What's going on with our series?

[Bedford]

Pukekohe - On the straight, Dumbrell inside, Baird outside, Baird moves across on Dumbrell, mayhem ensues, Dumbrell heavily fined

Barbagallo - On the straight, Skaife inside, Ambrose outside, Ambrose moves across on Skaife, mayhem ensues, Ambrose heavily penalised

Eastern Creek - Going through corners, Ambrose inside, Skaife outside, Skaife moves across on Ambrose, Skaife spins, Racing incident

This is our premiere racing series, and we're about to go show it off on an international stage.

The Puk-Bar incidents are so similar, yet the judicial process found absolute opposite offenders in both cases. The first one the overtaker was blamed, the second one the defender was blamed.
The EC incident has just dropped the bomb on us that the B Pillar rule is now defunct.

What on earth is going on?!

[James63]

Er, B pillar was always for the car passing...if the car behind was passing they had to be up to the b pillar if contact was made. Skaife was passing ambrose, thus how can the b pillar rule be inforced.

[peckstar]

you missed a couple bedford.

Barbagello race 3. Ambrose on the inside Paul weel on the outside Weel comes accross. Ambrose takes to grass and by some freah keeps it straight. no penalty or even stewards inquiry.

Eastern Creek race two Richards inside, Skaife outside. skaife moves accross on richards skaife almost spins but loses enough to get passed. No stewards enquiry.


I would think that skaife spinning was penalty enough for him at EC. he didnt deserve a drive through after already dropping back 6 spots because of his misdemeanour. especially after he did not cause any damage to car he moved accross on

So what about the crash at Phillip Island a couple of years ago between Bargs and Murphy? On a straight piece of road, Bargs moves over on Murphy - gets turned around and crashes. Murphy is charged.

[Matt H]

what about the dribble in other threads saying the b pillar rule doesnt exist ???

[mac]

Originally Posted by Bedford

Pukekohe - On the straight, Dumbrell inside, Baird outside, Baird moves across on Dumbrell, mayhem ensues, Dumbrell heavily fined

This incident is TOTALLY different to the Barbagallo one in that there was an out of control third party which triggered Baird to move over. At Barbagallo, Ambrose CHOSE to move over.

Where Baird moved over to avoid a recovering car, Ambrose merely moved over of his own volition.

This was a racing incident - and I believe Dumbrell being heavily fined was wrong.

Originally Posted by Bedford

Barbagallo - On the straight, Skaife inside, Ambrose outside, Ambrose moves across on Skaife, mayhem ensues, Ambrose heavily penalised

The stewards got this completely right. Skaife was driving perfectly legitimately in a straight line down the inside of the track. Ambrose then chose to move across on Skaife to prevent him attempting a pass.

It was a straight, there was overlap and Ambrose had no need to drive across Skaife at that point.

It may have been a misjudgement on Ambrose's part (he may have misjudged how far ahead of Skaife he was), and hey everybody makes mistakes - but it resulted in taking a car out of the race and thus he deserved to be penalised for the mistake.

And for the record I reckon the Murphy/Bargwanna incident was Bargs' fault - as it was very similar to the Barbagallo incident - Murph was very unlucky there.

Originally Posted by Bedford

Eastern Creek - Going through corners, Ambrose inside, Skaife outside, Skaife moves across on Ambrose, Skaife spins, Racing incident

The stewards got this one wrong. Skaife had made a pass and was 95% ahead of Ambrose ENTERING THE NEXT CORNER.

It was Mark's cornerand he had the right to choose his line when he was that far ahead.

It is clearly Ambrose's fault - and I do not buy any of the stewards' rationale.

I wouldn't have had a problem if the stewards had not taken any action, but to lay the blame solely at Skaife's feet is plainly wrong.

I do agree with the point about the inconsistency of the stewards - I mean I have spoken about four incidents and I only agree with one of the decisions made!

[Jimmy14]

Originally Posted by Bedford

The EC incident has just dropped the bomb on us that the B Pillar rule is now defunct.

The B Pillar rule still exists but it only applies in the braking zone. The EC incident occurred while accelerating, hence the B Pillar rule doesn't apply

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by mac

It was Mark's cornerand he had the right to choose his line when he was that far ahead.
It is clearly Ambrose's fault

He does not have the right to choose which line he wants to when there is a car on his inside. Ambrose didnt lunge, brake late he drove around the corner and Skaife moved down the track onto his front bumper.

[Mattracer]

Ambrose didn't back off. What was he thinking- leading the championship narrowly with Ingall very close and pushing him harder than he has yet been pushed. Lucky he didn't get a penalty and/or points deduction. Skaife is a margin away from the points lead so has to go for gaps, Ambrose doesn't.

[Formula 5000]

Got to agree Mattracer. Ambrose may have been right and may have been wrong. The risk for not just backing off a little was either a drive through, points deduction or car damage. He most probably would have beaten Skaife overall but you have to question why he risked so much. If I was his team manager I would have told him to turn off more than the oil pump.
Ambrose must focus on the championship not on Skaife because Ingall is looming as a threat, not because of superior speed but finishing well.
The risk doesn't make sense even to a Ford driver like me.

[mac]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

He does not have the right to choose which line he wants to when there is a car on his inside. Ambrose didnt lunge, brake late he drove around the corner and Skaife moved down the track onto his front bumper.

But he wasn't on his inside. He was miles back on the entry to the corner.

It's not as if they were side by side - or anywhere near that for that matter.

They were turning into the corner and Marcos was a long way back - it was his responsibility to say, "wait up, I'm not far enough along here".

But he didn't.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by mac

But he wasn't on his inside. He was miles back on the entry to the corner.

It's not as if they were side by side - or anywhere near that for that matter.

They were turning into the corner and Marcos was a long way back - it was his responsibility to say, "wait up, I'm not far enough along here".

But he didn't.

He cant of been that far back, if Skaife can turn across and make contact.

Doesn't SKaife also have a responsibility to think, "checkin inside, where is he, is there enough room for me to turn into the apex"

Maybe they need spotters, in this instance Skaife would have known where Ambrose was and could have adjusted his line.

[mac]

Originally Posted by D.R.T.

Doesn't SKaife also have a responsibility to think, "checkin inside, where is he, is there enough room for me to turn into the apex"

There was plenty of room for Skaife to turn in.

There wasn't so much for Marcos to keep his nose in there though.

[D.R.T.]

Originally Posted by mac

There was plenty of room for Skaife to turn in.

There wasn't so much for Marcos to keep his nose in there though.

I think we will have to agree to disagree on this one mac.

[racer69]

Originally Posted by mac

There was plenty of room for Skaife to turn in.

There wasn't so much for Marcos to keep his nose in there though.

The cars were going from a left hand corner into a right hand corner.

Ambrose wasn't diving up the inside, he held his line, a line that goes from the outside of one corner into the inside of the next, due to Skaife being along side.

Skaife knew Ambrose was there, when he turned across he knew he was asking for it. Did Skaife get out of the throttle at Wanneroo when contact was imminent?

[mac]

Originally Posted by racer69

Skaife knew Ambrose was there, when he turned across he knew he was asking for it. Did Skaife get out of the throttle at Wanneroo when contact was imminent?

They are two totally different situations - one was on a perfectly straight bit of road, and the other in a corner.

The constant link between them extends no further than the two combatants involved.

I maintain Skaife had the corner and it was Ambrose's responsibility to give up when he was beaten (at that corner) and try and get him at a later point, rather than nerfing the red car.