Superrally or Rally 2 or whatever

[A.F.F.]

What do you guys think, is it really necessary? Naturally the teams don't want to get rid off the rule since they want visibility for their product. But what does the fans say? I, personally, would like to return to the time when an off was an off and an enginefailure could end the rally. That made think how they drove and it made the championship more interesting. Of course, a single rallywise I can see folks wanting to keep it, more cars and flatout driving throughout the rally.

[PLuto]

I think that this discussion was made very often during last year. I prefer also system without superally (or system which is in ERC - when you retire, you can continue, but only for leg bonus points, not overall result). But with small number of drivers in WRC and problems with their reliability, on lot of events there should not be so many crews in finish.

[stefanvv]

Absolutely not. But necessary evil with commercial value as many other things in Motorsport in general. I don't think flat out driving on super Rally is more appealing, I don't remember anything special with a driver doing with Super Rally, but I do remember Colin McRae bending propshaft with a rock, trying to continue the stage. Ehhhh those were the days.....

[N.O.T]

superally can stay... but the time penalty should increase.

[Mirek]

I was arguing very often about that last year :) I'm fully against superally. Who retired shall not be in overall results. It's unsportsmanlike against the privateers and drivers from down the order (who are missing more and more in the start list and without whom the rallies could be hardly organized in the future). They deserve to be classified ahead of those who retired. The most ridiculous was Spain 2012 where retired crews were faster than all 2WD cars over the long muddy stage!

Besides that I don't think that no superally somehow damages the show - IRC was without superally and it didn't result in ten crews in finish or so. RMC is usually also without superally and there were no extraordinary numbers of retirements. I do believe that teams and drivers are able to adapt.

[RAS007]

Superrally or Rally 2 is shite and should be dropped by all events, just like on RMC. If you crash out, you're out and that's it.

[RAS007]

I don't remember anything special with a driver doing with Super Rally, but I do remember Colin McRae bending propshaft with a rock, trying to continue the stage. Ehhhh those were the days.....

This^^^.

[dimviii]

i really dont know what to prefere.There are pros and cons for both systems.Maybe a bigger penalty that they cant surpass slower drivers that they didn t retired?
i would like to see Neuville or Sordo for example at next days at Monte.

[makinen_fan]

I have to agree with NOT and Dimitri. It is good for the show and spectators but it is unfair for the slower crews. As long as it does not interfere massively with results it is not bad to be there. Saying that the current penalty system is too simplistic and has to change somehow if superrally stays in the future.
A system similar to ERC works best IMO (extra points for each leg), though a bit confusing with points for the non-hardcore fans.

[Sulland]

If some pair go off, they can be allowed back in again, but;
Must run first on the road.
Will only get times on the stages, but not count on the overall list.

[Mintexmemory]

First as mod standards are currently under discussion and given Mark's dictum that this is a family forum the more alert of you will have noticed my removal of the industrial language from the title. I wont trawl every post for cussing, oaths, blaspheming etc but would appreciate such terms not being in titles (if we are to concentrate on issues that really matter)

Secondly, what price tv coverage when on Day 3 of Mexico there may be only 5 WRC cars running without Super Rally?
Overall classification should have the fail system used for many years in UK road rallies. You miss a control, you get a fail. Clean runs are classified according to time and all are classified ahead of the crews with 1 fail and so on. Perhaps stage points should be awarded to encourage continued competition from those who have lost the chance of WRC top 10 points.

[gorganl2000]

from one view point we can say it should be banned as its unfair to those competitors who do not suffer any incident, but are classified below competitors who have used super rally. This course of action was probably more popular for rally organizers in the past when entries for the events were more plentiful and the rally purist accepted this position.

on the other hand, nowadays competitors/teams may wish to continue under super rally in an effort to fulfill sponsor obligations/promotions, refine pace notes and learn new stages in rally conditions, get some bang for the big bucks paid to enter rallies now, etc. As well, with rally now being promoted on TV, you-tube, etc. rally organizers and viewers may well wish to see a larger number of competitors, even if this is somewhat due to super rally, as it adds to the overall spectacle.

so from both sides there are valid points

[NaBUru38]

I have an Idea:

o- Drivers may start every day of each rally. If they retire on Friday, then can run Saturday and Sunday.
o- Top 12 drivers are scored according to each day: 15-12-10-9-...
o- Now, to keep the old endurance aspect of rallying, the aggregate times determine the winner and podium. Extra points are awarded to the top 5: 10-5-3-2-1.

[A.F.F.]

First as mod standards are currently under discussion and given Mark's dictum that this is a family forum the more alert of you will have noticed my removal of the industrial language from the title. I wont trawl every post for cussing, oaths, blaspheming etc but would appreciate such terms not being in titles (if we are to concentrate on issues that really matter)


With all due respect Mintexmemory, and this is my opinion only, you didn't solve the problem, you just moved it a bit forward. The title is as offensive as it was before plus plain stupid now. So, while you're at it, can it be changed something with no x's highlighting the offensive meaning? Just Rally 2 if that is indeed the official name of the rule?

[A.F.F.]

Brilliant :D Cheer Mintexmemory :up:

[AndyRAC]

Keep it, with one simple concession. You can't be classed ahead of somebody who has done the whole event. Somebody has mentioned the 'Road Rally fail'. Or the 'fault' in show jumping.....fastest faultless time wins - however, if you have a fence down, you can't beat a clear round.

The purist in me would get rid of it - however, we need as many cars as possible, so a fair Rally2 system is required.

[A.F.F.]

Absolutely not. But necessary evil with commercial value as many other things in Motorsport in general. I don't think flat out driving on super Rally is more appealing, I don't remember anything special with a driver doing with Super Rally, but I do remember Colin McRae bending propshaft with a rock, trying to continue the stage. Ehhhh those were the days.....


Exactly !!!

And how about those bittersweet retirements? 2003 at Australia, Marcus was a bit greedy with a hairpin and got stuck. Car was ok but he got stuck. How frustrating was that`???

[Simmi]

If I'm a spectator in the stages I want to see as many cars as possible. I don't like seeing cars come back up the leaderboard under Rally2, mostly because so often it highlights the thin fields at rallies. If we had more high-level WRC cars then it wouldn't be as much of an issue.

I'd let cars back in and give them the ability to get mileage, develop cars and please fans/sponsors. The only points I'd let them contend for are Power Stage points.

[ironseb]

Imagine one second a sprinter in Tour de France winning at Champs Elysee without finishing mountain stages. That is superrally.