.
Printable View
.
.
http://www.scca.com/documents/Fastra...strack-nov.pdf
I have read and reread the three AS appeals and I still cannot understand what is
going on....it appears to me that in each case for three different competitors:
Chief Steward Averett DQs the competitor via a CSA
The competitor protests the CSA
The SOM disallows the protest (enforcing the CSA)
Mr Averett appeals the SOM decision. (Why would he appeal the decision that enforced his CSA???)
The COA then upholds Mr Averett's appeal, thereby overturning the SOM decision to uphold Mr. Averett's CSA.... :shrug:
.
I beleive the impound for that race was in excess of 30 hours...not a proud Run-off moment.
Wha....????????????Quote:
Originally Posted by joeg
Impounds for Showroom Stock in the late-80's and early-90s, when they FINALLY decided to begin enforcing the rules, lasted DAYS. In fact, the races for SSGT, SSA, SSB, and SSC were always on Friday so that impound could get done before the awards banquet on Sunday night...
You either want them to enforce the rules, or you want to get out of there within a half-hour. But you can't have both.
GA
He he........... The one and only time I ran the runoffs was 1988. I ran a Mitsubishi Starion in SSA, I started 8th finished 7th, the impound looked like a garage sale! There was car parts everwhere! By the time they bounced the top three cars I was in 4th place! I passed more cars in the tech shed than I did on the track:)Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg Amy
Look at SCCA.Com... I don't think it went well as the BOD was not pleased... Also still being on the stewards side I have seen some letters that indicate things did not go well and changes are taking place to run the stewards program better... but I am not sure what those issues were or what changes may or may not happen. Reading between the lines I am wondering if some stewards are changing careers.
Raymond " again just to be clear, I DON'T know what happened, read the articles on the scca website" Blethen
link?
Rofl!Quote:
Originally Posted by norris
http://www.scca.com/newsarticle.aspx?hub=1&news=3804Quote:
Originally Posted by lateapex911
Quote:
Originally Posted by lawtonglenn
I wasn't present for these actions, so I cannot comment on the specifics of why the CS appealed. However, in general, there are a couple of reasons why a Chief Steward might appeal a positive SOM judgment.
1. The CS might be asking the Court of Appeals to clarify the meaning of the GCR rule.
2. The CS may not be the one who filed the original action, and was upheld by the SOM.
Remember that the Chief Steward typically delegates powers to Assistant Chief Stewards (operating stewards, tech stewards). Any actions they take are in the name of the Chief Steward, and the bits of paper would have 'Chief Steward' on them, not 'Tech Steward' or 'Black Flag Steward'.
Again, remember that these are general cases, and not explanations for this specific case.
As for the Runoffs review committee, the BoD has caused a committee to be formed. I am a member. The mandate of the committee is not to engage in a blame exercise, but rather to recommend possible improvements to the Runoffs process. We expect to report back to the Board in late November.
tnx John...I didn't think of those possibilities