For those of you who watched Bathurst yesterday & thought that Jamie Whincup had brain fade when he passed the last safety car, apparently there is more to it. He said he "saw the green signal" but nobody believes him.

It appears that race control was partially to blame. From what I can gather, the safety car DID have its green lights on, signalling Jamie to pass, because their info said that the Lowndes' 888 car was the lead car, which it was according to race control, because he was first over the finish line on that lap. They were signalling all cars to go past & were waiting for 888 to appear behind them.

In the last few seconds, it was realised that Jamie's no. 1 car was in fact the lead car & they quickly changed to flashing yellows by which time Jamie was passing them at warp speed.

All of this has been recorded from radio communications, during that time.

If you look on Youtube, the video proving Jamie's story had had that section conveniently erased.

I think that everybody (including Jamie) knows that the leader of the race should not overtake the safety car, but if you are signalled to go past & the decision is changed very late in the piece, who's fault is that.

It's too late to change history & he was never going to win the race anyway, because the pit stacking thing prevents 2 cars from the same team achieving a form finish.

Think about it. Say you had the 2 Red Bull cars in 1 & 2 positions, then 2 PRA Fords in 3 & 4 & say the 2 Volvos in 5 & 6 all in fairly close convoy. As soon as a safety car is called that's when you go into the pits. If you don't, your day is over, you'll be 15th. So, OK all 6 cars pit, because they really have no choice. The guys in 2nd, 4th & 6th are now 'toast'. They will be 'double stacked' & then end up 10th anyway. I'm not a big fan of safety cars at Bathurst, but the pit stacking thing is ridiculous in modern motor racing.

Anybody here have any thoughts ? If you don't like the V8s, please don't destroy an otherwise intelligent debate.

Dr Terry

Yeah, pit stops where they are needed, are an essential part of a long distance race, but these 'contrived' or compulsory stops & safety cars are ridiculous.

The whole safety car thing is probably OK for shorter tracks, but at Bathurst it changes the whole race. What incentive is there for a fast driver & car combination to go out a leg the field by a few minutes, when every time somebody goes off the track or whatever, brings out the safety car to bunch-up the field.

What's wrong with having a maximum allowable speed zone (say 40km pit limit) around any incident, until it is cleared up. The other 90% of the track is quite usable at full speed. You could place the safety car with its lights flashing a few 100 metres or so before the 'danger zone' & then allow them to speed up after that using the flag marshals. It's not rocket science. There's only 25-27 cars on the track these days. 40 years ago that figure was over 60, with a huge speed differential between the fastest & the slowest

Look how good the racing was before safety cars were introduced. We had tow trucks & ambulances on the track & the cars drove around them without incident. I'm not talking about the old Cortina 3 min + lap days either. In 1984 the "Last of the Big Bangers" was raced quite successfully without safety cars & their lap times were pretty good. Brocky did a 2.15 that year, albeit on a slightly shorter track, & that was 36 years ago.

Dr Terry

^^I think Warren nailed it, he knew he was the lead car and should have stopped, but the adrenaline must have been huge - he'd just disobeyed team orders to pit and stack, and was I think trying to beat the Safety Car as it existed the pits so he'd then have lapped all the cars in the pits. So he could then come in, get fuel and still be in front. Good tactics if it had worked but like last year he stuffed up.

As I said, his race was finished the moment the safety car came out. He was second in line & arguably challenging for the lead, so the lead cars pit & he would have been held up in the pits for around 30 secs or so. He would then have emerged in around 10th place. On what planet is that fair motorsport ?

The other thing is the penalty. OK it was race control's stuff up, so why then didn't they make him do his drive thru during the slower laps ? Instead, they waited & he was given the drive thru at full race speed, so he loses a lot more track time.

There are three indisputable facts here.

1. He was behind Lowndes when the safety car was called, so his race was finished.
2. The safety car was not in the centre of the track with it's yellow lights on, early enough to pick the new leader.
3. Whincup shouldn't have passed the safety car at all, regardless of the colour of its lights.

Dr Terry

Edited by user Tuesday, 13 October 2015 7:51:48 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Spelling

I am no expert but I too am sure I saw a green light on the safety car when they first replayed the footage on TV. Whilst Jamie may have "known" he was the lead car and "shouldn't have over taken" I bet the majority of drivers would have overtaken if given a green light (after all doesnt the green light signal for you to go??). What if there had been cars banked up directly behind Jamie and they get the green light? Does Jamie let them overtake him (and the safety car) whilst he stays put?

Once upon a time I couldn't get enough V8 supercars now I couldn't give a shit about em. Just a big wankfest in my opinion.

Perhaps these cars are just too fast for the Mt Panorama now. The track worked well when they still drove the tilt trays during the race to pick up cars. Adding a safety car into a 1000km "endurance race" really defeats the "endurance" part of it.
Maybe they need to race them on more open tracks.