Being Complacent

[Jag50]

Originally Posted by Bodysnatcher

PS did I see somewhere recently that next year's F. Ford championship cars will all have in car cameras to assist if required in judicials.
Presumably the incar footage will only be looked at if required.
How about turning that around and randomly taking one car's footage and replaying it for non reported infringements?
harsh? pah, I've barely even started.

They were actually in use at the Festival and on at least one occasion that I heard on the Radio the Clerks requested Chief Pits recover the SD cards from vehicles.

[Slipstick]

I believe the original question was about marshals possibly getting complacent. So what next ? Compulsory recording shoulder cameras on all marshals so someone can check that extinguishers are being used correctly and flags waved properly...and of course that we're all looking the right way and never sitting down, leaning on anything or turning our backs on the traffic.

How far do we really want to go with all this ?

Steve

[Bodysnatcher]

you mean you've never been on the end of a message from race control, who due to cameras or timing screens are telling you to.

1 - Bring the yellow flag in before the incident marshals are back behind the armco
2 - Wave a blue at a back marker 1/2 a lap behind the leader
3 - Get the incident team to push (harder) the car thats in up to it's axles 10m into the gravel
4 - get a team out to sweep non-existant gravel off the track near pit lane exit.
Then release cars onto the track whilst you're out there. A car had spun and it was assumed there would be gravel. That was due to 2 people in race control with different agendas.

I explain issue 4 in detail because that was one where I was nearly taken out by a BTCC car. Race control person that released the cars had the balls to blame us for being there. No concern from him at all. That was my last BTCC race as an IO. It took over 5 years to come back. The other guy that was nearly hit never did a BTCC meeting again afaik.
Complacency? - you can find it everywhere.

[juliet]

Going back to the yellow flag and lap times debate, maybe the best way to measure it would be that they cant go any faster than 70% of the fastest lap (not sure on what % it would be but i am sure you get the idea)

Then there is no argument about slowest laps and how you determine them, all you need to do is decide what % you think is safe.

[chezza]

Ok so fastest lap...up until the yellow flag or their fastest lap overall. Is that the pole time or individual fastest laps?

[neil_davidson2]

Are marshals becoming complacent? No I don't believe so and in a lot of cases it's that lack of complacency that's been keeping the "miss" in near-miss.

Over the last couple of years there has quite rightly in my opinion been a push to go back to marshalling basics without the need for racing to be neutralised by safety cars.

In order for those of us trackside to be able to do this we need to be able to trust the competitors to obey the flags and give us the confidence to work. I don't want this to turn into a driver-bashing as the vast majority of drivers (especially at club level) do allow us to do this but I feel that there has been an increase in the severity and regularity of flag infringements (both yellow & chequered).

We need these infractions to be dealt with appropriately and consistently.

[Steve Fox]

My worry with this is that if the drivers risk being heavily penalised by whatever means available they all slow to a crawl and we can then get out there and do what we need to do in relative safety, knowing that all the cars are going carefully though the sector, then we can start to ignore whistles, no need to keep the car in between us and the track, maybe even have a sit down or a smoke. That is complacency. Because it is the straggler who has been in the pits for the last 2 minutes and can catch the carefully moving pack if they could only keep both feet on the gas.....

Bring me solutions.
What may be useful and can be learned is a certain amount of "race craft" and to use that to predict the risks. For an easy example: if there is a river of oil we know that the first one on it will be the first one off, there will be little legislation that would make that not so, the oil must therefore be dealt with one way or another.
Slightly less obvious is the way some drivers may behave when the double yellows or the sc board is out: the leader sees the flag or board in the distance, slows down, the 2nd place driver has a good view as they come along side the 1st place driver and also slows up as well, the 3rd place driver thinks there is now a gap and the 4th place driver (who thought they would follow through) runs into the back of the 3rd place driver at full power. They didn't see the flag and in all likely hood had not even passed the flag before the accident.
The trouble is that there are a million combinations but a lot of those can be predicted, fortunately not very accurately as that by it's nature would allow complacency.
So, I'm thinking expect the worst and take any necessary precautions to get the job done, be in charge of your own safety, don't expect anyone else (not even race control) to look after it for you.



Sorry if a lot of that diatribe was obvious and/or stupid.

[icorper]

4 - get a team out to sweep non-existant gravel off the track near pit lane exit

I've not been marshalling long and I am not saying anyone was wrong, I am asking for clarification for my own thoughts and forgive me if I am speaking out of place

But surely no matter how 'high profile' the meeting the I/O or PC would be perfectly within their rights to ignore a request from race control to sweep if it puts themselves or other marshals in their team at risk.

Even under waved yellows is sweeping gravel from an area safe, surely a change of surface flag and a waved yellow would be safer and allow the cars to clear the line themselves.

[wolfhound]

The only time that marshals should have to get down off the bank in live traffic is when there is a significant incident to be dealth with. This should be done with due care and attention.
Remember that the first person to look after is your safety and fellow marshals.
The driver will be in a piece of metal and plastic that should offer him some protection.
If its a car then it can be replaced with money.

The only other thing is to ensure that any oncoming traffic is aware of any new hazards on track and if it needs to be moved that it is done with your own safety in mind.
Gravel on track normally would be a low level risk for racecars and can be covered by the appropriate flag.

[Bodysnatcher]

Originally Posted by icorper

I've not been marshalling long and I am not saying anyone was wrong, I am asking for clarification for my own thoughts and forgive me if I am speaking out of place

But surely no matter how 'high profile' the meeting the I/O or PC would be perfectly within their rights to ignore a request from race control to sweep if it puts themselves or other marshals in their team at risk.

Originally Posted by wolfhound

The only time that marshals should have to get down off the bank in live traffic is when there is a significant incident to be dealth with. This should be done with due care and attention.
Gravel on track normally would be a low level risk for racecars and can be covered by the appropriate flag.

welcome icorper,
if you and wolfhound did not read my earlier post carefully enough...

let me explain further
In this case the track was neutral, no cars on track whatsoever.
[so no danger if we went out]
Race control requested that we sweep the non existant gravel
IO(me) refused on grounds of their being no gravel and passed this back to PC
PC (one of the mods here) then passed this back to race control
Race Control then "demanded" that we sweep (perhaps in order to look good for TV, perhaps in order to let a prima donna BTCC driver see that sweeping had been done.)
Power trip by a clerk?
In reality who knows why.

So, in order to get race Control off our backs myself and an experienced track marshal went out to perform a bit of pantomime.
Then another person released cars to track, and being BTCC, they never lift.
We were still crossing the gravel trap as 3 of them went past.
Mind you they never saw a waved yellow (cos they never passed a marshals post before they got to us)

[icorper]

Sorry if I seemed to be referencing your particular incident, as this was not my intention at all, although I did misinterpret the fact that the track was not live when you went out.

However every time I have been on duty so far, admittedly only 5 days, we have usually walked the track between sessions as a matter of course regardless of whether we had seen an incident during the session or not, so I assumed that this would have happened anyway.

My question was more general and was about who makes the final decision about going on track or not, and in my opinion that lies with the PC / IO and the individual marshals, at the end of the day the CoC is not sticking his bum on the track, unless he is riding around in the course car, and race control are usually tucked up in there nice office.

[Hepatic]

there is no way to put this gently so i won't even bother trying

Personally, i find the sort of issue bodysnatcher is referring to where what looks like marshal complacency is far more complicated. It maybe more of an issue caused by those running a meeting of higher profile, quite likely televised events. from insisting stuff is done when it isn't necessary, not punishing reported transgressions or feeding back comments after an investigation up to not stopping a blatently dangerous race (due to conditions). the higher up the ladder the event goes, the more issues seem to arise.

there are obviously far more perssures on those running the event but at times it seems that clouds judgement and the main task of ensuring a safely run event seems to get lost.

i reported an overtake under waved yellow earlier this year. marshals were trackside dealing with a small fire, and due to its location were unable to use the car as a barrier to the traffic so were more at risk than a simple stop. nothing was done by race control but i had a full explaination as to why by the clerk at the end of the day. what seems blatent and obvious trackside will always have another side to the story. in this case the driver was in a pack of about 6 cars, nose to tail, and had been for most of the race. during the investigation they explained this fact, admitted they had not seen the flags as a result and offered profuse apologies when they were told. the clerk was ready to add time to their race but on balance and after the unprompted apology decided that no action was necessary.

the point of this story is that was a club meeting, i've known the clerk for as long as i have been marshalling and feedback was a vital part of running the meeting and my training. had that been a higher profile meeting, despite the same circumstances i very much doubt that would have happened. it's those types of differences that permeiate the bigger meetings and what might be straight forward and sensible actions at a club meeting isn't seen at the bigger ones.

F1 insisted we sweep the track after every session, even tho there were next to no tyre marbles at our location. We were told "because it looks bad on HD TV". Not due to safety, but 'cos it looked bad.

That sums up my feelings on the bigger events and why i'm very selective about what i marshal. The events i enjoy tend to be the ones where not only racing is good but i feel the event is run in a safe manner and our reports will be dealt with appropiately. There will always be close calls, its the nature of what we do, but as long as that isn't from ANYONE's complacency it has to be accepted. In my experience the bigger the event the more complacency (from all those invloved) is seen.

[Nighthawk]

So as a I/O or PC are we here to please the C.O.C I would stick to my guns im not here to get brownie points.

[deadsquirrel]

Originally Posted by icorper

My question was more general and was about who makes the final decision about going on track or not, and in my opinion that lies with the PC / IO and the individual marshals.

Yes, as far as I'm concerned that's how it is. R/C may ask a post for 'job x' to be done at any point - between or during a session/race etc.

Hopefully PC will ask IO to do 'job x' with his/her marshal team if PC considers request reasonable. If PC considers request unreasonable, they can inform R/C accordingly.

IO may choose to do 'job x' with some/all of his/her team. IO may also choose to consider the request 'unworkable' and advise PC accordingly.

These are judgement calls, and it is down to PC and IO experience to assess the risks/rewards and decide what to do.

As a track marshal, you can still decide you don't want to go out to an incident (and don't fear doing this)- for whatever reason. It's better to do this, than go out and be concerned and therefore distracted, possibly being a liability for your teammates.

Hopefully, you'd only be going out after hatching a cunning plan, so that's the point to say you're not going, so plan B can be worked out.

[mattt]

There is always the alternative way to prevent the stragglers catching up the pack from the pits. hold them in the pits until after the crocodile and only have it open for the queue of cars at pit exit like in endurance racing. this would prevent the pit lane being a problem but not preventing the cars not adequately slowing down.

[NewYankee01]

Originally Posted by icorper

at the end of the day the CoC is not sticking his bum on the track, unless he is riding around in the course car, and race control are usually tucked up in there nice office.

bloody hell! hahaha, that may well be the case regardless but im concerned, without sounding demeaning or anything for someone who has done 5 days im slightly concerned about your views towards your fellow officials after a few days of joining the OA... on a BTCC meeting the clerks after all they are "tucked up" for a reason, some of what they do is delegate kicking none existant stones on track and other jobs that gets on the backs of marshals and make decisions that makes us sometimes scratch our heads but then the other things to keep themselves busy is to oversee 300 marshals, 2 or more rescue vehicles and all other circuit vehicles, etc., 100 or so drivers, the circuit itself, the race teams and even the spectators and so on. because its televised they oversee its running ontime, make sure the weekend goes to the regs, theyre assisting with any driving infractions and are also trying to sort problems reported from officials. its a busy job which means they are "tucked up" im not really defending them, just stating the facts

[The Fat Clerk]

As a Clerk, I would never ask anyone to do something that I wouldn't...........................simples.

[johngee]

Originally Posted by The Fat Clerk

As a Clerk, I would never ask anyone to do something that I wouldn't...........................simples.

I've kept silent (with difficulty ) but I totally agree with The Fat Clerk - or Dave as he is better known

[The Fat Clerk]

That's probably because you were my Mentor, all those years ago John.

[Dave Brand]

I find it both amusing & saddening the way the question:

"I know it is easy to blame the driver.
But (is) it a possibility that Marshals are also being complacent and forgetting the fundamental basics of Marshalling."

has prompted so many replies slagging off drivers, clerks, etc., while, with a few exceptions, the original question has been ignored.

So, replying to the original question, I don't think we're forgetting the basics. . . I think in so many cases the basics just haven't been hammered home to newer marshals.

Looking back over the last ten years or so we've seen a sharp decline in marshal numbers reversed in the last few years by a vigorous recruitment programme which has, at many circuits, restored manning levels to what they were ten years ago. The big difference is that, because of the loss of so many older marshals we just haven't got the people on post to pass on the basics to the new marshals; people get into bad habits because they aren't shown how, & more importantly why, to approach the job in a safe, professional way. It's not uncommon now for some 80% of the team on a post to be trainees, a far from ideal situation in the interests both of efficient running of a post & effectively meeting people's training requirements; however, that's the way things are & it's up to those of us who've been around for a few years to ensure that we do everything we can to help our newer colleagues develop as marshals - they are the future of marshalling.

As for the "overtaking under yellows" debate & the suggestions, some fanciful, some unworkable, some demonstrating a lack of knowledge of the way things work, here's a controversial suggestion: maybe marshals should consider what they are telling drivers with yellow flag . . . "crying wolf" is the phrase that springs to mind.

Just my opinion. . . feel free to disagree!

[icorper]

hehe, just re-read my post and it does sound like I was having a go at RC and Clerks, which I most definitely wasn't.

My point, however badly made, was that despite other officials best intentions, the people actually on the circuit are the Marshals.

They (RC and CoC) rely on the information the PC / IO give them and given that, should accept the decision of the marshals on the ground as whether to go on track or not at any particular time.

Apologies if anyone if the were in any way annoyed by my previous post.

[NewYankee01]

Originally Posted by The Fat Clerk

As a Clerk, I would never ask anyone to do something that I wouldn't...........................simples.

a clerk is a hyper experienced (and good) official obviously, i can imagine there's not a lot of things you or any of the others havent come across...

could i expect you go to a race meeting and be an office boy all day though!

[NewYankee01]

Originally Posted by Dave Brand

I find it both amusing & saddening the way the question:

The big difference is that, because of the loss of so many older marshals we just haven't got the people on post to pass on the basics to the new marshals; people get into bad habits because they aren't shown how,

you worded that very well!

good post but can you tell me what WAS the original question!

[Guinness2702]

Originally Posted by Dave Brand

because of the loss of so many older marshals we just haven't got the people on post to pass on the basics to the new marshals; people get into bad habits because they aren't shown how, & more importantly why, to approach the job in a safe, professional way.

IME, people are often unwilling to be told they are doing it wrong, or take "advice"

Just this past weekend, I saw somebody doing something wrong, and it was only because I knew the particular marshal well that I was prepared to offer comments/advice at all.

[NewYankee01]

Originally Posted by icorper

hehe, just re-read my post and it does sound like I was having a go at RC and Clerks, which I most definitely wasn't.

My point, however badly made, was that despite other officials best intentions, the people actually on the circuit are the Marshals.

They (RC and CoC) rely on the information the PC / IO give them and given that, should accept the decision of the marshals on the ground as whether to go on track or not at any particular time.

Apologies if anyone if the were in any way annoyed by my previous post.

i hope the fact that 66% of your posts consist of replying back to grumpy replies from some of us miserable sods havent made us all appear like we bite...hard!
i thought that statement might of been passed onto you by a marshal giving you bad influence on the way things work, which ive seen before and im sure if thatd happened with me erm all those...months ago! id have been more disillusioned more quickly with certain officials. we all have a job to doincluding drivers and i always give everyone the benefit of the doubt, when flagging in my judgements if i observe something (even if i think there's nothing wrong with something ill give it a quick mention to the PC) and other things to my approach towards marshalling even if it does seem naive...