Of course he had control of the track conditions. Wasn't there a inspection? If there was then he failed. If there wasn't then he failed.Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
Printable View
Of course he had control of the track conditions. Wasn't there a inspection? If there was then he failed. If there wasn't then he failed.Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
So Randy is supposed to be doing these inspections himself? Of course we both know that is not the case. Now, given that, if he is told by the folks who did the inspection that things looked ok, he's not supposed to take their word for it? Yes the buck may stop with him, but it was still not something under his direct control.Quote:
Originally Posted by anthonyvop
Wasn't there an ALMS race there the day before? Did the track break up then? If not, what expectation would Randy have that it would today. Look this was a really bad outcome today, I agree. I just don't see how it falls on Randy's head.
Gary
Anthony has a point...
I own a couple restaurants.... And even if I'm on vacation and one my cooks over cooks a steak ultimately thats my responsibility
Are you telling me because he is COO Randy has no responsibility of how the series is actually run?Quote:
Originally Posted by garyshell
He is the boss. If the people who he hired FAILED in the track inspection then he FAILED as a Chief Operating Officer. The Business world is littered with the carcasses of former business leaders who failed to lead.
BTW It was Grand-Am not ALMS and I have heard from some people that yes, parts of the track were coming up on Saturday.
Ultimately, the buck stops at Randy - if they did not properly check out the course ahead of time that would be his fault for not insisting it be right and once the situation became bad he should have "lead" to some sort of solution (which he may have done behind the scenes). Basically this is a perfect example of the old adage "PPPPPPP" - proper prior planning prevents pi** poor performance.... and Randy is responsible for proper prior planning...
The real problem here is the series continues to deal from a potion of weakness and as such does not have the power to tell promoters, teams, etc. to "do it right or get lost"... I am fine with racing in Detroit on a less than ideal race course for the sake of Chevy etc. It is not ok for that course to then fall apart (much like the rest of the infrastructure of this country). The promoters should have known better....
But, I agree, Randy has to accept responsibility and deal with this fiasco - not pass the buck......
In that example, you are the responsible one but it is not your fault, there is a difference there, it becomes your fault if you don't take actions and it keeps happening again, again, and again.Quote:
Originally Posted by SarahFan
Responsibility is greater/trumps fault
Interesting reading from passionate people I must say.
The basics of this post was to deal with the owners trying to get rid of Randy. They have no power to do so and only a few have the ear of "The Family".
I think Randy was smart blasting it on twitter and keeping the series in the media's attention. Even the bad track problems at Detroit will keep the media's interest a few more days. Media coverage is good and controversy sells TV time.
I agree with RM, he needs a trusted racing veteran owner to help him. But my advise is to Randy is to watch your back when making that selection. What is Mo Nunn doing these days?
Most certainly, but Anthony's point was that it was his fault, I'm saying that thee is a difference between being the responsible one and the one at fault, you fire the one at fault, not the responsible one, you fire the responsible one only when he or she is uncapable of taking corrective actions.Quote:
Originally Posted by SarahFan
In this case, obviously, you can't fire the one at fault because promoters don't work for the racing leagues, getting rid of the race might not be a solution either, lets be honest, promoters and tracks are not fighting to stage Indy races, but I do want to see him taking every possible measure to avoid something like this if they use this track next year.
His job is not easy, he can't choose and pick, this is not F1 where Ecclestone has to choose between tracks he wants, tracks that are willing to pay him a lot of money, tracks that will improve the F1 brand, and tracks of governments willing to do everything and anything to stage a race, in Indy you try to do the best you can with what you have.
Without splitting too many hairs ..
Responsibility always encompasses fault
The other way around not so much