NSGP Online Championship 8

[redmelons]

the decision you've made was not based on replays of any of the sides! Isn't that against the rules ?

I am not aware of any such rule.

* Race control look at incidents upon an investigation request from a driver.
* Every driver is allowed 3 investigation requests per season (you do not lose a request if you win the investigation).
* Investigation requests must be submitted within one hour after the final championship race of the day.
* Investigation requests submitted after this time will not be delt with.
* Penalties will be fully decided by the stewards. A list of offences/penalties will be kept here for consistency and future reference.
* It is your responsibility to press F1 to save your replay, no replay could count against you in an investigation depending on the discretion of the stewards.
* Should one or more stewards be involved in an incident, they will not have a say in the final decision of the incident - this is when the backup stewards come into play.
* Replays should be submitted here.
* Please rename your replay file to SurnameRace.rep (e.g. FrostSpain.rep).

[przemator]

* Investigation requests must be submitted within one hour after the final championship race of the day. Investigation requests submitted after this time will not be dealt with.

This bit is about appeals, not replays. We're talking about the same appeal, not some new one. I'm wondering why you did not ask Marek for his replay, I bet it requried sending one line to Marek on his IM. Consider it new undisclosed evidence in the case .

[KingKong]

I am not aware of any such rule.

* Race control look at incidents upon an investigation request from a driver.
* Every driver is allowed 3 investigation requests per season (you do not lose a request if you win the investigation).
* Investigation requests must be submitted within one hour after the final championship race of the day.
* Investigation requests submitted after this time will not be delt with.
* Penalties will be fully decided by the stewards. A list of offences/penalties will be kept here for consistency and future reference.
* It is your responsibility to press F1 to save your replay, no replay could count against you in an investigation depending on the discretion of the stewards.
* Should one or more stewards be involved in an incident, they will not have a say in the final decision of the incident - this is when the backup stewards come into play.
* Replays should be submitted here.
* Please rename your replay file to SurnameRace.rep (e.g. FrostSpain.rep).

The rules are incomplete then. I think we can all agree on that. And I'm not refering to this case only but in general, it was obviousl that there are few loopholes and sometimes we would have to act in accordance with common sense. For some reason you decided not to and now I'm wondering wether you just don't give a shi.t or reasoning surpasses your abilities. I can't comprehend how you could talk to me all day about other incidents and not ask me for my replay.

[redmelons]

I can't comprehend how you could talk to me all day about other incidents and not ask me for my replay.

* It is your responsibility to press F1 to save your replay, no replay could count against you in an investigation depending on the discretion of the stewards.

So now it's the stewards' fault for not asking you to upload your replay? As a steward yourself you couldn't be expected to know that you have to upload your replay? You think it wasn't reasonable of the stewards to assume that if you didn't upload a replay that you didn't have one? Or is it just that you think you are a special case?

[KingKong]

* It is your responsibility to press F1 to save your replay, no replay could count against you in an investigation depending on the discretion of the stewards.

So now it's the stewards' fault for not asking you to upload your replay? As a steward yourself you couldn't be expected to know that you have to upload your replay? You think it wasn't reasonable of the stewards to assume that if you didn't upload a replay that you didn't have one? Or is it just that you think you are a special case?

Why do you keep quoting that rule?! It's completely irrelevant here. I'm not saying that you should have, I'm saying you could have because that's what we've been doing for the last few weeks. It's natural that some may forget to upload their replays. How many times have you asked investigated people on the forum to upload their replays because we could not finish our work ? I'm not saying that we are all frineds but we sort of are and I don't understand how you could not ask me to upload the replay especially that the time for uploading replays is not specified in the rules... and so is the time by wich RC should finish thier work and give the result of investigation. Many times it took us more that 2 days to gather and establish the verdict, I might be wrong but I believe that it's the first time we gave the verdict on saturday. I did not brake any of the rules by not sending the replay. If there was a rule saying "Every investigated person should provide their replay within 5 hour from the end of the race" I would understand your point... Such rule does not exist and that's why I have a chip on my shoulder about what you guys did. As I said, there are many loopholes in the rules but I expected that the stuards would be able to 'fill them up' using common sense.

[Alex Reeves]

Wow, so much happened overnight! I'll have to remember not to sleep again...

To answer a few things potted in my direction..

@Alfonso - re voting vs Appointment - Yes, the President should have the power to appoint the stewards. I think that's a fair and reasonable approach, rather than voting for them. The only caveat being that the President can't be a steward. This balances democracy and pragmatism, in my opinion.

@KingKong - Airhead? I love the fact that your approach to everyone and everything is to 1) swear a lot and 2) use insults instead of rational discussion when challenged. You basically shoot yourself in the foot for any claims of maturity or wanting to be taken seriously by doing that.

@RC - Think the outcome in my appeals was well considered and explained, although if PSW had provided a replay I figure that it would have been a little more complicated. However the Marek decision does disturb me as well (OMG, I'm defending Marek!?!?). When I originally proposed the RC rules (which, looking back, it appears one of the stewards either never read or displays a selective memory of!) it was mandatory for the appellant to provide a replay. No replay=No Appeal. I still believe this should be the case, and that the replays of the people involved in an incident should be the only ones used to determine whether the appeal is proven. Having said that, Marek did pull that stupid move at the start of one of the pre-race practice rounds, and I had a go at him about it. His predictible response was to 1) swear and 2) insult me without acknowledging the issue, so I guess he'd built some form...

[peter-27]

The stewards found that, even allowing for lag, Santamaria-Woods should have been aware of the proximity of Reeves, yet he still cut the corner recklessly, forcing Reeves into the wall. Bearing in mind the stewards' decision at Germany that further incidents by Santamaria-Woods would be penalised, the decision of the stewards is that Santamaria-Woods will have 5 seconds added to his race time at the next NSGPOC race.

Disappointed with this ... i did expect a penalty but i think it's wrong that it carries over into the next season. Nevertheless i accecpt punishment. To answer back at this response, i did know Alex was there, but on my screen he was much further behind than what it looked like on Alex's screen - need to remember F1 key next time!!

"Peter failed to provide his replay and we were forced to judge his action solely on Reeves' replay. Not only did he ram Reeves' car into the barrier but on the straight preceding the corner he slightly changed his racing line causing Alex some damage. Now, Peter asked us to look at this incident from someone else's replay but frankly, I don't see how's that supposed to bring us closer to what was actually displayed on his screen. Rules are rules, and they are to be obeyed. He did not provide his replay and only Alex' replay should be taken into consideration. The question is what penalty should be imposed on Pete, supposing you all agree with me, and most importantly; should it be applied to todays race or the first race of the next season ? I'd say the former."

Other people's replays should be looked at for every incident, a neutral point of view as people invovled in an incident always have lag with eachother.

As for my incident, I forgot to upload my replay, Peter doesn't have one at all, I'm asking then, on the basis of what was that decision made ?

Fair question. Ribeiro and Costa replays made the incident quite clear and we couldn't see how your replay could show anything different.

What he said, my host replay also gives a pretty clear picture.

If you used replays of people who wern't involved for this incident, why not do the same for my incident with Alex? Fair question i think!

It's only natural that a driver, right after the start, turns to the racing line.

For crying out loud I did nothing wrong! I did not even touch Peter and as a matter of fact had it not been for that manoeuver I would have driven right into Alex's rear !

Not so suddenly infront of another car. You could have avoided Alex by breaking?

@PETER Also, something to be added on the voting sheet is....race controls decisions can be appealed to a higher ground, which i dont know what would be. Maybe the president?

Well then we'd esentially end up with a second race control which would just be stupid - the president would have to look at every penalised incident again, makes no sense, especially if they are already on the steward team.

Feel kind of bad to report Marek now, the incident didn't really affect my race but i just wanted to use up my request. Although what he did was wrong in my opinion.

[Othello82]

As for RC decisions i agree with the outcome of both Alex's appeals but i think PSW penalty is a little bit hard. Also i have to disagree with the fact that the penalties come to effect next season. What if PSW quits?

As for Marek's incident it's a little weird it was solely based in others replays. If Marek had the replay he should have uploaded it... Nonetheless if PSW had a complaint but didn't had the replay at it shouldn't been allowed to be submitted in the first place.

Although i don't know if i'going to be able to run next season, i'll apply to a team e try to race a few circuits, but i have time to take part in a future RC, so here i am making me eligible to a place (the president role is out of question for me).

Cheers

[Sida79]

I'd like to see Reeves and Kolowski as stewards next year.

[Alfonso]

I'd like to see Reeves and Kolowski as stewards next year.

I would like to see a voting for next year stewarts..... Im sure the results would be quite different then last season.

EDIT: and gus, who still hasnt voted for "The best NSGPOC season ever",please do it here: http://www.newstargames.com/newstarf...OC-Season-Ever
We would be glad to know the results.

[peter-27]

Voting has opened for season 9, check the season nine thread for more info

[Alfonso]

Ferrari Statement: "We have been celebrating our first win ever on constructors championship from this fantastic competition,NSGPOC. We still dont really believe it has happened....everything was so fast, specially on races. Looking back at the beginning of this season, Ferrari team only had won 10 races in all history. Now, we finished season 8 as Constructors Champions, and have 25 wins in all history. Unbelievable...we set a maximum record of 15 wins in 1 season. Its also the teams record and unfortunately we think that to beat this record it will take ages...if eventually happens.

We want to thanks Afonso Ribeiro and Joao Costa for the support and help in developing this great winner car! Without them this wouldn have been possible.
As you all know, we signed a contract with both drivers for 1 year with the option of prolonging it if accepted by both parts. We would be really interested in continuing this successful formula but its not up to us to decide but to both drivers. As soon as we have more news we´ll make an official statement.
And now....we will continue to celebrate!! "