Recently the red flagging (stopping) of a championship race caused confusion, protest, ill feeling and sent race stewards rushing for their rule books. Clarification of procedures under these conditions is currently a hot potato while argument continues. However a sensible ruling by a sub-committee of Motorsport New Zealand has somewhat cooled the debate. Lucky there are no billionaires involved!
The key issue for clarification is whether crews can work on their cars under red flag conditions.
This situation has evolved from the first BNT V8 race at the Hampsta 200, held at Timaru International Raceway in January 2010. After the race was red flagged because of a major incident, many crews worked on their cars (essentially changing to wet tyres and setup) which can be perceived as contrary to Schedule CH article 23 of the NZ Motorsport regulations which states ……no intervention or any nature is authorized unless the Event Director directs otherwise.
Let’s back up a little bit to before the said race began. Rain literally put the cat amongst the pigeons as it began to fall with most drivers on the grid with dry weather tyres bolted to their cars.
To add to the confusion:
• three competitors elected to start from the pits (not having taken to the starting grid) on wet tyres
• three competitors (Paul Manuel, Clark Procter and John Wheelan) took to the pits as the race started to change to wet weather tyres. (They were able to do this as their grid position was further back from the pit entry.)
The first three were able to join the race once the field had started and passed the pit exit.
Before the second three were able to rejoin the race the field came round to the end of the first lap with John McIntyre dramatically aquaplaning off, others joining him and the red flag being shown before the completion of the lap.
Add more to the confusion:
• To get to his pit Manuel had to cross the timing line that runs through the pits. The race was ‘green’ so he was credited with a lap.
• As Procter and Wheelan’s pits were before the timing line, they crossed it while the race was ‘red’ and were not credited with a lap.
• Meanwhile while the race was suspended most of the field elected to take to the pits, of course to change to wet weather tyres (and make as many adjustments they could). – This is the contentious issue which requires clarification!
And more:
• The race commenced and eventually it was Clark Procter that was given the chequed flag ahead of Craig Baird (the actual race winner).
The protest flag was flown by several crews which eventuated into a hearing (including protesters, the event director and the hearing committee).
There were several issues including the ‘control line’, the start, race recommencement, timing loop, pit lane and parc ferme conditions, the race finish and the results.
The hearing dealt with specific issues raised by the competitors in question and thus amended the race results. (click hear for full decision)
In its decision the hearing committee used good common sense to deal with the issue of crews working on cars contrary to Article 23 of SCH CH.
“There is a case to say that a large portion of the field contravened this rule, however the decision whether to do anything about that was the Event Directors and he choose not to. The panel is of the view that this would be extremely difficult to resolve. And in any case given that the penalty for this contravention is only a monetary one it would have no bearing on the results. This rule needs clarification.”
This is a good example of how our motorsport rules evolve. It was a particularly difficult situation for all involved and their ruling is sensible although some may differ.
The fact that it was a low key meeting (in the global sense) has meant that much of this has been glossed over and not raised many eyebrows. Rather if it had been in Valencia, had billionaires involved and was about the battle for a large silver cup then it would have made continuous headlines, magazine articles and history books.
