2016 Virgin Australia Supercars Championship - Results and TalkTouring Cars

[05XR8]

Skaife says each of the three drivers did nothing wrong.

Ingall says there was no lock up and Whincup was not out of control

Both saying Whincup was at the b-pillar and the move was on.

Must be some good stuff they're smoking.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

People just leaving the door open for Giz is appalling.

If they don't leave it open, he'll force it open, and they'll likely wind up in the wall while SVG smirks down Conrod Straight.

 

[ZooB18]

Bathurst usually clashes with the Japanese Grand Prix, which is one of Button's favourites.

Yeah but when retires barring he doesn't race anywhere else like the prototypes maybe we'll see him here it would be great to have him race here.

 

[ZooB18]

Skaife says each of the three drivers did nothing wrong.

Ingall says there was no lock up and Whincup was not out of control

Both saying Whincup was at the b-pillar and the move was on.

Must be some good stuff they're smoking.

I'm with you he stuffed both drivers race.

 

[CodeRedR51]

And that's without bringing up the fact that Kelly never actually completed the redress....

He was given a 10 second hold penalty on his next pit stop instead.

 

[05XR8]

http://www.speedcafe.com/2016/10/12/de-silvestro-work-needed-ahead-2017/
I checked the Nissan Motorsport FB page. Some people posted about wanting to see the #260 photos. NM responded about how the #360 got technical support and how they were an independent commercial entity.

Might be a way to run another Altima on the grid. Like the #97 for Holden and #111 for SBR.

What other team would pick her up, if not the wildcard team made for her?

 

[Spacegoat]

Ingall says there was no lock up and Whincup was not out of control

He had a slight lockup going into the corner. They even froze the footage at the exact moment Whincup's car started to slide. What the hell is Ingall on?

 

[FPV MIC]

I like the idea of a redress being an option for smaller incidents, but only when both drivers can resume in exactly the same positions, with no immediate gain or loss for either driver.

What I don't agree with is the redress being used as a "Let's just pretend that didn't happen" when a driver has been massively disadvantaged or hindered. Best example is the Kelly / Pither incident, where Pither dropped 10 positions as a result and a redress was ordered.....sorry, but that's taking it too far. And that's without bringing up the fact that Kelly never actually completed the redress....

^^This^^👍

He was given a 10 second hold penalty on his next pit stop instead.

Another case of Race Control making the rules up as they go along. He was told to redress but did not = pit lane drive through penalty. It is not up to Race Control to make sure Kelly has a working radio, that is the teams responsibility.

 

[CodeRedR51]

I'd hardly say it was on purpose anyway, his right front locked up pushing him into Pither. Had Pither not been there, the outcome would have been the same for Rick but without involving another car. Pither just happened to be there.

 

[FPV MIC]

I'd hardly say it was on purpose anyway

Totally agree. He was clearly distracted by his radio not working which lead to his error, but that's irrelevant.

his right front locked up pushing him into Pither. Had Pither not been there, the outcome would have been the same for Rick but without involving another car. Pither just happened to be there.

Pither just happening to be there isn't a reason to not deserve a penalty but it is the reason he did deserve one.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Pither just happening to be there isn't a reason to not deserve a penalty but it is the reason he did deserve one.

I'd say the lockup and the subsequent off is enough of a penalty in the first place, but in the end he did get one so us arguing about it is irrelevant.

 

[FPV MIC]

I'd say the lockup and the subsequent off is enough of a penalty in the first place, but in the end he did get one so us arguing about it is irrelevant.

Would you feel the same if Pither had done that to Kelly, I don't think so. You are totally disregarding what happened to Pither which was a far worse penalty than Rick's (who caused the incident) 10 second hold penalty. In what world is a locked brake and a slight off enough of a penalty to Rick.

I am not pointing this situation out as a grudge against Rick, it's for me more about Race Control. This is exactly the sort of thing that leads to inconsistencies that frustrate me no end in the sport I love.

 

[CodeRedR51]

In what world is a locked brake and a slight off enough of a penalty to Rick.

Losing positions due to an off is a penalty, surely. Not one issued by race control, but one self inflicted. Second, It doesn't matter if Rick had to readress or serve a 10 second penalty at the stop, either way Pither stays where he ended up and Rick loses a ton of spots. There is no issue here.

 

[FPV MIC]

Losing positions due to an off is a penalty, surely. Not one issued by race control, but one self inflicted.

That's fine if there were no other cars involved, but there was and Pither was clearly disadvantaged by Kelly's error so he deserved a Race Control penalty, not a self inflicted one.

Second, It doesn't matter if Rick had to readress or serve a 10 second penalty at the stop, either way Pither stays where he ended up and Rick loses a ton of spots. There is no issue here.

This is where I have the issue, not with Rick but with Race Control. First they issued an order for him to redress, which under the current rules is ok, but Kelly did not because he couldn't hear his radio, so (this is the bit that's wrong IMO) Race Control changed their decision to a 10 sec. pit lane hold penalty. It's this moving target of rules that is wrong IMO, no matter who the driver is. Rules are rules whether your radio is working or not, so if you don't redress you get a drive through.

 

[CodeRedR51]

Meh, 10 second hold, readress or drive through, it all has the same effect. And that's the point.

 

[legatoblues]

Meh, 10 second hold, readress or drive through, it all has the same effect. And that's the point.

The penalties all have the same effect (and thanks for pointing out the hold in the pits, I had forgotten that), but real issue I was looking at is what deserves those penalties.

Making contact with someone and moving them off line or off the track is one thing that deserves one level of attention.

But making heavier contact with someone, causing them to lose multiple positions and potentially causing damage to their car is something that deserves another level of attention. They aren't equal and shouldn't be treated as such.

I'm not sure what the rulebook actually says in terms of the redress situation, but I believe it should only be considered appropriate in situations where the redress puts both drivers back in exactly the same position as they were prior to the incident. No gain or loss for either.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

It's long been felt among the fans that there is one rule for Triple Eight, and one rule for everyone else because if Triple Eight are penalised, Roland Dane makes a fuss and the sport gets negative media attention.

 

[Tak[TEC]]

Seems like it is about time to start being harsher on them then, this appeal should result in a harsher penalty. Then maybe Roland will stop wasting everyone's time with **** like this

Also i'm a bit confused, wasn't the B-Piller rule changed due to stuff like this constantly happening? Hence why redressing is now becoming mandatory

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Seems like it is about time to start being harsher on them then, this appeal should result in a harsher penalty. Then maybe Roland will stop wasting everyone's time with **** like this

Also i'm a bit confused, wasn't the B-Piller rule changed due to stuff like this constantly happening? Hence why redressing is now becoming mandatory

Here's what I think about moving the goal post, Supercars is afraid of not catering to the one group that keeps them afloat in the vast exit of manufactures in the sport in one sense or another. If it were for Triple8 holding a literal monoply on car supply to others who wish to be competitive to whatever degree, perhaps the governing body wouldn't feel held hostage at times and make such varying decisions on rules that are not at all consistent.

 

[Tak[TEC]]

Well they own what, 4 cars including Tekno? They aren't going to get much interest with Gen 2 cars if they just cater everything towards one team

 

[LMSCorvetteGT2]

Well they own what, 4 cars including Tekno? They aren't going to get much interest with Gen 2 cars if they just cater everything towards one team

Yeah that's true, but with the obvious move from HRT to give everything to T8, it's pretty obvious where people will need to go if they want a competitive car from the get go. Now DJR may come up to equal pace next year with Penske money but that's to be seen. I feel VASC isn't doing much to actually one, interest people into trying Gen 2 bodies and engines to shake up the T8 strong hold. And two bringing in other manufactures that could use the Australian series as a platform for the Oceanaic and Asian markets. Which brings it down to a more local reason of catering to groups already in the series.

I mean yeah it's a bit conspiracy in nature but then again other than influence why else would T8 seem to get goal post movement where others do not?

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Roland Dane has reportedly told Will Davison that he doesn't want Triple Eight's appeal to change the race result:

http://www.speedcafe.com/2016/10/12/davison-assured-bathurst-1000-victory-safe/

It looks like he wants Whincup to get the full 300 points for finishing eleventh.

 

[Com Fox]

Well they own what, 4 cars including Tekno? They aren't going to get much interest with Gen 2 cars if they just cater everything towards one team

They supply Holden to several other Holden teams, more so than HRT ever do. CS and I do believe LD also use 888 Commodores.

Roland Dane has reportedly told Will Davison that he doesn't want Triple Eight's appeal to change the race result:

http://www.speedcafe.com/2016/10/12/davison-assured-bathurst-1000-victory-safe/

It looks like he wants Whincup to get the full 300 points for finishing eleventh.

Does it really matter then? Whincup is still in championship range and Red Bull have the top 3. If they aren't looking to change who wins (which shouldn't happen anyway) then its best not to bother.

Not to mention, not sure how SVG would feel losing the Championship lead.

 

[05XR8]

VASC need to stop. PLP for spinning, spearing, escorting a car off track that results in the innoocent car getting stuck, having to rejoin and continue and/or having to enter pits for repairs due to such contact. No rederessing. No points taken. Ruin one drivers race, yours get ruined. Done.

In case offending team/driver do not carry out PLP(in case of last lap incident), 10 place grid penalty for next race.
There is no gray area.

http://www.speedcafe.com/2016/10/12/cams-introduces-supercars-superlicense/
Are they serious? Someone almost has to race in TCM forever, to get a licence. Yet, pilot an 86 and you can get an invite quicker.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Someone almost has to race in TCM forever, to get a licence

Most TCM drivers are older, gentlemen drivers, and the cars handle significantly differently to V8s.

Yet, pilot an 86 and you can get an invite quicker.

The 86 Series is designed to be a feeder series to assist young drivers with their careers.

 

[05XR8]

Most TCM drivers are older, gentlemen drivers, and the cars handle significantly differently to V8s.


The 86 Series is designed to be a feeder series to assist young drivers with their careers.

Some TCM cars have more power than a Supercar. Plus, less brakes and tyres than Supercars. Closer to a Supercar than an 86.

Going from a low hp Production car straight into a Supercar, is a steep hill to climb.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

Going from a low hp Production car straight into a Supercar, is a steep hill to climb.

It's a points-based system. You need thirteen points to drive a Supercar, but winning the 86 Series only gives five points. So you'd have to win it three years running to get a Supercar licence.

 

[05XR8]

Classing the 86 series with TCM and V8 Touring cars makes no sense. Even if someone masters a 3rd season in an 86, still hasn't prepared them to handle a Supercar.

If Aaren Russell has a little cousin that wants to race at Bathurst. Having won the 86 C'hip 3 times in a row, doesn't mean they can steer a Supercar. No matter how talented they are in an 86.

If someone gone from a season of 86 to V8 Tourers to DVS makes sense.

 

[Com Fox]

Classing the 86 series with TCM and V8 Touring cars makes no sense. Even if someone masters a 3rd season in an 86, still hasn't prepared them to handle a Supercar.

If Aaren Russell has a little cousin that wants to race at Bathurst. Having won the 86 C'hip 3 times in a row, doesn't mean they can steer a Supercar. No matter how talented they are in an 86.

If someone gone from a season of 86 to V8 Tourers to DVS makes sense.

Same could be said of Simona who originally only had Open Wheel experience before 2015 Bathurst (which is a lot different to a Supercar), and experience in terms of time, Simona wasn't even any good at it.

or anyone else who came from overseas to jump straight into a Supercar.

 

[prisonermonkeys]

If someone gone from a season of 86 to V8 Tourers to DVS makes sense.

And I suspect that's the way that it will play out. If you win the 86 Series three times, you're eligible for a Supercar licence - but that doesn't mean that you'll get a Supercar drive. I imagine that drivers who succeed in the 86 Series will be promoted to something like DVS relatively quickly.