[iV8SC12R29&R30] Telstra Sydney 500, Homebush - 30 Nov - 2 Dec - Page 5

STEALTHY · 2 Dec 2012, 11:05 (Ref:3174148)

Quote:

Originally Posted by rich07

Im not convinced he'll be back for a fulltime gig next year but hope he gets a prime enduro seat. Just give him a car thats not a pile of **** and we might actually see the Murph of old.

Lowndes and Murphy in 888?

rich07 · 2 Dec 2012, 11:12 (Ref:3174150)

Quote:

Originally Posted by STEALTHY

Lowndes and Murphy in 888?

I'd love to see that happen but if the bad blood between them from the HRT days is still lingering then thats what I'd be dealing with before that happens.

Average Punter · 2 Dec 2012, 19:24 (Ref:3174267)

Seems some blokes take the Gridgirls thread a bit too seriously...

Go Harder. · 2 Dec 2012, 20:40 (Ref:3174290)

Team Vodafone accused of race fixing.

HERE

FAS33 · 2 Dec 2012, 21:08 (Ref:3174297)

Arent they all fixed?

Mixer · 2 Dec 2012, 21:18 (Ref:3174299)

Mildly amusing given #55 is "strategised" out of the way if its in front of either #5 or #6.

Fair play though, there's no radio communications or instructions, its probably just written into Davey's contract!

I haven't watched all of the second race yet, but how bad were Moffat and D'Alberto?

Murph cracking the ****s about mechanical failures was telling, giving a dejected apology to a sponsor like Pepsi must have hurt.

peckstar · 2 Dec 2012, 21:46 (Ref:3174312)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Go Harder.

Team Vodafone accused of race fixing.

HERE

It seems logical that T8 would do what they did

But if the rule is there why wasnt it penalised.

Go Harder. · 2 Dec 2012, 21:58 (Ref:3174315)

Didn't FPR do a similar thing at Winton? Wasn't in the pits but still Davo moved over for Frosty.

That said, I don't think it would have made any difference to the championship standings anyway....

peckstar · 2 Dec 2012, 22:10 (Ref:3174319)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Go Harder.

Didn't FPR do a similar thing at Winton? Wasn't in the pits but still Davo moved over for Frosty.

That said, I don't think it would have made any difference to the championship standings anyway....

At Winton it was also about the strategy they were on and the tyres. so different, there is no evidence to support it being about improving the championship position.

Take 150 points of lowndes (the penalty for what they did) and it will affect the championship standing. The actual move in the race would ahve made things a lot closer. but FPR seemed to stuff things up a bit on the weekend including not lodging an appeal in the required time

Umai Naa · 2 Dec 2012, 22:15 (Ref:3174322)

I thought everyone wanted more passing

Honestly, team orders should be up to the team. As long as it doesn't directly affect another car, i.e blocking or punting someone off, who cares?

peckstar · 2 Dec 2012, 22:22 (Ref:3174327)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Umai Naa

I thought everyone wanted more passing

Honestly, team orders should be up to the team. As long as it doesn't directly affect another car, i.e blocking or punting someone off, who cares?

The people who added the rule obviusly consider it important.

The people who are betting on the race would consider it important.

Umai Naa · 2 Dec 2012, 22:27 (Ref:3174328)

Gambling aside, and lets face it, why should we accomodate for that?

Can someone sit down with the lap charts and calculator and work out how much Mr Lowndes gained Vs how much Mr Whincup lost?

peckstar · 2 Dec 2012, 22:32 (Ref:3174330)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Umai Naa

Gambling aside, and lets face it, why should we accomodate for that?

Can someone sit down with the lap charts and calculator and work out how much Mr Lowndes gained Vs how much Mr Whincup lost?

you left out the rule. the rule is clear , it was not followed. why wasnt it followed?

Umai Naa · 2 Dec 2012, 22:36 (Ref:3174331)

The rule can't be that important if it hasn't been enforced, especially on a few occasions in the recent past.

peckstar · 2 Dec 2012, 22:45 (Ref:3174335)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Umai Naa

The rule can't be that important if it hasn't been enforced, especially on a few occasions in the recent past.

sort of like the balclava rule then, but that suddenly ebcame important

the only other time when the championship fixing was obvius to us was in 2006, and its probably because of then that the rule has been introduced.

V8S owe us an explanation of why it wasnt enforced.

FPR need to brush up on their udnerstanding of the rules

Mixer · 2 Dec 2012, 22:52 (Ref:3174338)

Quote:

Originally Posted by peckstar

the only other time when the championship fixing was obvius to us was in 2006, and its probably because of then that the rule has been introduced.

I presume by "us" you mean people who wear tinfoil hats.

Frosty could have beaten Lowndes if he hadn't cocked up the strategy in race 1, and then after Lowndes penalty he got a reprieve, but then still ended up in the wall!

Personally I take issue with the fact that Lowndes wasn't given a PLP on the day, or none of this would have happened at all.

mac · 2 Dec 2012, 23:03 (Ref:3174341)

Quote:

Originally Posted by peckstar

The people who are betting on the race would consider it important.

I'm sorry, but if you're betting on something you know nothing about you deserve everything you get (or don't)...

Jamie was perfectly clear about his role at Sydney being to help Craig get second in the championship - anyone who gambled on the race and DIDN'T take that into account is a fool.

The same reason team orders are perfectly acceptable in F1 nowadays - anyone who bets on the race needs to consider that Felipe Massa will always be Number 2 at Ferrari before they place any bets.

If Tim Edwards is bleating (again) about some existing rule, it's ridiculous. The other reason no one cares about it in F1 is that everyone knew it was going on so, instead of treating the punters like morons and having teams make up "concerns over engine performance", or "fuel conservation issues" they let everyone be upfront and honest.

peckstar · 2 Dec 2012, 23:08 (Ref:3174346)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mixer

I presume by "us" you mean people who wear tinfoil hats.

Frosty could have beaten Lowndes if he hadn't cocked up the strategy in race 1, and then after Lowndes penalty he got a reprieve, but then still ended up in the wall!

Personally I take issue with the fact that Lowndes wasn't given a PLP on the day, or none of this would have happened at all.

No by us, by every person who is a fan of the sport, I will leave the tinfoil hat wearing to those who weared coloured glasses or are in denial about the enforcing of clear rules

It really has nothing to do whether Frosty could have beaten lowndes, That is creating a strawman

what is important here is why wasnt the rules applied
and to a lesser extent why didnt FPR lodge a protest

peckstar · 2 Dec 2012, 23:13 (Ref:3174351)

Quote:

Originally Posted by mac

I'm sorry, but if you're betting on something you know nothing about you deserve everything you get (or don't)...

Jamie was perfectly clear about his role at Sydney being to help Craig get second in the championship - anyone who gambled on the race and DIDN'T take that into account is a fool.

The same reason team orders are perfectly acceptable in F1 nowadays - anyone who bets on the race needs to consider that Felipe Massa will always be Number 2 at Ferrari before they place any bets.

If Tim Edwards is bleating (again) about some existing rule, it's ridiculous. The other reason no one cares about it in F1 is that everyone knew it was going on so, instead of treating the punters like morons and having teams make up "concerns over engine performance", or "fuel conservation issues" they let everyone be upfront and honest.

No you see thats where you are making incorrect assumptions. Jamie made it perfectly clear how he was going to break the rules. But everyone who bet should also be have an expectation that the rules would be enforced.

F1 is complete irrelevant to this situation as the rule is in the V8 rules and that is what we are talking about here

Umai Naa · 2 Dec 2012, 23:16 (Ref:3174355)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mixer

I presume by "us" you mean people who wear tinfoil hats.

Frosty could have beaten Lowndes if he hadn't cocked up the strategy in race 1, and then after Lowndes penalty he got a reprieve, but then still ended up in the wall!

Personally I take issue with the fact that Lowndes wasn't given a PLP on the day, or none of this would have happened at all.

All of this, and particularly the last paragraph.

Post-race penalties are a bit of a joke. Either deal with it during the race, or let it go and cop flack from the punters.

peckstar · 2 Dec 2012, 23:26 (Ref:3174361)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Umai Naa

All of this, and particularly the last paragraph.

Post-race penalties are a bit of a joke. Either deal with it during the race, or let it go and cop flack from the punters.

What i find funny is that i have been harping on about post race penalties all year. got no support from you at all. suddenly now you are al excited.

Lowndes got off lighly with his post race penalty. dropped him from the equivelent of first to 3rd and didnt have to use fuel to pass the cars in front.

Umai Naa · 2 Dec 2012, 23:29 (Ref:3174364)

You never asked me!

Mixer · 2 Dec 2012, 23:53 (Ref:3174372)

Just the fact that FPR are whining and crying over 2nd place tells the story of their season I think. They of all teams have used team orders more than anybody else so regardless of the rule, they should be the last to bring it up. Tim Edwards effectively says so in his comments.

peckstar · 3 Dec 2012, 00:04 (Ref:3174376)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mixer

Just the fact that FPR are whining and crying over 2nd place tells the story of their season I think. They of all teams have used team orders more than anybody else so regardless of the rule, they should be the last to bring it up. Tim Edwards effectively says so in his comments.

maybe how you can tell us how FPR have used team orders more than anyone else.

and where did he say so in his comments

Nice red herring you have created.

but here is what tim said

Quote:

That has huge commercial implications because Mark gets a bonus for where he finishes in the championship and we have arrangements with our sponsors," Edwards said. "It impacts how much money we get and is very important

bluesport · 3 Dec 2012, 00:12 (Ref:3174379)

Ford should "wake up" and realise that this is not a category they should be involved in.........it's simply not going to happen for them. They have spent millions and won zilch for the last two years..........they should withdraw from the category altogether, cut their losses and refuse a Ford body shape for the category (as Mazda did).

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
[DV8SC12-R07] Dunlop Development Series, Homebush Nov 30-Dec 2 [WITH POLL]	GTRMagic	Australasian Touring Cars.	24	2 Dec 2012 08:31
Sydney Telstra 500 Launch	GTRMagic	Australasian Touring Cars.	3	1 Sep 2011 08:04
[V8SC10R25&26] Sydney Telstra 500, Homebush Olympic Park	Razor	Australasian Touring Cars.	185	9 Dec 2010 22:37
[V8SCEVENT15] Sydney Telstra 500, Homebush Bay	GTRMagic	Australasian Touring Cars.	35	13 Sep 2010 07:35
[V8SC09R25&26] Telstra 500, Homebush Precinct, Sydney	GTRMagic	Australasian Touring Cars.	337	14 Dec 2009 19:36