Was it unfair?

[OVERSTEER]

But the wheel was jammed on the hub, that points to a problem with the Standard hub supplied by TOCA, so the system screws Tim Harvey out of another good potential finish.

[redshoes]

Just to repeat what I've already said on more than one occation - This is not the place to bring up the whole Chilton/Harvey debate again.

Oversteer, I know there is an autocensor but please try to moderate your language. Censored or not that sort of thing is not welcome here.

[Dave Brand]

Originally posted by OVERSTEER
But the wheel was jammed on the hub, that points to a problem with the Standard hub supplied by TOCA, so the system screws Tim Harvey out of another good potential finish.

Yeah, what a lousy trick, supplying Harvey with a faulty component to rob him of second place.

[jase]

Originally posted by OVERSTEER
But the wheel was jammed on the hub, that points to a problem with the Standard hub supplied by TOCA, so the system ****** Tim Harvey out of another good potential finish.

Rules are Rules, it's that simple

[kristof14]

it may not have been a faukty wheel hub assembly at all, it could be that the mechanic who put the wheel on before the race cross-threaded the nut causing it to become jammed.

[Rhys]

Perhaps this is me just being stupid, because i'm not 100% sure of the rules. Don't they state that 2 tyres must be changed, but not specify which ones? someone mentioned before about how the team probably knew that the tyre wasn't going to come off even before Harvey got into the pits. If that was the case, then when didn't the crew change a different tyre, which would have avoided the penalty?

[Elaine]

Yeah the rules don't state which tyres need to be changed so they could have changed a front and a back

[beatlebum]

Just a thought on the Matt Neal penalty at Oulton, is it not the reponsibility of the starter to ensure everyone is lined up correctly on the grid before the race starts.

[Pip]

If the wheel got stuck, they should have changed a different one... the team knows the rules, they should try to stick to them next time and perhaps then they won't get penalised!

[OVERSTEER]

Well going back to the incident at Brands (Yes we've been told to drop it)

[*************** REMAINDER OF POST DELETE ****************
Redshoes]

[AndyF]

I agree there should have been a penalty for Tim, but I though 25 secs was a bit harsh - he can't have gained that much time, if any at all!

[OVERSTEER]

Originally posted by OVERSTEER
Well going back to the incident at Brands (Yes we've been told to drop it)

[*************** REMAINDER OF POST DELETE ****************
Redshoes]

Why was the remainder of my post deleted? there was no bad language, I was just expressing a view, maybe in a slightly sarcastic way, but I saw no reason to delete that post

[Carrie]

Back onto Tim Harvey, at the end of the day, rules are rules and the team should have changed two wheels. It seems likely that if the team didn't have a rear wheel easily to hand when the front wheel jammed then they must have taken the decision that it was better to accept a penalty rather than wasting time getting another wheel sorted. Is 25 seconds a set standard penalty time or could it have been less or more?

[Carrie]

Originally posted by OVERSTEER


Why was the remainder of my post deleted?

Whilst I didn't see your original post and therefore cannot comment on the content of that post. I will say this. Neither myself or Redshoes will edit someone's post just for the sake of it. It is not an option that we will resort to lightly. I have confidence that Redshoes would have a very good reason for choosing to remove the remainder of your post.

[jase]

Originally posted by Carrie
...Is 25 seconds a set standard penalty time or could it have been less or more?

I believe that the penalty is not fixed, it depends on the advantage that could be gained. Think about it for a second, the tyres are up to heat and by changing only changing 1 tyre, you are in effect halving the disadvantage of cold tyres, thereby increasing the grip available until the 4th tyre comes upto temperature

[touring_car_fan]

If the race officals are so keen to drill it into our heads that TH's penalty was fair because of the rules etc. why wasn't TC penalised?

[redshoes]

Originally posted by OVERSTEER
Why was the remainder of my post deleted?

Originally posted by OVERSTEER
Well going back to the incident at Brands (Yes we've been told to drop it)

I think you had already answered your own question.

[KA]

Originally posted by touring_car_fan
If the race officals are so keen to drill it into our heads that TH's penalty was fair because of the rules etc. why wasn't TC penalised?

Presumably because the officials who looked at the situation felt that it didn't warrant a penalty- it's a situation that's open to interpretation and judgement, because you can argue whether one driver pushed another off or whether it was deliberate, reckless or simply a racing incident.

TH's pitstop problem is a different situation- the rules say the team must change 2 wheels, and if they don't then the penalty is applied. You can't argue whether they did or not, so there's no judgement involved

[jase]

Tim Harvey's infringement would have happened under direct scrutiny by a Pit Observer, If a report is issued to the Clark of the Course it is upto him to act upon it.

Out on trackside it is possible to miss any incident, in the pits it is hard to miss them. So penalty's will be issued on the spot.

[jase]

In addition to my previous post, if the fact that the 2 tyres haven't been changed, it will show up in post race scrutineering. In that case the Clark of the Course will more than likely speak to the driver and a member of the team and then will decide on what the penalty will be, if one applies.