|
Ok. let's try to sort this out. No-one has said that there is something wrong with the Mustang, so there is no reason why it would have caused consternation at Croft. As I said, the car was built to HRSR rules. In fact my ire was with Patrick Watts public outburst about the car. No-one has denied the oil leak either as far as I can see. In fact, in Jason Minshaw we have a first hand witness of its existence. However, why would someone not in the race but close to the sport, who I consider to be a reliable source ring me to inform me of the lack of ballast, and why would Marcus Pye allude to it in his report of the Croft meeting, where, incidentally, the car won again (in the second race).
This is apparently a highly modified car (Marcus Pye calls it 'Group 5') but built within HRSR rules. So the questions are 'do HRSR rules require it to run with ballast when racing against Appendix K cars', and 'was it carrying that required ballast in the race that it won at the Silverstone Classic?'
None of us get everything right when we are reporting, especially those of us who do it as an unpaid hobby. We sometimes have to rely on what is reported back to us. I'm always more than happy to make corrections, and have done so in the past, to anything I write, and I'm sure that goes for others on here, too. However, they say there is no smoke without fire, so you'll forgive me if I don't jump into immediate retraction mode. A statement from an official source would not go amiss at this stage.
|