. The compulsory itinerary of the rally is defined in the Road Book by the road direction diagrams
and, between the road direction diagrams, by the defined roadway. Furthermore, on the special stages the
organisers may erect barriers or any other hindrances where they believe competitors have deviated from
the roadway during reconnaissance or the first running of the stages.
Any deviation will be reported to the Stewards."
I completely don't understand the reference in this though:
"13.3.4
Attribution of ‘Power Stage’ points
Points will be awarded according to the scale as described in Art. 5.3.2.
For the purpose of allocating points, the Power Stage Classification shall be calculated using the stage time
plus any other time penalty accrued on this stage, including any false start penalty.
To score points, a driver must be classified in the Final Classification of the rally.
If a driver appears in the Power Stage classification but is not classified in the Final Classification of the rally,
the Stewards shall decide whether the next Competitor should be moved up in the Power Stage classification
for the attribution of Power Stage points.
If the Power Stage is definitively stopped before all P1 drivers eligible to start the Power Stage have had the
opportunity to complete the stage, the FIA may decide that no points are awarded for the Power Stage."
Perhaps some lawyer here can explain those?
How much You define deviation from the route in 14.2 - 2 inches? A penalty for the PS time seem to be defined only for false start time - did Ogier broke that rule?
It says that penalties incurred in the stage count towards it's time, including the false start penalty and I suppose any penalty for cutting corners as well. Correct?Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
Correct, but on what ground is the time penalty in 14.2 penalized in 13.3.4? It says organizers can raise obstacles if a driver deviates from the route on the first pass. But in the decision doesn't state that, it says the obstacles are exactly in the same position (and what of it? this is only driver's concern)? I'm a bit confused, looks like they've fallen in their own trap.Quote:
Originally Posted by steve.mandzij
How much should be penalized Neuville & Mikkelsen going in the banks several times with more than 2 inches deviation?
No, it was over when Sordo and Loeb had punctures.Quote:
Originally Posted by macebig
Like NOT said, it was fun for 1.5 days but it would have been fun for all 3 days without the troubles.
The difference here is that the road book does not contain every single corner - just tells which road to drive, how long, which junction to turn. And of course, anything artificial such as chicanes, and they should not be deviated from.Quote:
Originally Posted by stefanvv
And a steward’s decision is not automated, it takes a human decision. If Ogier’s time had been slow enough not to get any points in the first place, I doubt the penalty would have been issued.
Stewards are often old professionals, I think Grönholm’s co-driver Timo Rautiainen used to be one.
To my understanding, thats one of the reasons these stewards exist - to evaluate such situations and assign penalties when unfair advantage is achieved. At least on local level i know that leaving the course is when all 4 wheels are off the road (tarmac or gravel). In most such situations advantage is not achieved, as moving on roads is generally faster than moving on ploughed field or through bushes, but on some occasion it might be faster and then (when sufficient proof is presented) stewards may apply penalty. Also, rally is supposed to happen in environment without deliberately rearranging said environment - so hitting a tree is technically illegal, but when no advantage is gained, no penalty is assigned. But when barriers or cones are pushed away and advantage is achieved, then stewards may assign penalty. As possible variations are endless, quality of proofs varies, then panel of stewards is necessary to weigh each situation. Otherwise clearly defined list of penalties could be sufficient.
If these barriers were made of solid concrete Ogier would have been stuck on the place with broken front right wheel. So penalty was fully ok. Understand the forum is agreed on the penalty. (Didn´t read whole thread at the end)
We've seen loads of driver's nudging and even fully hitting straw bail chicanes over the years and no penalties have been applied.
Why cant Ogier just say he mis-judged his speed and hit the barriers axcidentally ?
Can you pinpoint an example where a considerable advantage was gained (ie. gaining a position or winning a power stage)?Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
Don’t think anyone will believe him.Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
We may find out though, as M-Sport are going to appeal his penalty.
This could only be a joke
Neuville could have driven that chicane at 10 km/h making sure he touches nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by RICARDO75
He could have plowed through and been given a 30 sec penalty
He could have been given the same 10 sec penalty as Ogier
None of that would have changed the end result of the rally (this was not on the power stage)
First passQuote:
Originally Posted by RICARDO75
It doesn't matter. If a driver is penalised for a reason, and everyone else who did the same, must be equal for all, regardless of whether it makes a difference or not.
something for Anttik https://twitter.com/SebOgier/status/972944034053410816
You would be happier if Neuville was 9:13.0 from the lead instead of 9:03.0 and 1:31.7 ahead of Tidemand instead of 1:21.7?Quote:
Originally Posted by RICARDO75
Like I said, this is why we have human stewards.
This type of penalty does not make me happy and I don't have favourite drivers. I just like things to be fair. And those barriers should have water within.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
Well, if the stewards had acted quick and given Neuville a penalty before the power stage started, I guess Ogier would have taken it easier. So in that way it was not fair.
Regarding that chicane and how it should be built, I don't think it should have been there at all. It was not even necessary for the stage average speed being too high.
Loeb also moved the barrier(only on the exit though) on the power stage and didn't get penalty and scored one point.
Thats what I mean... driver's take every cut and advantage they can, those crappy barriers were asking to be clipped.
Theese chicanes are used to slow cars down on the entry to villages or cities, due to improve safety of spectators or citizens just accidentaly passing by. If there was not the chicane, cars would be entering next right corner about 40kph faster, (i guess) and there was a lot of spectators on the outside on the finish straight.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
They could have just put the finish a bit earlier, where tarmac started?Quote:
Originally Posted by kubiczech
EDIT: Maybe the chicane was indeed to allow a big spectator area in the outside of the last corner...otherwise they wouldn't have had space for a big spectator area.
I still do not understand why they insist on this kind of "special".
In Ogiers case it was WDC points to fight for. And Ogier gained many tenths of a second doing what he did. So justice were conducted. No fiver for him. That´s fair.
And hey, hai bails won´t be hit hard without severe damage on car.
This.Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
They could use tractors, like in finland last year. Or metal shipping containers.
When chicanes are heavy and dangerous, people complain, when they are light and safe, other people complain.
It's pretty simple, you're not supposed to hit anything or leave the route. If you do, they can give you a penalty. Its up to the clerk of the course to decide.
2016 actually. After complaints it was removed for 2017.Quote:
Originally Posted by denkimi
As I wrote yesterday. The solution is very simple and can be done same way as in our championship. The chicane is of standard proportions given by the rules before the season, it is painted on the ground before the recce, than built on the same ground plan and a steward with an arbitral function is assigned to it. For damaging/braking the chicane there are fixed penalties given by the rules prior the season. If You only move one element of the chicane from its ground plan You get 5 seconds penalty (it must be completely outside of the ground plan), if more You get higher penalty up to 30 seconds if You simpy go straight through.
This has been working here for years. It's clear and fair for everyone.
Have you read the decision?Quote:
Originally Posted by AnttiL
So before PS (and therefore likely after first run and seeing what Neuville did). Ogier asked and was told that it was not ok.Quote:
... Competitor, before the running of the stage, was seeking clarification with the Clerk of the Course regarding consqeuences of "nudging the first part out of the way".
The reply given by the Clerk of the Course to the team of all the manufacturers was that any deviation.... will be referred to the stewards for further investigation.
... and then pushed it out (maybe not on purpose but that doesn't matter).
Note how all other cars avoided it prbly also because they got the same info.
Therefore I am 100% fine with the penalty.
Jesus, guys, take a moment and read the stewards decision report.
"Competitor, before the running of the stage, was seeking clarification with the Clerk of the Course regarding the consequences of "nudging the first part out of the way". The reply given [...] was that any deviation, "specifically not going around the elements of the chicane [...] will be referred to the stewards for further investigation"."
If this isn't clear proof of intent to win time with that trick, I don't know what is. And he was warned that it will be referred to judges, yet he still did it. How can you justify his action? I haven't seen Neuville's run through that chicane on the previous stage, but unless he also deliberately and as clearly cut the chicane to gain time (for which he had no reason to, as there was no one around him and it wasn't power stage), I don't really see a problem here.
// mknight already pointed the same out while I was typing this post, sorry for doubling. But damn, AnttiL is a proper hypocrite.. :)
...and to have those crappy barriers on a Power Stage is just stupidQuote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
???Quote:
Originally Posted by RaunoK
What's up with this forum?
While I agree with Ogier that 10 seconds is too much since we can't know that he did it on purpose and of course he didn't gain 10 seconds cutting the chicane, I think it's fair that a penalty is applied considering that there are bonus points in the power stage that can be valuable for the championship.
On a side note I think we should have a standard for artificial chicanes. They shuold be built in the same way in every rally and we should have rules for drivers who cut in some way (in those chicanes).
But most important they should be limited as much as possible and the most of the time just for safety reasons...
I think that chicane in the PS was pretty useless...
Ogier:Quote:
Originally Posted by Fast Eddie WRC
""We are working on this to explain ourselves because it was not deliberate at all," he said."
That's impossible to prove. The fact that they moved it on the other hand is impossible to deny.
Also think it's very unlikely they will give him penalty of 0.8s or something like that based on some detailed video analysis. If anything happens they'd change it to 5s. Which will give him 1 PS point.