Skaif Appeal to Reconvene

RaceTime · 12 Dec 2003, 05:48 (Ref:809820)

The V8 Supercar National Court of Appeal will reconvene at 7pm, Monday 22 December 2003, at the Confederation of Australian Motor Sport's National Office in Melbourne. The Court will continue to hear the appeal lodged by Mark Skaife with regard to the careless driving finding of the Stewards at the Eastern Creek V8 Supercar Championship Series meeting on 30 November 2003.

Mark Skaife will continue with his appeal against the Stewards' finding that he was in breach of Rule B 6.7.2 (AVESCO Operations Manual), careless driving.

The V8 Supercar National Court of Appeal will continue to be chaired by Mr Ian Percy, who will be assisted by Mr Keith McKay and Mr David
Turnbull.

The respondent representing CAMS will be Mr Robert Anderson.

**GTRMagic** · 12 Dec 2003, 06:14 (Ref:809827)

I wonder how many silks will rock up

devil racer nz · 12 Dec 2003, 06:56 (Ref:809833)

Quote:

Mark Skaife will continue with his appeal against the Stewards' finding that he was in breach of Rule B 6.7.2 (AVESCO Operations Manual), careless driving.

Careless driving? I guess they wouldnt be saying that had Ingall pulled out of his interesting position. it certainly wasn't Skaifes fault.

Wizzby · 12 Dec 2003, 07:09 (Ref:809835)

Someone obviously thought it was, just like Brighty wasn't at fault for Phillip Island

vortexo · 12 Dec 2003, 11:00 (Ref:810005)

Maybe the *B* pillar arguement will come into the play ???????

HRT #1 · 12 Dec 2003, 11:26 (Ref:810032)

I hope Mark wins his case and 'if' he does then we'll never hear the end of it from the Blue Brigade.

Thanks for the update RaceTime.

sevi · 12 Dec 2003, 11:55 (Ref:810054)

and if he doesn't we will never hear the end of it from the red side???????//

mixxer · 12 Dec 2003, 12:23 (Ref:810078)

pls not another thread about it ........... Oh well too late now

jetsetter · 12 Dec 2003, 12:35 (Ref:810088)

Whichever way the appeal goes it is going to be a long & interesting night at CAMS on Monday night.

Wizzby · 12 Dec 2003, 13:46 (Ref:810179)

Hey, I'll wear it. Russell didn't get off his penalties and Mark's copped the big one on the chin, so I'm not particularly fussed if he gets off or not. Don't get me wrong, I hope he does as a fan of his, but I won't rant on if he doesn't

Grimace · 13 Dec 2003, 00:27 (Ref:810659)

If Skaife gets off there will be hell to pay!!!

**GTRMagic** · 13 Dec 2003, 01:55 (Ref:810690)

Looks like there will be hell to pay... I dont like the chances of two different groups of stewards making 2 decisions the same.

Something was written in MN this week by the Ed. that the stewards merely apply the rules they are given... however the interpretation can be surprisingly liberal when you can make the same words mean several different things, with personal life experience making the final spin on interpretation.

Especially with the considerable legal resources available to SHRT that CAMS could never hope to match and survive financially

Gaz170 · 13 Dec 2003, 09:20 (Ref:810816)

This is bull****. It should never have been allowed to get to this. Skaife should have had to have his hearing the same time as Ingall.
I have no confidence that justice will be done now.

SDR41A · 13 Dec 2003, 14:11 (Ref:810943)

I dare say Holden is pumping a lot of dollars into this one as Skaife did a lot of damage to the company by carrying on the way he did. For a supposedly professional sportsman and holding the position he does at HRT a very poor indication of character. At least Russell only acted after being provoked by a goose, which is no where near as bad or damageing for the Ford camp. I think this stouch has fallen into Russell's favour regardless of Skaifes outcome as it is now all too late. This incident has been firmly ingrained in peoples minds. Thanks Mr Skaife for boosting Ford's image, keep up the good work. They call Russell the Enforcer, Skaife shall be known as the INTIMIDATOR!!! MARCUS RISES AS THE TRUE V8 SUPERCAR CHAMPION IN MANY WAYS, A GREAT INSPIRATION FOR ALL CHILDREN AND FANS TO FOLLOW!

**GTRMagic** · 13 Dec 2003, 23:21 (Ref:811263)

I agree SDR41A, however the likely outcome is that Mr Skaife's penalty will be wiped on a legal technicality as opposed to not having done the crime....

RaceTime · 13 Dec 2003, 23:27 (Ref:811270)

GTR - I don't believe it will be wiped - even if a legal technicality is attempted. The appeal is against the contact with Ingall - which incurred a loss of 30 championship points - so this is all he can possibly achieve (the recovery of those 30 points).

He is not appealing the $10,000 fine - so regardless of the outcome of the appeal hearing, his $10,000 fine, the loss of 75 championship points and the 3 round suspended sentence will remain.

**GTRMagic** · 13 Dec 2003, 23:29 (Ref:811272)

So what precisely is the point? To get the licence cleansed so next time he is before the stewards (and there will be a next time...) they can say what a good boy he is for not getting any demerits??

Money isnt the object here, having Holden's inhouse counsel and people from Browne & Co working on this would have burned up that much dosh in the first day of sitting...

RaceTime · 13 Dec 2003, 23:49 (Ref:811275)

Think you have missed the point of what is and isn't being appealed.

The $10,000 fine, the loss of 75 points and the 3 round suspended suspension is NOT being appealed - IOW - they are accepting that one.

They are ONLY appealing the initial contact between Skaife and Ingall for which Skaife was docked 30 points.

They appear to be trying to clear his name for on track antics only....the track side antics cannot be (and aren't) fought.

**GTRMagic** · 14 Dec 2003, 00:05 (Ref:811287)

I still cant reconcile in my head as to why you would bother... are they considered different breaches if Mr Skaife was brought back before the stewards...

i.e. would his bumping Rusty off the track get brought up, and the stupidity of the side-of-track antics not included?

There would have to be a strategic advantage in this or it would not be being pursued

RaceTime · 14 Dec 2003, 00:07 (Ref:811289)

The track side antics have no relevance or part of the appeal - it is PURELY to do with the contact between Skaife and INgall:

Quote:

Mark Skaife was found to be in breach of the Rules, careless driving, after an incident involving Russell Ingall. A penalty of a deduction of 30 championship points was applied.
.....
Mark Skaife was found to be in breach of the Rules, bringing the sport into disrepute, for failure to comply with the instructions of an official and failure to retire behind the first line of safety after the incident. A penalty of a deduction of 75 championship points and a $10,000 fine was applied. A further penalty of a three-event suspension, suspended on the basis that he is not found guilty of the same offence in the next 12 months, was also applied.

Holden Racing Team, on behalf of Mark Skaife, has lodged a notice of intention to appeal against the decision of the Stewards with regard to the finding of careless driving.

RaceTime · 14 Dec 2003, 00:09 (Ref:811290)

And further:

Quote:

SKAIFE APPEAL HEARING ADJOURNED

The V8 Supercar National Court of Appeal convened this evening at the CAMS National Office in Melbourne to hear an appeal lodged by Mark Skaife with regard to the incident with Russell Ingall during Race two at Eastern Creek on Sunday 30 November 2003.

The appeal by Mark Skaife against the finding of the Stewards that he was in breach of Rules, careless driving, after an incident involving Russell Ingall, has been adjourned to consider new evidence presented
this evening.

Mattracer · 14 Dec 2003, 00:09 (Ref:811291)

Someone recently posted about the front wheels and the steering angle. Look closely at Skaife's hands on the wheel. Looks a bit like correcting oversteer by the place ment of his hands on the wheel.

RaceTime · 14 Dec 2003, 00:10 (Ref:811292)

Funnily - I have just re-read the Adjournment release a bit closer - it states that further evidence WAS presented at the appeal before the adjournment - bu no one has reported, at this stage, what that further evidence was.

Anybody know?

RaceTime · 14 Dec 2003, 00:11 (Ref:811293)

Matt - don't believe so otherwise they wouldn't have granted an adjournment. If they then come back and say 'We withdraw' they could, conceivably, charge them with messing them about.

**GTRMagic** · 14 Dec 2003, 00:13 (Ref:811295)

The SHRT bods were talking about getting a statement/presentation from Max Wilson who saw the whole thing....

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Appeal	pit bull	Club Level Single Seaters	32	29 Jul 2006 20:59
Coloni Appeal	cv2000	National & International Single Seaters	9	10 Oct 2002 22:27
What is the appeal of F1	Mark Ward	Formula One	28	28 Jul 2000 02:00
Haga's appeal	Kai Higdon	Bike Racing	4	6 Jul 2000 04:10