June Sprints

[imported_Maddog]

Originally posted by R. Pare:
14.3 Hearing

No penalty shall be imposed by the SOM except after a hearing that follows the proceedures set out in 13.4., Hearing Protest, whether the matter is brought to the attention of the SOM by Protest or by a Chief Steward's Request for Action (See 6.11.4., Request for Action)

( my italics in the above rule quote)

That rule seems to contradict the "No SOM hearing is required to impose this penalty" statement by you.

Thoughts?

GCR 14.3 applies to action taken by the SOM, but does not apply to action taken by the Chief Steward under 6.11.2 and 6.11.3.

Any action taken by the Chief Steward is protestable to the SOM who will then hold a hearing.

[TimW]

In case anyone hasn't noticed, the REmarks column on the chicago website likely is in response to the FF race...

http://www.scca-chicago.com/pistonpa...s/2004_06.html

[R. Pare]

What this all boils down to is that any penalty or judgement imposed upon a competitor is protestable.

For a Chief Steward to inform a penalised competitor that he is not entitled to protest or appeal that penalty is a gross breach of the Steward's powers, and should be addressed by the Club officials.

What Don and Justin should do now, even though it is probably too late for anything to be done about it, is to file a protest to the SOM, outlining that breach of the CS's powers. Even if they cannot officially get redress and reinstatement of their win, they will at least have it on file, and MAYBE the SOM will have a little "talk" with that CS.

If there ever is a next time, Justin, keep your cool and FILE A PROTEST!!!!!!!!!!!

[akilcoyne]

How did LaRue end up in the gravel at 14?

I never heard.

[fubar]

Re. June Sprints: I first attended the Sprints in '75 as a crewmember and the next year as a competitor. The plus side of this event is a great track at a great time of the year with some of the best drivers in the country in the competition. The minus side has always been the arrogant administration of the event by the Chicago Region and the Steward corps. The attitude has always been: "This is our show and we will do you the favor of allowing you to compete, but strictly on our terms!" Nothing has changed in the past 3 decades and I've witnessed the FF field drop from an over-subscribed 80 plus cars in the late '70's to the present day sorry turnout in numbers (but very high talent level of entries) Of course the dropoff in FF in general affects these numbers but the Region and the pairing with FM in all but the '03 event have hurt the program substantially. I totally sympathize with Justin, Don and Gib and they were unfairly denied a great victory much as Nunnes was before. Just remember, it's Chicago's show, and don't you forget it. In the future, vote with your checkbook and go somewhere else. Tony Foster (I'll probably be in trouble at the "Chicken" EWC race)

[schla]

terry,

aren't stewards required to provide a competitor a piece of paper indicating them of the action against them?

[Terry Hanushek]

Gregg

aren't stewards required to provide a competitor a piece of paper indicating them of the action against them?

That is correct. All of the current forms which are used to assess penalties (Chief Steward's Action / CSA, Request for Action / RFA and Protest) have a small section on the bottom which is a summary of the violation, penalty and appeal process. It should be torn off and given to the competitor along with any verbal explanation of the action.

Terry