Jason Plato, wrong or right

[mattt]

Originally Posted by wheelsportaddict

O M G

Anyone would think some of you are blind........ If you watched Race 3 as I did, you can CLEARY see that Plato had a the faster car. I do not think that Shedden broke early, if anything he broke late in a desperate attempt to defend his position, but NONE THE LESS Plato was already nose-to-tail with him WELL before the breaking zone. Not only that, the line that Shedden was taking, would have compromised his exit anyway.

So having a faster car means the driver in front should leap out of the way, surely he should have overtaken sheddon, not attempted to drive through sheddon

As for Race 2, Plato had taken the position therefore had EVERY right to take the racing line and Collard didn't give enough room when instead he should have relinquished and tried to retake the position (fairly) further round the track.

over.... For now!

Collard was on the outside of him and had every right to be there. Plato tried to squeeze him onto the grass, misjudged it spun across collards nose.

[mark_l]

Originally Posted by wheelsportaddict

O M G

Anyone would think some of you are blind........ If you watched Race 3 as I did, you can CLEARY see that Plato had a the faster car. I do not think that Shedden broke early, if anything he broke late in a desperate attempt to defend his position, but NONE THE LESS Plato was already nose-to-tail with him WELL before the breaking zone. Not only that, the line that Shedden was taking, would have compromised his exit anyway.

As for Race 2, Plato had taken the position therefore had EVERY right to take the racing line and Collard didn't give enough room when instead he should have relinquished and tried to retake the position (fairly) further round the track.

over.... For now!

Plato exceeded the track limits and gained an advantage in race 3. He was penalised for this, not for blatantly shoving Shedden off the track (causing an avoidable collision). Shedden would of made the corner without exceeding the track limits if Plato had not been up to his usual tricks. I was stood at the corner and could clearly see what was coming, and when it did I was not surprised.

A driver is allowed to use the full width of the track, as defined by the white lines painted at its edges, to defend a position. He is not required to allow the driver behind past just because he is faster when they are fighting for position.

Wheelsportaddict - maybe your MG baseball cap fell down over your eyes during the races, it was windy after all.

[wheelsportaddict]

Originally Posted by mattt

So having a faster car means the driver in front should leap out of the way, surely he should have overtaken sheddon, not attempted to drive through sheddon

Collard was on the outside of him and had every right to be there. Plato tried to squeeze him onto the grass, misjudged it spun across collards nose.

No you don't have to leap out of the way of the faster car, but like I said, his exit would have been compromised anyway, it was just unfortunate that he came off second best.

As for the Collard incident, Plato was half a car length in front so Collard should have given up and again, like I said, should have tried to take the position back later on round the track.

Originally Posted by mark_l

Plato exceeded the track limits and gained an advantage in race 3. He was penalised for this, not for blatantly shoving Shedden off the track (causing an avoidable collision). Shedden would of made the corner without exceeding the track limits if Plato had not been up to his usual tricks. I was stood at the corner and could clearly see what was coming, and when it did I was not surprised.

A driver is allowed to use the full width of the track, as defined by the white lines painted at its edges, to defend a position. He is not required to allow the driver behind past just because he is faster when they are fighting for position.

Wheelsportaddict - maybe your MG baseball cap fell down over your eyes during the races, it was windy after all.

[MGDavid]

Originally Posted by mark_l

If Plato got a time penalty, why did he not get 3 points on his licence in line with MSA regulation (C) 2.1.7 (iii) Fine, time or place penalty – 3 points.

Page 68 of the Blue Book.

...because, as I've reminded earlier, the guy who runs BTCC gave them dispensation from various BB rules whilst wearing his MSA hat.
And yes I do think it looks bad and does the sport no favours whatsoever.

[awrb]

Originally Posted by wheelsportaddict

As for the Collard incident, Plato was half a car length in front so Collard should have given up and again, like I said, should have tried to take the position back later on round the track.

Collard was a bit further alongside than that. But drivers need to give each other racing room, you can't just push a car that's alongside off the track. And as for Plato claiming he wasn't sure where Rob was, it took a good few pushes before the spin happened so I'd have thought he would have noticed then.

(I feel left out looking at this thread, so here's a random moving smilie )

[garcon]

Originally Posted by wheelsportaddict

O M G

Anyone would think some of you are blind........

Alternatively it could simply be that others have a different but entirely valid opinion.

As far as I'm concerned - and I am not one of the legion of Plato bashers this forum seems to have attracted - you would have to be blind, or at the very least blinkered, not to see that:

1. Race 2 v Collard: Plato was blatantly squeezing Collard wide onto the grass on the exit, and if you try that when you're half a car length in front you spin. It's simple physics.

2. Race 3 v Shedden: It is plain for all who can see that Plato was pushing Shedden from about half way down the straight. There was nothing Shedden could do to make the chicane. Braking from 130mph doesn't tend to have much effect if you have another tonne or so trying to accelerate you. Plato continued pushing until Shedden was past the apex, which is why he missed the corner himself. In fact I thought at the time that it took some impressive skill to push Shedden so far and not end up facing the wrong way in the gravel.

[Alfa Fan]

I do think that Shedden was perhaps blocking rather too much though in this case. I'm not an advocate of the one-move rule or the over-zealous blocking rules certain series have, but Gordon had made several blocks down the straight where Jason clearly had the legs on him, with the rather inevitable result.

[MarkG]

Originally Posted by Alfa Fan

I do think that Shedden was perhaps blocking rather too much though in this case. I'm not an advocate of the one-move rule or the over-zealous blocking rules certain series have, but Gordon had made several blocks down the straight where Jason clearly had the legs on him, with the rather inevitable result.

Sheddon wasn't able to carry speed in places he would have liked to because of the Ford in front and the need to defend from an obviously quicker car. I think Sheddon demonstrated some great defensive driving, so much so that Plato knew he wasn't going to get past unless he did the usual Plato thing.

[MarkG]

I know the laughable 2 second penalty has already been mentioned, but surely that sort of penalty will only encourage more nob driving. The nob may as well push someone else off if the worst that can happen is he'll go back to the position he was in before the push.

[Moneyseeker]

[QUOTE=mark_l;3060537]Plato exceeded the track limits and gained an advantage in race 3. He was penalised for this, not for blatantly shoving Shedden off the track (causing an avoidable collision). Shedden would of made the corner without exceeding the track limits if Plato had not been up to his usual tricks. I was stood at the corner and could clearly see what was coming, and when it did I was not surprised.

A driver is allowed to use the full width of the track, as defined by the white lines painted at its edges, to defend a position. He is not required to allow the driver behind past just because he is faster when they are fighting for position.[QUOTE]

He did the same at Brands when trying to pass Newsham - he went over the broken white line and into the pit lane exit, so clearly not on the track!

[werner]

Originally Posted by wheelsportaddict

O M G



As for Race 2, Plato had taken the position therefore had EVERY right to take the racing line and Collard didn't give enough room when instead he should have relinquished and tried to retake the position (fairly) further round the track.

You take a position if your car is 100% past the other car. Plato had only done half of that.

[yesnomaybe]

regardless of who was in front of who and who was trying to overtake whom, theres a blue book rule that says you can't cause others to leave the track,

"manoeuvres liable to hinder other drivers, such as more than one change of direction to defend a position, deliberate crowding of a car beyond the edge of the track or any other abnormal change of direction,are strictly prohibited"

so Plato shouldnt have kept trying to push across Collard, the corner was done with, was Collard supposed to back off the throttle to avoid the contact?

the track as described in the blue book includes the white lines at the edge of the tarmac, so as long as you have one wheel touching a white line a little bit, e.g. 99.99% of the car actually off the tarmac, then you actually still driving on the 'track' as defined by the blue book, daft but true

I'm not a Plato fan at all, but i dont see any difference between Plato blatantly pushing Shedden out of the way to gain a position and the slight nudge on the back corner of the car ahead to push it offline and gain a position that way, both techniques mean the offending car gains a position unfairly.

Platos shove looked very dramatic, he didnt even make the corner himself, but a few seconds penalty resulting in loosing the position gained is probably inline with how the btcc does things.

In my mind Plato should have had a time penalty at Brands Hatch also for knocking Newsham off, it was good to see a bit of Karma at Donington when Plato came off second best when trying to push Collard off the track.

It seems penaltys are only handed out in the BTCC when the incident looks dramatic, e.g. Plato on Shedden at Donington, Adam on Plato at Brands 2009 or when it causes a big accident, e.g. Nash at Snetterton a few years back.

[werner]

Originally Posted by Alfa Fan

I do think that Shedden was perhaps blocking rather too much though in this case. I'm not an advocate of the one-move rule or the over-zealous blocking rules certain series have, but Gordon had made several blocks down the straight where Jason clearly had the legs on him, with the rather inevitable result.

That is rediculous. Shedden took the inside line directly after Coppice, and did not move over until he was pushed by Plato in the braking-zone. Plato should have taken the wide line. When Shedden had braked so early as Plato tried us to believe, he would have easily passed him at the outside.

[Greem]

Whether you like him & his driving or not, one thing is certain: he's getting a massive amount of exposure for his sponsors. I said it in this thread previously: all publicity etc etc. Controversy sells!

[Peter Mallett]

Yup and it is a shame really when (and I haven't kept up with the rules) these cars seem to be quite spectacular without the rough house tactics.

[Bramzel]

Originally Posted by wheelsportaddict

O M G

Anyone would think some of you are blind........

Ehm, if you actually read this thread you'll see that the majority disagrees on you. So it's up to debate who's the blind one here...

In Holland we have a saying, if there's smoke there must be a fire. All the individual incidents and discussions aside its a fact that Plato is constantly involved in debatable incidents, and in my book that means there's something wrong there.

[Cynic]

I'm going to play devils advocate and suggest that BTCC shouldn't race on the Brands Indy circuit at all.

Yes the 'bump and run' tactic seems to have become an accepted overtaking method in the BTCC, whether the majority os like it or not, but the nature of Brands combined with the size of a BTCC car seems to have made it (in the drivers eyes) the only way to get things done. I can count on one hand the number of clean overtaking moves I've seen at Clearways in the last couple of seasons.

As to the original question as to whether Mr Plato was right or wrong, you might as well ask if the Moon is made of cheese. He's a racing driver, and therefore unless his actions put someone in the med centre, he's never openly going to admit blame is he?

[nicanary]

Originally Posted by Greem

Whether you like him & his driving or not, one thing is certain: he's getting a massive amount of exposure for his sponsors. I said it in this thread previously: all publicity etc etc. Controversy sells!

I doubt if it'll help sell any MG6 cars though - by all accounts it's no great shakes.I fear that I'm beginning to see "the other side" a little bit.IF you look upon it all as a piece of theatre, then JP is playing his part really well.

Gow is the impresario arranging the props,JP is the villain (hissssss...),and all the spectators have to do is scream out loud at every corner "HE'S BEHIND YOU!!!!!!"

Seriously,though, if this IS legitimate racing to the rules written and unwritten, then it's a black flag job.I

[Tom Bee]

Originally Posted by werner

That is rediculous. Shedden took the inside line directly after Coppice, and did not move over until he was pushed by Plato in the braking-zone. Plato should have taken the wide line. When Shedden had braked so early as Plato tried us to believe, he would have easily passed him at the outside.

I totally agree.

Shedden did nothing wrong in my opinion as staying on the right hand side of the track was his only option. He didn't brake early and even if he did (WHICH HE DIDNT) he is the car in front so its up to him where he brakes!

[Minicross424]

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/98920
Shock horror, he admits he was wrong!!

[FIRE]

Originally Posted by MarkG

I suspect Gow is delighted with all the controversy caused by his star ugly sister of the pantomime.

Maybe but because of the controversy after round 1 I decided not to watch round 2. After reading all the comments I conclude the drivers, officials and BTCC didn't learn anything (not a surprise) so for now they have lost one viewer. Later this season I tune in again but for now I lost my interest and prefer watching WTCC, TC2000 and Superstars. I really don't understand Gow and his people. BTCC doesn't need this banger racing. Without the dirty driving it would still be a great series.

[Mark-e21]

By Potato claiming that Shedden's driving was 'overly defensive' does he mean he stopped me overtaking? Isn't that kinda the point? To defend ones position?

His statement is merely a begrudging acceptance of his punishment, and his statement confirms he see's nothing wrong with his driving.

[Paradise City]

Plato needs to be reigned in. There's Moss-type driving, there's edgy Schumacher driving and there's Laurel and Hardy slapstick driving. They have to reign it in at least to the 2nd level.

[Lancsbreaker]

Originally Posted by Minicross424

http://www.autosport.com/news/report.php/id/98920
Shock horror, he admits he was wrong!!

Hardly a fulsome apology is it? Somewhat mealy-mouthed:

"I tabled the idea that if the stewards thought I had gained an unfair advantage to reverse the positions and it is the right thing."





So it was Platos idea to generously let the Stewards penalise him?


And he still maintains, despite all the evidence to the contrary:


Nevertheless, he also believes Shedden braked early for the last corner. "It looked a bit unfair, but he braked 25 metres early and his driving before that was overly defensive," added Plato.



The man's a clown, and a dangerous one. As for whether his sponsors have gained good publicity? I couldn't tell you who sponsors him, and if I did I'd be inclined not to support them if there was a viable alternative, but maybe I'm just contrary

[wheelsportaddict]

Originally Posted by Bramzel

Ehm, if you actually read this thread you'll see that the majority disagrees on you. So it's up to debate who's the blind one here...

In Holland we have a saying, if there's smoke there must be a fire. All the individual incidents and discussions aside its a fact that Plato is constantly involved in debatable incidents, and in my book that means there's something wrong there.

Well I guess we will have to agree to disagree then. As my signature says - "I'm opinionated"