Originally Posted by
Thijs
Some people may not agree with me on what I’m about to say, but I feel that to some extent organizers shouldn’t want to know if tiny changes have occurred after initial scrutineering that will have no influence on lap times anyway, as long as there are no safety issues, or unfairly gained advantages. Scrutineers also don’t go around checking cars for any bolts that they might have missed earlier, or that have been changed out such that all of a sudden only one thread protru
des from a lock nut, ready to then hand out a DQ.
I have inspected cars. I’m convinced that if a scrutineer looks long and hard enough, he/she can find something that’s not quite right on pretty much any car.
This comes back to the point as to why this one is different than most DQ’s. It feels like a gotcha, and not just to those directly involved.
Tiny infractions, on parts found rule compliant earlier, heavily penalized on 4 out of 5 of the fastest autocross cars that finished endurance, and no one else.
I want to believe them when the organisation states that they remain convinced that the correct action was taken, that the measure they decided upon was fitting for the offense.
I want to believe you when you say that no pleasure was taken in disqualifying the teams.
However, I also think that the organizers could have tried harder to avoid any impression that all this was just to make some point, or who knows what.