New Zealand Superbikes and Grand Prix

[Tony.OK]

Rule 6.13.B.c states

Only those riders who have accomplished at least 65% of the laps realised by the first rider of the preceding part will be authorised to restart.

If the leader had completed 5 laps and the red flag came out, Andrew would have needed to complete 3 or 3.25 to be precise to be eligible to restart.

Yup, and since laps in NZ aren't measured in 1/4's or sectors then you'd assume it would stand at 3 laps equalling 60%.

But that is for Andrew & co to dispute with MNZ stewards really.

Certainly makes for a bloody interesting start to the series, plenty more great racing to come I'm picking

[k14]

Also like to add that all the racing is available to watch after the event here:

http://www.livetiming.co.nz/Ctas%20L...0Coverage.html

$2 a race or the whole event for $20. Bloody bargain if you ask me! Grant has done a superb job of the video and audio and it is well worth the money.

Yeah the live timing, video and audio is excellent. Top notch work by all involved, great to sit on my couch and be able to keep up with the action.

[scott411]

mylaps shows him being dq'd from race 16b (the restart)

[Rcktfsh]

Try reading rule 6.13.B.c in GCR's. It is quite clear and yes, the rules are there for everyone.

He did 3 of 5 before red flag, thats 60% so not enough.

Mylaps shows him DQ for restart.

He had completed 3 of the 5 laps before the red flag. That is 60%

Mylaps show the leaders completing 5 laps with Sellars/holmes having completed 4 laps. 6.13.B.a states the 1st part results are to be a lap before the red flag is shown so 4 laps. part 2 of the race is to be a duration to make up the original length 6.13.B.b, by my calculation this means the restart should have been 11 not 10 laps? 6.13.B.d requires restarting riders to have completed 65% of the leaders 1st part laps ie 65% of 4 laps not 5.

[Kiwi Graham:Me]

Sounds like the leader had completed 5 and was on his sixth requiring Andrew to have completed 3.9 or 4 laps to be eligible to restart.

It wouldn't be NZ racing without a bit of heat now would it. roll on next weekend.

I hope all can get the repairs done that needed, I heard Chop has done a big end, I hope Jarred is up for lending Dan/Brian his bike again and Rees can get his S1 back together. Jaden decked a stator on the curbing and low sided and is now all good to go again and even younger Aaron had an off but is all good to go again in the 250's and is raising a few eyebrows.

Dave Cole is back in his shed tinkering with the motor from my mighty R1 by now I hope

KG

[Rcktfsh]

leaders had completed 5 laps from what i can work out but the results from leg 1 are set a lap proir, hence the 65% requirement should be at that point.

[dean boy]

Come on down and support our local event of Superbike racing and family fun, meet our top national and international riders, watch our local boys and girls carve up there north island competitors.

Attachment 254152

Big thanks to all the riders, officials, marshals and helpers.

apologies to jimmy and red, triple R team for the cock up

Dean James

[wharfy]

Mylaps show the leaders completing 5 laps with Sellars/holmes having completed 4 laps. 6.13.B.a states the 1st part results are to be a lap before the red flag is shown so 4 laps. part 2 of the race is to be a duration to make up the original length 6.13.B.b, by my calculation this means the restart should have been 11 not 10 laps? 6.13.B.d requires restarting riders to have completed 65% of the leaders 1st part laps ie 65% of 4 laps not 5.

Sounds like Stroudy has a case then, I hope he is pushing this interpretation !
Reminds me of the "America's Cup"

[jasonu]

If it was a 'tail end charlie' and not Andrew bloody Stroud would this discussion even be happening???

[k14]

If it was a 'tail end charlie' and not Andrew bloody Stroud would this discussion even be happening???

Nope.

Apparently the start of the second half of the race was held up so Stroud could get his bike repaired. Some of the other guys bikes started overheating on the dummy grid. Typical NZ racing, double standards when someone "important" needs the rules bent.

[Edbear]

If it was a 'tail end charlie' and not Andrew bloody Stroud would this discussion even be happening???

When you are one of the best at what you do and well known and liked, it is a natural thing to be given consideration for the good of the sport overall. It's a case where the spirit of the rules rather than the strict application of them may best serve the interests of the sport. I do agree that it should be fair for all and if it was a tail-end-charlie as you say, such a one should be judged accordingly.

Racing is not that popular with the general public especially in the current economic climate and the high profile accidents of motorcycling in general so I do feel TPTB should be flexible and try to promote a good support for it where possible. Maybe I'm a softie who wants everyone to do well and enjoy themselves so may be less inclined to apply the "letter of the law" than is proper.

[k14]

When you are one of the best at what you do and well known and liked, it is a natural thing to be given consideration for the good of the sport overall. It's a case where the spirit of the rules rather than the strict application of them may best serve the interests of the sport. I do agree that it should be fair for all and if it was a tail-end-charlie as you say, such a one should be judged accordingly.

Racing is not that popular with the general public especially in the current economic climate and the high profile accidents of motorcycling in general so I do feel TPTB should be flexible and try to promote a good support for it where possible. Maybe I'm a softie who wants everyone to do well and enjoy themselves so may be less inclined to apply the "letter of the law" than is proper.

No it's not. The rules are the rules. He shouldn't have crashed in the first place and this wouldn't have happened. No one should get special treatment or rules bent for them, whether they are Stroud or Rossi.

[Edbear]

No it's not. The rules are the rules. He shouldn't have crashed in the first place and this wouldn't have happened. No one should get special treatment or rules bent for them, whether they are Stroud or Rossi.

Yeah I understand that. As for not crashing, even the best can and do crash, so the issue really is whether the rules were interpreted and applied correctly or they need re-wording to be clearer. All professional sports push the rules to the max and where they are not crystal clear is where the arguments begin.

[wharfy]

If it was a 'tail end charlie' and not Andrew bloody Stroud would this discussion even be happening???

Of course it would this is a "discussion" forum !! Oh and whats Stroud ever done to get the "bloody" tag (apart from winning 9 NZSBK titles) ?
How ever a "tail end charlie" would not have a possible 10th National title at stake. I believe the decision to let him race and work out the fine print of the rules latter was the correct one - one of the best races of the meeting.
All the riders with a shot at the title will be doing their utmost to acquire the points needed. Obviously Stroud's team will be trying to get the points from both parts of the last race and his competitors will be trying to block that. That's why they have rules and a protest procedure. Read Rckfsh post - seems like a legitimate interpretation of the rules to me.

[Mental Trousers]

At the time it was the right decision.

A. Stroud crashing is news in itself, but then having him back on the grid and going from last to first to take a win is a worth the publicity bonus. Now, if things go the way they should, a protest will have been lodged and when MNZ look at the rules and the decision they'll reverse it. Which means a crap load more publicity.

Also, it's not like any of the classes is overflowing with entrants. We need all of the bikes we can get on the grid as often as possible. If protests afterwards are upheld then that's fine as long as the correct decision is made in the end.