Firmer rules, accountability among changes needed
IndyCar commentary — By Steph Wallcraft on August 29, 2011 10:21 amSeveral times over the past couple of days, Randy Bernard has stated that he’ll be looking for feedback from the INDYCAR community on the changes that people want to see in officiating procedures going into next season. In the spirit of lending a helping hand, here’s my wish list for 2012. Please feel free to add your own in the comments section below.
– Remove as much freedom for discretionary decision-making from the rule book as possible. Every legal document requires a certain number of out-clauses. But the current INDYCAR rule book is just one giant out-clause with very few hard and fast rules, and that’s no way to operate a professional sport. An effective rule book would have a base set of rules that are to be followed to the letter and a clause that allows for discretionary decision-making only where no established rules apply to a given situation. The current system makes the entire sport look like one man’s plaything, which is clearly not good for credibility.
– Further to this same theme, separate the roles of Chief Steward and President of Competition. This is so important. Right now, if a team has an issue with a decision made by the Chief Steward, the only person they can appeal to is the same person who made the decision in the first place, which immediately removes any shred of objectivity. Adding another level to the hierarchy gives the sport’s competitors a third party to hear complaints and offers a much-needed alternate perspective. (Ideally, to take this objectivity a step further, one of these roles would be filled by someone who isn’t currently involved in the INDYCAR organization.)
– Consider changing the driver consultant on a race-by-race basis. This point came up in our podcast with Justin Wilson a couple of weeks ago, and it’s a very good one. This isn’t to say that Al Unser, Jr. isn’t doing a fine job in his role as driver consultant to the Race Control team. But bringing new faces into the fold would go a long way toward creating at least a perception of greater impartiality. Having a different driver for every race is likely impractical given the number of candidates available, but it should be relatively easy to assemble a group of a half-dozen or so people to rotate through.
– Create a paper trail to establish accountability. Credit for the genesis of this thought goes to Marshall Pruett of SPEED.com. In INDYCAR, all communication on pit lane and in Race Control is done by audio, which becomes untraceable as soon as the transmission ends. Other racing series, both past and present, have used text messaging or instant messaging as a way to ensure that communications can be recorded and referenced in the event that clarification is required. The only reason not to establish a system like this — which is faster, more reliable, and far more open — is if someone has something to hide.
– Finally, and this is a big one: get rid of that stupid blocking/defending rule. Contrary to the understanding held by some that the blocking rule is in place due to the parity in the current equipment, Tony Cotman told MFW last month that the rule is actually a safety measure and will likely remain for 2012. There are two major problems with this rule. The first is that very few observers of the sport understand it. No other form of motorsport on Earth uses a similar rule, open-wheel or otherwise, and the commonly held perception is that it’s akin to telling race car drivers how to do their jobs — or, rather, telling them not to do their jobs since it dictates for them how and where passing can take place. The second issue is that it doesn’t appear that such measures will be necessary given the other safety measures that will be in place next year, particularly the bumpers covering the rear wheels and the return of the fuel knob (which is also ostensibly in the name of safety and is also a travesty, in my opinion, but this isn’t the place for that discussion). Mandating various aspects of the sport in the name of safety is an important and noble endeavor, but there’s a fine line between keeping the drivers safe and preventing them from racing, and this rule falls too far on the latter side to the detriment to the on-track product. The European rule that allows one change of line but calls a second change a block would produce racing that viewers would be more familiar with and more excited to watch.
These changes would go a long way toward creating a fair, accountable, and raceable environment in the IZOD IndyCar Series in 2012. There are likely many other great ideas out there. Please feel free to leave your thoughts in the comments section below.
Tags: Verizon IndyCar Series - Administration
I agree entirely.
I have no idea how they ended up that the Chief Steward is also the Race Director, surely it should’ve been obvious even before these problems started occuring that problems would eventually occur.
It seems to me that positions are moved around willy nilly, both during the race and after it, with little explanation as to why. Sometimes it makes complete sense do to it, say if a driver cuts a corner and gains a position he/she should expect to move back, be moved back, or receive a drive-through. Other times cars move around and we’re not told why.
I’m sure most by now have seen Reinbold’s quote where he’s confused why a lapped car was moved ahead of Pantano and that he’s decided to ignore the post-race penalty. http://www.tweetdeck.com/twitter/DRRIndyCar/~S3dGI
Generally if the teams are bellyaching about an official I tend to think the official is doing a good job at policing them (we can’t have someone in their pocket). But it has gone too far, we can’t have officials being flagrantly ignored as a result of incredible and unbelievable decisions.
And yes the so-called ‘blocking’ rule must go. Entering a corner on a different line is not blocking, it is only blocking when you enter on the same line as normal and then swerve across the road.
“…Tony Cotman told MFW last month that the rule is actually a safety measure and will likely remain for 2012…”
A safety measure..? That’s absolute nonsense — and, sadly, displays a fundamental lack of understanding of motor racing.
For competition and safety’s sake why not go back to Barnhart’s original blocking rule (the one they penalized Helio with in 2008 at Belle Isle).
It was: Each driver is allowed one defensive line change.
This way it allows drivers to pick whatever line they want and then to change the line once, but it also stops slower cars from swerving dangerously to protect position.
I think what bothers me about the whole debate over race control is that lots of people want Barnhart fired at least in part because of a rule that was imported along with Tony Cotman, and want to go back to the rule as it actually existed when Barnhart was the sole authority. That said …
Yeah, there needs to be a change. Even if it’s 100% undeserved (it isn’t, but even if it is), there is a perception within the sport and among hard-core fans that there is a big problem. I personally think that perception is somewhat overblown due to a certain reporter’s repeated harping on it, but that doesn’t really matter. Credibility gap is a disease, and it needs to be cut out quickly. Otherwise, we get cases where Race Control does the absolute correct thing, and fans will complain because they’re already geared up to do so.
However, I don’t think that change can be Tony Cotman. For one, it looks like he doesn’t want the job (and why the heck would he?) and he also has a similar problem to Barnhart – he comes directly from one side of the split. Fair or not, I think the new person needs to be someone from outside the series. I know it’s a small world, and any suitable candidate will likely have connections in IndyCar, but they can certainly minimize those connections.
And lastly, yeah, the rule needs to go. It’s contrary to literally every other form of racing on earth. Generally, if you’re doing something one way, and everybody goes the other way, you’re not actually a trail-blazing iconoclast – you’re just wrong. 🙂
I absolutely agree with adding instant messaging to the communication to/from race control. It would prevent any BS statement like we heard in NH that race control was not told drivers were warning of bad conditions.
On the blocking rule I have an idea for a compromise. Before the race at the street/road courses that have these potential blocking/braking/passing zones have someone get a can of orange paint. Starting in the turn at at a point the width of the cars plus 2 feet from the inside wall paint a line that gets wider back towards turn entry. Mark a commit line across the racing groove. The lead car gets to pick one side or the other and has to stay there the until center of the turn as long as the trailing car is on the other side. (Trailing car must also choose by the commit line.)
That lets the leader choose to defend without “blocking” and gives the trailing car a chance to pass on the inside or the outside. With clearly defined lines it would be easy to see if a driver cuts off or moves out into another car.
Disagree on the compromise Roger. These are professionals – they do not need lines or zones drawn across the circuit for them.
If this series really wants to be taken seriously, this rule needs to disappear quickly.
You said what needed to be said.
The more rules, the more problems.
I would agree with everything 99 said and I would add that more needs to be done to ensure proper alignment for starts and restarts on all tracks, ovals and roads alike. And punish transgressors after the second infraction. Make sure the front row is lined up nicely by the time they are ready to go green. If not, a penalty such as a drive through or dropping a spot on the grid.That’s for smarter minds than mine to decide.
… and another thing. Every square foot of a race track should be a passing zone if the driver can pull it off. More to the point, every part of a race track should be able to be raced. Have reasonable forms of punishment for bad driving but let them race. Let drivers be drivers, not lawyers.