Result of Greg Murphy appeal arising from Oran Park Pit Lane accident

RaceTime · 4 Sep 2001, 23:49 (Ref:141489)

At an incident on 29 July at Oran Park, the CAT Racing Team's pit equipment became entangled with Greg Murphy's car as he exited the pit bay during a practice session. The Stewards found that Greg Murphy had exited the pit bay without "reasonable care" and subsequently fined him $5,000.

Mr Murphy appealed. The appeal was held 30 August 2001 at CAMS National Office. The Tribunal upheld the appeal and directed that the orders of the Stewards be vacated and that the fine and appeal fee be refunded.

Buckshot · 5 Sep 2001, 02:29 (Ref:141534)

Glad this was overturned - while we all don't want to see anyone get hurt in the pits how is a driver strapped tightly into his race seat with his helmet on that only faces forward supposed to know if there's an airhose stuck to his spoiler if he can ever see back there through all the roll cage whilst he's looking forward for other people in pitlane and sidways for oncoming traffic ?

RaceTime · 5 Sep 2001, 02:46 (Ref:141541)

According to the Stewards - quite possible....of course these guys haven't been in a race car for years - if some of them have been in one at all!

Crash Test · 5 Sep 2001, 04:30 (Ref:141551)

1) How much did it cost TWR to lodge an appeal?
2) Why even bother having stewards anyways? How many times over the years have any of their major decisions actually stuck? OT- why wasn't Ingall outed for nerfing Imrie at QR last year?

sevi · 5 Sep 2001, 04:40 (Ref:141554)

If they appealed to CAMS which I think they did it would of cost them $3498 half of which is refunded if they win.

RaceTime · 5 Sep 2001, 06:31 (Ref:141569)

Not this time:

directed that the orders of the Stewards be vacated and that the fine and appeal fee be refunded.

Crash Test · 5 Sep 2001, 06:55 (Ref:141574)

So between the two levels of officialdom, there is a complete opposite views of the incidence? Hmmm...makes sense to me!

Crash Test · 5 Sep 2001, 07:09 (Ref:141577)

Here's my thinking atm- they could adopt a points system like the NRL, and penalties apply when certain events happen.

If you speed in pit lane in a non-racing situation, deduct x-points. Ditto for pit infringments etc, and team members doing burnouts in the car park...

As for on track incidents, perhaps they could form something solid. IIRC there is something solid in place at the moment, but it isn't adhered to.

Your thoughts? Or am I just a whacko?

RaceTime · 5 Sep 2001, 07:39 (Ref:141587)

Personally I am against point penalties at ANY stage and for ANY reason - this type of penalty basically sayd you were good enough to race, but not good enough to get championship points.

Apply penalties against RACE RESULTS - and preferably on the day. IMHO unless it is a major incident, penalties applied on the day/weekend cop a race result adjustment.

Anything decided afterwards, except a major incident, gets a fine only. The only other adjustment that should be allowed afterwards is exclusion - totally - none of this slap on the wrist stuff.

And, as I said - this should apply across every category in racing.

Finally - match the penalty to the crime - speeding in pit lane - exclusion of the lap prior to coming in (practice and qualifying - like trucks do now for speeding on track).

And none of this stop/go penalty BS

V8insider · 5 Sep 2001, 08:48 (Ref:141600)

I was chatting with greg on saturday night at the 500 and a steward told him that statments were taken from majority of the Cat team a week before the 500!!! More than enough time to get stories STRAIGHT!!

This is just a classic case of "WE WANT SOMEONE TO BLAME".

Go for it Murf!!!

Crash Test · 5 Sep 2001, 11:34 (Ref:141692)

RT- not necessarily a penalise in championship points system, league have a thing where certain events deduct you a certian number of brownie points, and when you've lost X brownie points, you get an automatic weeks suspension.

If they had rules and enforced them, then there would be no complaining...

V8: But was anyone to blame for him snagging the air lines? Shouldn't someone be responsible for him not snagging them? Even if it was the team aheads air lines, there shouldn't be such a rush to get out of ones pit box.

Whether or not a $5000 is the solution, no amount of money will get that bloke's health back in order.

RaceTime · 5 Sep 2001, 13:55 (Ref:141775)

The problem is that you have to practice genuine pit stops at some stage - when do you do that?

For instance, we are currently drawing up potential regs for a 150 lap HQ race involving two wheel change pit stops and two driver change stops.

What we are thinking is one practice session for each driver (two sessions total) and a third for both to practice their wheel and driver changes.

Crash Test · 5 Sep 2001, 22:44 (Ref:142148)

"The problem is that you have to practice genuine pit stops at some stage - when do you do that?"
-Judging by the 500, all the bloody time! We were rather late leaving on Friday and Saturday, and most of the teams were hard at it. But does the act of tearing out of your pit box as fast as you can, need practice? Espacially when it is apparent that the team in front is in the pits, and it is a warm up session..

As for the HQs- will it be at Winton? We had a few 2hr HQ/Gemini races up here, and they were a hoot. Tales of guys doing an hour long stint, only for the other car (relay race situation) to die on the out lap, and the original car having to go back out again...
great stuff.

What are they going to do about refueling a HQ in a race?

RaceTime · 5 Sep 2001, 22:54 (Ref:142155)

No not Winton - Wakefield Park.

AFAIK we have never had Gemini's at Winton - they're a QLD phenomenom

HQ's have had a 4 hour race at Winton for the past 3 years - 2 hours SDat and 2 on Sunday - that takes care of refuelling problems.

sevi · 5 Sep 2001, 22:55 (Ref:142157)

Add another $6502 on to that amount.
Should of know Avesco would have their own amount.
Interesting to note that they will not release why he won the appeal though.

Crash Test · 6 Sep 2001, 00:01 (Ref:142181)

General off the record statement that I can't be held responsible for: Wouldn't 4 hours of driving over two days distroy a HQ, let alone a racing one?

Are ya sure they never had Geminis at Winton? There used to be series all over the place, was the Victorian one limited to just Keilor?

RaceTime · 6 Sep 2001, 00:49 (Ref:142192)

Can you give me a time frame for Gemini's? Then I can check for you - but can't recall them being there (old age etc...)

HQ's over two days - surprising how many fail in the last 5 or 6 laps of each race - primarily running out of fuel <g> - 2 hours is the limit at Winton for an HQ's fuel tank - thus the split into two races.

BTW - did you get my email? Need your email address and looks like I may have the wrong one...

Crash Test · 6 Sep 2001, 11:34 (Ref:142396)

Old age....I think it would be mid to latish 70s, try 74-78(?).

And check your email

RaceTime · 6 Sep 2001, 11:40 (Ref:142399)

Ahhh that early - well before my time at Winton then - I didn't move to Melbourne until 76 and didn't start timing their in my own right until late 85.

And yes - got the email - you should have a response by now

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
greg murphy rude???	Pro Racer	Australasian Touring Cars.	34	7 Dec 2005 09:47
greg murphy hot lap?	The Hrt Kid	Australasian Touring Cars.	2	2 Aug 2005 12:58
Greg Murphy	tickfordchick	Australasian Touring Cars.	162	10 Nov 2002 10:23