Upgrade to enjoy this feature!
Vital MX fantasy is free to play, but Premium users receive great benefits. Premium benefits include:
- View and download rider stats
- Pick trends
- Create a private league
- And more!
Only $10 for all 2026 SX, MX, and SMX series.
Where does it say you can't pass before you get to the triples the lights warn you must be rolled? The lights simply warn you the restricted section is coming up.
The Shop
DeCal Works Huge Plastic Inventory of UFO and Polisport kits.
Luxon 4-Post Bar Mounts
$189.95 - $239.95
Like I said, if it was a blatant disregard for the rules, throw the book at him but in my opinion (and obviously the AMAs) , it wasn't.
And for the people saying RV was the fastest and would have won anyways are stupid. We aren't here to discuss his performance, we're discussing his mistake. Because if stewart would have anticipated the pass he would have made a defensive move in that corner and they would just be battling it out while someone is down on the track which is not safe. RV should have just calmed down and waited, it is that simple. Even if the guy was getting back on his bike, it is not his call to determine the risk of the situation he just needs to follow the rules. The point of the flags are to tell the riders to put the racing on hold and be aware of what is going on. Continuing to race in that situation is the real danger.
The pass was just unnecessary and if he would have made a better decision none of this would be in question. AMA is a joke for letting something like this slide, it will just lead to more of these cases and eventually someone getting hurt because of it.
The first one was the one that got him a penalty. The problem they have is they don't have a rule for applying the specified penalties to a restart, and, to me anyway, the "contract" that is a rule book allows them to choose from a list of specified rules or just issue a warning, but it's not written in a way that gives them discretion to gin up a new penalty on the spot to fit the restart situation. The time penalty in the rule book, if you impose it, it has to be accompanied by loss of at least one finishing position. Time penalty seems to be what they usually apply to flag and track cutting incidents. There's not really a penalty listed, at least a proportionate one, that doesn't end up costing RV the race.
The problem they have is that they applied the penalty and the race went on. I don't think they can go back and say scratch that unless one of the other teams protested before the restart.
The other problem is that they've created a situation where the riders have to choose to be aggressive or restrained when the situation is ambiguous, and you can bet after RV makes that pass Saturday as this has sorted out that the riders are not gloing to choose restraint.
I'm not sure why Stewart's getting dragged into it as far as the arguing goes. This is really devolving into a Millsaps/RD people versus RV people. As RV said last week, Stewart really isn't the worry of any of those three, right?
It is stupid to think that just because the guy who was in the wrong was also the fastest means we shouldn't care about what happened and how it was handled. Even if Stewart fought back and won I would still be making the same points. It matters because you need structured and consistent rulings at this level of racing. And the fact of safety(yes I am aware that everything seemed safe but that's not always the case) there is no need for rider judgement if rules were more clear cut and strictly enforced.
My time idea would be to set up a new system where the worse the mistake the more time added to the penalty. In this case my system would have caused RV the race but my system would be fair. It still gives the person a chance to win even if he screws up.
And I agree with your decisions on the fly thing. That's why I said no penalty should be enforced until after the race. What if they did a complete restart? Would they dock his gate pick? Lmao...
We have three people on track (not counting Kiniry), two "Monster people" (safety crew) and one AMA official (in blue/black shirt)
This is same situation a micro-second apart, two angles
In the top shot, it is clear that BOTH the yellow flag AND red cross flag are being displayed.
But there has to be a fourth guy in front of the AMA guy (and out of frame on picture 2) holding the red cross flag.
So, he was needlessly waving a red flag? Because the only thing after that flag is Kiniry, no other incident, so they had an unnecessary red flag zone for a matter of five feet?
Even with that being the case, you can see RV is past JS within feet of that yellow flag, a bike length past the yellow flag, as Stewart's rear wheel is parallel to the yellow flag, so that means that within the space of that red cross flag and that yellow flag, RV had to have been, not behind JS as he was over that third jump (of the triple), but alongside JS making a pass and completing that pass at the point of, if not prior to, that yellow flag.
Even if you want to argue the minute distances of exactly where RV's wheel when past JS's wheel, RV was already making the pass. The rule is no passing. He was passing, he just had yet to complete the pass and the rule does not say "Do not complete a pas" it says "no passing" and it seems clear, at least to me, that he was indeed passing JS, and completed that pass right at the yellow flag, if not prior.
IMO, it's a violation both by the letter of the rule and most certainly especially in the spirit of the rule.
I watched it live, from above, from almost the same angle as the second picture, and that was how I saw and many others around me.
Even if the pass was not completed by the yellow flag, he was in the process of making a pass within the red cross zone
Unlike correcting the first penalty before the restart, they're also in a position to do something about it.
I don't blame him, but there it is.
Pit Row
It's the rider's responsibility to be aware and to observe all safety official instructions
If this defense is to say RV knew he was switching from a red cross to a yellow flag, you're talking about a time frame of one-tenth of a second, which either makes RV a psychic or the luckiest MOFO in the business to be able to anticipate the thoughts of the flagger in order to allow him to initiate the pass prior to, but complete the pass at the exact fraction of a second the flagger switched flags.
http://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=582828041747409
Their overriding priority in a situation in red cross situations needs to be handling it in the flash of the moment in a way that doesn't create confusion for riders who are in a heated race, and you're not going to find another situation more like that than this one, where the top five were wheel to wheel. And the problem is that no matter how much more clearly you could present a red cross flag, by giving riders a pass because of confusion you create the sense in everyone else that they are going to have to go for it in the next such situation or they are going to get screwed if another rider takes advantage because he doesn't believe anyone is going to do anything about it. One of the things that MXSports did well when they first took over the outdoors is that they rigorously enforced the wheels down rule at Hangtown and the first few rounds, including taking a moto win from Grant and dropping Pource from second to third. http://www.allisports.com/alli/news/mike-alessi-races-first-career-450-class-victory-hangtown. I believe they followed up pretty quickly to change the yellow with red cross to white with red cross flag to make it clearer, but the penalties stuck. Riders will only take the rule seriously if it's enforced.
As far as how applying rules affects a title, it seems to me the guys who would be really smoked by this would be less Stewart and Suzuki, but Dungey and Millsaps. They are the one disadvantaged by RV not being penalized.
My recollection is that you typically see a five second penalty for something like this. That would have bumped RV down to third in this case, as Stewart and Reed were both within 5 seconds of RV at the end.
Hard to imagine anything will happen now to address the situation, so time to move on a worry about this as much as I worry about the fuel thing way back when. It is what it is.
FIRST PENALTY/RESTART: As posted perviously, the handling of this first penalty was not in compliance with the Rules. After thinking about it and reading the comments here, particularly those of posters that have personal experience with the imposition of penalties, I am of the opinion that the Race Director in this case came up with the penalty of dropping RV 3 spots on the restart as a kind of a spur of the moment "let the penalty fit the crime" kind of approach. I don't think this was some great conspiracy kind of thing to benefit one Rider over another. The problem here is that this kind of off the cuff decision making is (1) not allowed under the rules and (2) results in disproportionate treatment between riders for the same infraction at future events where the penalty is imposed at the conclusion of the race.
Solution: The solution I would like to see is clarification of the rules, perhaps by a simple statement that all penalties are imposed at the conclusion of the race. Secondly, it would be beneficial to have an acknowledgement that it was handled wrong and then impose the appropriate penalty. At most I could see a time penalty dropping RV 1 spot in the finish considering that he was dropped 3 spots in the restart. Perhaps a more equitable approach would simply be a formal warning as allowed under the rules.
SECOND NONPENALTY: While personally, I think a penalty here should have been imposed both on the facts and on a policy basis of letting Riders know that Red Cross flags are to be taken seriously, I believe that it is within the Race Director's discretion to make this decision. The Race Director didn't find a penalty. My hopes are that all Riders are treated equally and this does not result in more flagrant violations of the Red Cross flag.
Solution: Best solution here is simply to move on. I do think that at the next Rider's Meetings something should be brought up to let the Rider's know that the Red Cross flags are to be taken seriously.
The Protest and Appeals Provisions: Finally, looking over the rules on protests and appeals, they appear to be antiquated and need to be revamped. With particularity, I am addressing the $800 payment that must be made at the time a protest or an apeal is filed. This $800 charge, while clearly designed to discourage protests/appeals, puts the under funded privateer at a complete economic disadvantage compared to the well funded team. The rules do allow for return of the $800 fee if the action is justified, however, there is no description of what justified means. Does it mean that the action is upheld or something else? Perhaps the fee should be reduced and only not returned if the protest/appeal is completely frivolous.
^^ This is my main takeaway from this entire ordeal. A bad precedent has been set here.
I'll add this...
I think the 3 position dock was fair, but assessing it on the single file restart instead of the finish was a major boner. First off, it reduced the severity of the penalty down to practically zero. Secondly, how is a fair, equal penalty to be enforced in future incidents where a restart doesn't occur?
I also feel like some more "hard & fast" rules need to be put in place for safety specific violations. Factoring in time lost/gained on the track is fine for track cutting or something like that, but matters related to safety should be more cut and dried (and punitive). Can anyone imagine NFL referees speculating on the outcome of a play to determine the penalty for a facemask or horse collar tackle infraction?
Post a reply to: What if: RV docked 3 places with no red flag