Quote:
Originally Posted by Coach Ep
Why should IMSA have any considerations for the SCCA Runoffs when deciding their schedule? Club racers? Those with pro ambitions will already be in one of their support series. Corner workers? Been on the bottom of their priority list for quite a while now. Spectators? No one outside SCCA members and racing regulars (crew members, officials, etc.) know such a thing as the Runoffs even exist let alone consider attending.
As much as I like club racing, the 'clash' is a non-issue for IMSA.
Time to get over it and move on.
|
It is an issue as IMSA is going to have problems finding people to man all of the positions needed to run the race. This wouldn't be an issue if IMSA got rid of the stance of not allowing the workers to respond to incidents on track. From working Daytona a couple years I can say they use to get a lot of workers from overseas (heck who wouldn't want to get out of Europe for a week during the winter) to work stations but since IMSA has started this policy we are lucky to get 1 or 2 workers from overseas. As I said in another post this policy leads to manufactured racing taking the endurance aspect out of the races. The way Daytona ran this year was one of the best race in a long time because of the lack of cautions.
As for the support series that could be an issue too. I see some drivers being out of contention for any of the support series titles who also run in SCCA and are Runoffs eligible running the Runoffs over the PLM support races. I can bet they would love to have a shot at a title and also save some money while going for that title.