1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.
Dismiss Notice
Like RaceDepartment on Facebook.

[ROUND 7 DAYTONA] STC RACE DIRECTION vs RPM

Discussion in 'Simracing Team Challenge' started by Xosé Estrada, Nov 21, 2010.

Penalty for RPM car?

Poll closed Nov 23, 2010.
  1. No penalty

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  2. -2 points

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  3. -4 points

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  4. -6 points

    0 vote(s)
    0.0%
  5. -8 points

    8.3%
  6. -10 points and no Q in next race

    75.0%
  7. -12 points and DQ in next race

    16.7%
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Xosé Estrada

    Xosé Estrada
    Premium Member

    Reported team: RPM
    Reported car: Jesper Taulborg

    Description:

    During the qualifying of the last race, STC staff realized PSRtv responsibles wouldn't be present in time to start the broadcast normally, so a session restart would be needed. That implies I (Xosé) was trying to contact Ian from PSRtv, and David and Eckhart were taking notes of the qualifying positions, quite busy momment.

    At a certain point, Jesper entered the staff TS channel and mantained the following conversation with us:

    Jesper - Guys, can I re-enter the server?
    Xosé - You are not in the server anymore?
    Jesper - No, I'm not
    Xosé - Ok, you can rejoin the server then.
    David - Yes, is open qualy session, you can rejoin
    Jesper - Ok, thanks guys


    The STC staff assumed he disconnected from qualy session, so confirmed him he was authorized to rejoin, as everybody else did in this case in the past.

    What we didn't know was that Jesper already had a qualifying attempt with this result:



    It seems he made a mistake and then pressed ESC and left the server.

    He asked then authorization to rejoin, and when he did he set a new qualy time.

    In the conversation we maintained this first try was never mentioned, and we were never asked about authorization to make a second attempt.

    We ordered the grid manually during warmup lap and this facts were never communicated to race direction also.

    The incident was reported by more than one team and looks very serious to us, so we decided to report it in STC name.
     
  2. Ross Balfour

    Ross Balfour
    #99 | Roaring Pipes Maniacs

    Jesper was told he could rejoin so he presumed all was ok -
    Quote from him:

    If he wasn't able to rejoin, it would of been better to have been told before the race, rather than after it. But as you were unaware of what happened, it's a difficult situation. I think this is a tricky one as there is no written rule about a situation like this, so it will be very very hard to penalise correctly.
     
  3. Quote from the briefing:

    "6.- SUPER POLE
    In Super Pole mode Qualifying, you have to complete the Out Lap, Qualy Lap and In Lap."
     
  4. Exactly, super pole. This means you only get to do one fast lap, not that you can try again if you mess it up.
     
  5. Ross Balfour

    Ross Balfour
    #99 | Roaring Pipes Maniacs

    Yeh I understand that, but he then asked the Race Direction if he could rejoin and he was given the go ahead, we would of rather had Jesper start last and finish about P5 or P6 rather than him come P2 and receive a big penalty,
     
  6. Ross, Why didn't he told what happened ? If he did he wouldn't have got a second go.

    If guy are going to ESC out and do a new qual lap, then what is the point of superpole.

    Superpole is one go and thats it, no need to ask.
     
  7. Ross, this is too much. Its obvious your not supposed to have more than one attempt at qualifying. Clearly Jesper made an attempt, crashed on his out lap and tried to have another go, withholding information that he had already made an attempt. Your just making the team look bad by trying to defend him. Its a serious breach of the rules. Just because the rule has no specific "You can not have more than one attempt" line in it. It shouldn't need to be said. Its "Super Pole" for a reason, one chance that is it. This is bending the rules to breaking point. That you are trying to defend it makes it worse in my view.
     
  8. Well quite frankly you should make sure your team doesn't bend the rules then, end of. If any of our team tried to do this (which they wouldn't) They wouldn't be in the team afterwards, they are not just representing themselves, they are representing all of us.
    If you don't believe that well we have done it before when one of our members did not adhere to the rules.
     
  9. Ross Balfour

    Ross Balfour
    #99 | Roaring Pipes Maniacs

    WOOWW! Ok serious overstep here now guys jsut chill it! I would very much accept if Jesper hadn't been received the go ahead my the guys in the green room, once again please stop pointing the finger at me and please do not tell me how to run my team. This goes against the rules of this thread where it's meant to be "Leave your vote, reason and discuss by PM" I tried that earlier but looks like I'm fighting a losing battle here.
     
  10. well then give me a 12 point penalty!
     
  11. Ross Balfour

    Ross Balfour
    #99 | Roaring Pipes Maniacs

    Don't see how that's a relevant post if I'm honest, please stick with the rules - everyone else can.
     
  12. They gave him the go because they thought he disconnected. Not that he screwed up his Q and rejoined to get a better time.
     
  13. Ross Balfour

    Ross Balfour
    #99 | Roaring Pipes Maniacs

    I know, Jesper did not make it clear to the guys there, that there is no denial. But what I'm trying to get at is that this was no done purposefully.
     
  14. I dont know. I know Jesper, raced with him alot and always fair battles with him. Not a bad word about him.
    But we have all out dark sides. :)
     
  15. Ross Balfour

    Ross Balfour
    #99 | Roaring Pipes Maniacs

    Very true, I won't speak another word till I hear more from Xose or David on the rules of this thing.
     
  16. Dinca Andrei

    Dinca Andrei
    Premium Member

    If that accident would happend for real....its a big chance that the driver will not survive....But we are in a game and the driver did survive,only the car was dead....so from my point of view the qualy was done for that driver.The problem is:did he forgot to mention that he did have a try and failed...or he made it on purpose to have another go.
    If we vote as a friend than we say he forgot to mention and no penalty....if we vote as rules demands it then it deserve a penalty.
    Maybe a no Q for the next race""because he did 2 quals"" but no points taken.

    Le. After i read some post its clear -10 and no Q.
     
  17. Xosé Estrada

    Xosé Estrada
    Premium Member

    I answer in STC name because I was mentioned.

    We authorised him to re-enter for the same reason we keep the qualy open, to minimize the loss of drivers because technical problems.

    That doesn't imply you have a second attempt, that is a different thing.

    In case we had the full information at the momment, the answer would be:

    "You can rejoin the server, but you have to start from the back of the grid as you already made your superpole attempt".
     
  18. Basicaly what your trying to say Ross, is its everyone elses fault but not Jepsers. Maybe David and Xose should get a penalty..... Ofcource it was done on purpose you/he must think we were born yesterday.

    Just to add to this, when Jesper made his second attempt he ran out of fuel on his inlap. Unfortunatley you can't get it on replay after he joined he doesn't show. He was obviously trying to get the best Q lap possible by fair means or not.

    Really this should be a straight DQ for Jespers car.

    (I'm not being personal Ross, your all nice guys at RPM. I just think your defending something you shouldn't. How would you feel if the roles were reversed?)
     
  19. Absolutely!
     
  20. Once again I must agree with Mike. Jesper knew he had wrecked his car on the outlap before "dropping off" but then proceeded to run a quali on his return.

    Whether his actions are due to deception or misjudgement the result is still the same. Jesper gained an unfair advantage in running a second set of laps.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.