Trying to make sense of the penalty system

Few people would contest that introducing a driving standards advisor to the BTCC was a positive move, leaving drivers in little doubt that punts and taps will be punished. But with the way the decisions have panned out in 2014, that’s about where the clarity ends.

The seeds for this column were sown in the press room at the end of a manic day’s racing at Snetterton. It was a question of when, rather than if, Colin Turkington would be punished for his incident with Matt Neal in the final race.

When the decision came, the award of an eight-place grid penalty caused a few heads to be scratched. The number of places didn’t seem to make any sense, and was the latest penalty award to cause a furrowed brow or two.

To put that comment into context, cast your minds back to the opening round at Brands Hatch; a meeting where the stewards outlined in no uncertain terms that they were not to be messed with.

That weekend saw both Martin Depper and Marc Hynes excluded from races for contact which caused other drivers to retire, and both Aron Smith and Jack Clarke get five-place grid penalties for incidents which severely hampered other competitors’ races.

The standard had been set, it would seem. End another driver’s race, and you’ll be excluded if you’re found to be at fault. Cause a driver to lose a host of positions, and you’ll get a grid penalty, as reversing places wouldn’t work when so many cars finish in between the assailant and his victim.

Move on to Donington Park, and the decision making was equally as firm. Tom Ingram hit Rob Austin in the final race, put the Audi out of the running, and was excluded. Ditto Thruxton, where Austin was ruled to have taken Nick Foster out of race two, and was also scratched from the results.

But from Croft onwards was where the waters became somewhat muddied. In race two, Jason Plato was held to blame for an incident which caused Alain Menu to retire, but was not excluded. Instead, he was given a 10-place grid penalty for the next race.

And in that race, Andrew Jordan was held responsible for an incident which caused Fabrizio Giovanardi to retire. Another trip to the stewards ensued, and another 10-place grid penalty was handed out, not an exclusion.

Jordan, of course, later successfully appealed that penalty, but the point remains that a 10-place drop was considered appropriate at the time.

So, what differentiates Hynes, Depper, Austin and Ingram from Jordan and Plato? The obvious thing is the first quartet were excluded for contact while fighting over minor positions, while the latter two were at the sharp end.

A cynic might suggest it is easier to exclude a driver from 22nd than it is to kick out one who’s just won a race – especially when it’s the final race of the day, and the crowd has long since left.

Then we come onto Snetterton, and the Turkington incident.

On paper, his crime was no different to that of Smith and Clarke at Brands. Hit another driver, cause them to lose several positions, get a grid penalty.

As alluded to above, you can’t switch positions when several cars end up in between the two at the chequered flag. And in the case of Turkington, even a five-second time penalty would have seen him finish outside the top 10.

The difference here is Smith and Clarke received five places, and Turkington eight, for seemingly the same offence.

We’ve seen a host of different penalties handed out this season; everything from the standard reprimand and points to exclusions. All the cases listed above are just a selection of the overall total.

And of that total, arguably the application of time penalties and position switching has been the easiest to understand.

These often apply in situations where contact has been made and positions switch, and if the cars finish together on track, they will be reversed in the results.

We’ve seen this on a number of occasions this year, and you can’t fault the logic: Jason Plato and Colin Turkington at Oulton Park; Gordon Shedden and Mat Jackson at Croft; Shedden and Jack Goff at Thruxton and Matt Neal and Alain Menu at Oulton to name but a few.

But the point I’m getting at with all of this is that several penalties are hard to understand, and it would help all of us – media and fans – if they were explained clearly.

It would be churlish to be overly critical of the series, especially when it is in such fine fettle at present. Indeed, this is by far and away the most questioning piece I’ve ever penned about the BTCC.

And at all times, we know that the race stewards have access to a myriad of sources to come to their decisions, including telemetry and onboard camera footage, which provide a far greater level of analysis than just seeing the TV pictures.

But at a time when its profile is as high as it’s been for many a year, and professional drivers are coming back to the championship, I think it would be appropriate for the reasoning behind some of these penalties to be made clear.