WRC » Rally Australia: Result - REVISED

Sort Comments: Oldest | Newest

jeff - Unregistered

September 06, 2009 2:33 PM

That's not fair at all. Ford were handed 5 min penality in portugal 2007 for a small glass thikness difference and now citroen are getting only 1 min penality?

They should have been banned like Toyota in 1995 for the rest of the season and next year.

Nassel Ali Attiyal was excluded in Greece for tech infringement also and he's fighting for PWRC.

Inconsistent, unfair and unprofessional WRC Stewards...

Cortrez - Unregistered

September 06, 2009 4:06 PM

Typical idiotic comments.
The error was down to managment and it didn't boost the performance or the handling of the car,so the penalty is far.
As for Rally Portugal 2007,the Fords where using thiner glass for all 6 windows on the car.So what does thiner glass mean....
It means less weight and more speed/power.

Notched up - Unregistered

September 06, 2009 5:09 PM

@Cortrez - Some respect is appreciated. Agreed the Citroens had no apparent direct performance benefit and I find it hard to believe it was intentional. Having said that the extra notches would allow for more a wider or finer range of notch adjustments had they been necessary, without their competitors knowing of the extra / finar adjustments capability. At the end of the day a rule has been breached. Should the penalty have been the same as for the Ford's 5 minutes - No IMO - the breach was not the same.

Beszti - Unregistered

September 06, 2009 6:22 PM

Loeb is lucky - ford got 5 minutes in 2007, Sordo was excluded in 2006 Japan (forgot to fasten his seatbelt), a certain Makinen was excluded here in 2000 because of illegal turbo, Burns was excluded in Argentina 2002 because of an underweight flywheel (it was 20 gramms lighter than in the homologation), ford was excluded in 1999 Monte-Carlo (illegal water-pump), Peugeot was excluded in Cyprus 2004 (plastic water-pump instead of metal)...
The judges kept Loeb's title chances alive!!!!!

Rally fan - Unregistered

September 06, 2009 7:20 PM

Cortez i think you will find that it was only the quater windows on the Ford, not all 6, as the other windows are made from Glass and therfore do not have to comply with the perspex window ruling that was infringed.

Page 1 of 2
1 2  »

Join the conversation - Add your comment

Please login or register before adding your comments.

Although the administrators and moderators of this website will attempt to keep all objectionable comments off these pages, it is impossible for us to review all messages. All messages express the views of the poster, and neither Crash Media Group nor Crash.Net will be held responsible for the content of any message. We do not vouch for or warrant the accuracy, completeness or usefulness of any message, and are not responsible for the contents of any message. If you find a message objectionable, please contact us and inform us of the problem or use the [report] function next to the offending post. Any message that does not conform with the policy of this service can be edited or removed with immediate effect.

© 1999 - 2016 Crash Media Group

The total or partial reproduction of text, photographs or illustrations is not permitted in any form.