Observation - 2006 GCR

[RacerBill]

From the Forward section of the 2006 GCR......

"Effective January 1st, of each year, all editions of the SCCA
General Competition Rules and all Court of Appeals rulings are
superseded by the following SCCA General Competition Rules.'

I know that we have discussed the effect of COA actions on how we interpret the GCR. This statement from the Forward seems to me to imply that COA actions do not set precedent.

On the one hand, this eliminates the excuse of why we interpret something "We've always interpreted it that way". But on the other hand, it implies that we can't use protests and COA actions to clarify gray areas in the GCR.

What about 13.9's? Are they or can they be superceded by subsequent editions of the GCR?

I also notice that 13.9 has been amended this year to include the statement - "A non-compliant ruling will be published; a compliant ruling will not be
published."

So, if someone files a 13.9 for a specific part, and it goes through the process, and the COA says yes you can use this part, the only way the rest of the club would know that it could be used is if the information was posted on a forum like this (or multiple forums if the part could be applied to multiple classes).


Please, friendly discussion here. There have been too many vicious arguments recently. Thanks.

[bldn10]

Every chance I get I advocate making COA rulings precedential. The technology is readily available to archive all opinions and make them searchable. There is no procedure currently in place to make Rules interpretations consistent across the country and across time. I have read what seemed to be diametrically contrary outcomes in the very same issue of Fastrack. :bash_1_: Frankly, I think the steward types (w/o whom we could not race, bless their souls) want it that way because they can never be "wrong" when rulings are allowed ad hoc. My understanding of 13.9 is that it is advisory only to the person who got it and may not even be binding on the SOM. :blink: And, yes, notwithstanding Jeremy's position, it is not inconceivable that spherical "bushings" could be protested and found illegal.

[Knestis]

Originally posted by RacerBill@Jan 20 2006, 08:18 AM
...the only way the rest of the club would know that it could be used is if the information was posted on a forum like this (or multiple forums if the part could be applied to multiple classes). ...
...and even then, it means exactly piddly-squat.

Back a couple of years ago, when I was being an academic fulltime, I would argue that many of the things that frustrate us about SCCA are part of its culture. Having never made any traction with that, I've pretty much given up wasting valuable O2 on that point but this is a great case of institutionalized, codified organizational culture.

Want to change the rule or policy? Change the culture first.

K

[Doc Bro]

Originally posted by Knestis@Jan 20 2006, 03:51 PM

Want to change the rule or policy? Change the culture first.

K

71395



The problem with that is when you get fresh talent, new ideas, and a new perspective the "old" culture pulverizes it until it fits the familiar pattern.

Sort of like buying a new pair of jeans............

R

[Andy Bettencourt]

Originally posted by Doc Bro@Jan 20 2006, 11:13 AM
The problem with that is when you get fresh talent, new ideas, and a new perspective the "old" culture pulverizes it until it fits the familiar pattern.

Sort of like buying a new pair of jeans............

R

71398

And you are right... the new culture needs to be strong enough, and effective enough, to affect change.

All we need to do is learn. I need to know historical data points BEFORE I make a new suggestion so I can put my best proposal forward. Knowing the objections before hand, and your answers and solutions to those issues, puts you in a better position.

A good idea is a good idea, no matter who it comes from...

AB

[RSTPerformance]

New blood is coming into the ranks slowley and changes are/have been coming slowely. The "old farts" with the "old culture" very much welcomes new blood (I should know). All the rumors of them not accepting new ideas are completely off base. If you don't believe me step up and bring in your new ideas by taking on some job duties!!!

Ok thats my recruitment rant, cause realy in all honesty the old guys welcome new people more than you think!!!

As for COA's actions not taking precedence... I would like to think the reason for this is that all COA actions are reviewed each year and action is taken on the GCR where SCCA feels it is necessary.

Do I like/dislike this... I am not sure, I see benefits to both, however It certainly does make it easier for the stewards having 2 sources to look at. The GCR and any That years Fast Tracks.

The other thing to consider, is that as rules (The GCR) changes thus COA's rulings also might be non-legit, and would not take precedence. This could be hard to manage. Keeping everything in one book is a well organized.

Raymond

[RacerBill]

Originally posted by Andy Bettencourt@Jan 20 2006, 12:38 PM

A good idea is a good idea, no matter who it comes from...

AB

71403


By the way, what did they do to thin down the GCR this year, use smaller print like the phone companies?

Seriously, I got my hard copy yesterday, and my crew chief says 'Here's the new GCR.' I said 'No way, too thin!' Wife wins again! ;)

[erlrich]

Originally posted by RacerBill@Jan 20 2006, 09:18 AM
From the Forward section of the 2006 GCR......

"Effective January 1st, of each year, all editions of the SCCA
General Competition Rules and all Court of Appeals rulings are
superseded by the following SCCA General Competition Rules.'

I know that we have discussed the effect of COA actions on how we interpret the GCR. This statement from the Forward seems to me to imply that COA actions do not set precedent.

On the one hand, this eliminates the excuse of why we interpret something "We've always interpreted it that way". But on the other hand, it implies that we can't use protests and COA actions to clarify gray areas in the GCR.

What about 13.9's? Are they or can they be superceded by subsequent editions of the GCR?

71372


Not sure I'm fully comprehending the issue here - is the question whether the Forward says "every year when a new GCR is published all prior GCRs and CoA rulings are voided"? I'm not reading the statement that way. What it implies to me is that changes in subsequent editions of the GCR supercede prior GCRs, as well as any CoA rulings based on that section of the predecessor GCR. If the CoA makes a ruling based on a section of the GCR, and that section is not revised, how could that ruling not be considered precedent? Help me, I'm just trying to understand :huh:

[JamesB]

Originally posted by RacerBill@Jan 20 2006, 01:29 PM
By the way, what did they do to thin down the GCR this year, use smaller print like the phone companies?

Seriously, I got my hard copy yesterday, and my crew chief says 'Here's the new GCR.' I said 'No way, too thin!' Wife wins again! ;)

71420



I already had my nose in mine. the paper is just a tad thinner to the feel and the print is maybe one point lower. Still very easy to read even in the dark.

[RSTPerformance]

Originally posted by JamesB@Jan 20 2006, 02:18 PM
I already had my nose in mine. the paper is just a tad thinner to the feel and the print is maybe one point lower. Still very easy to read even in the dark.

71430



Are you saying we are all in the dark :unsure:

LOL...

Raymond "had to" Blethen :D

[JamesB]

Last night while I was paging through the GCR to verify that I was compliant to the door bar rules. I found as I walked around my house reading with only the kitchen and bedroom lights on (its a split level 4 br house) that it was still legible with the smallest amount of light.


However, out of your interpetation, its more likely that I am in the dark.

[Bill Miller]

Originally posted by erlrich@Jan 20 2006, 12:07 PM
Not sure I'm fully comprehending the issue here - is the question whether the Forward says "every year when a new GCR is published all prior GCRs and CoA rulings are voided"? I'm not reading the statement that way. What it implies to me is that changes in subsequent editions of the GCR supercede prior GCRs, as well as any CoA rulings based on that section of the predecessor GCR. If the CoA makes a ruling based on a section of the GCR, and that section is not revised, how could that ruling not be considered precedent? Help me, I'm just trying to understand :huh:

71426



It's not that they're 'null and voided', it's just that a similar protest can end in a different result. In theory, you should be able to use a prior ruling on a protest or 13.9 as supporting evidence as to why something is or isn't legal. But, you can only do that in the same year that the ruling was issued.

[RSTPerformance]

Originally posted by bldn10@Jan 20 2006, 11:31 AM
My understanding of 13.9 is that it is advisory only to the person who got it and may not even be binding on the SOM. :blink:

71392



Just reread thread.. and I want to clarify. A 13.9 WILL be binding to the SOM, and it would be a huge failure on the SOM if they failed to recognize a compeditors 13.9 IF they brought the 13.9 documentation to the table during the protest.

Now that does not mean that if person "A" filed a 13.9 got a favorable responce and didn't share with anywone, thet person "B" who gets protested wont be found compliant (IE: The SOM could find him "guilty as charged") This would is because the SOM only gets the Fast Tracks and the GCR to make determinations on rulings (IE: IN This case person "B" and the SOM would not have any nowledge of a 13.9 decision). A 13.9 could be considered an advantage as it is only good to those with a copy of the decisions made. (Remember stewards DO NOT get a copy of the results, but maybe they should?)

Raymond "Hope I clarified something in my ramblings" Blethen

[Jack Marr]

Originally posted by RSTPerformance@Jan 20 2006, 11:26 AM

As for COA's actions not taking precedence... I would like to think the reason for this is that all COA actions are reviewed each year and action is taken on the GCR where SCCA feels it is necessary.


71417


Stewards are told to do things by the GCR and this years Tech Bulletins and CoA ruling.

At the end of the year the CRB reviews all the changes made and may incorporate them into the next GCR....or not. In any event, prior years rulings could certainly be presented as evidence of the SCCA intention but they are binding only in the year issued.