Tom Walkinshaw Dead at the age of 64

[soop]

I can understand the annoyance at having the co-driver take over as well, But seriously they all knew what Peter Brocks abilities were. As if you would argue to the point. They were only ever going to be also rans.

 

[Brett_jjj]

You cant deny his driving abilities,I just think its a crappy way to win the race..

 

[soop]

HDT wouldn't have won at all. And given the fact that he came from at least two laps down and won it.

He passed everyone in the field THREE times to win that race. I mean, how much more of a battle could he have fought?
If he had lost, this would be forgotten.

 

[Reaper]

I can understand the annoyance at having the co-driver take over as well, But seriously they all knew what Peter Brocks abilities were. As if you would argue to the point. They were only ever going to be also rans.

There is also the little matter of PB owning both cars.

You cant deny his driving abilities,I just think its a crappy way to win the race..

Reading the rule book and exploiting them to your advantage is a crappy way of winning a race??? I'd call the European brand of racing at the time an abomination. They read the rules, disregarded many of them and had a wink wink nudge nudge deal with their local stewards to look the other way. Pitty for them Australia didn't play ball in '87.

Reaper

 

[crazyspoon05]

Find me a legitimate quote where he says that, otherwise its hearsay.

Harvey himself says it in some interview.And as he even said,he shouldnt have handed the car over.Ive also read that Brocks brother (who was harveys co driver that year) said similar stuff too.That says a lot about what went on,and it wasnt like they found this secret "loophole", everyone knew about it,but no one else was pathetic enough to do it.They even changed the rules so it didnt happen again,that shows what the people at CAMS and the general public felt about it.I remember what most aussies at the time thought about it too.It was very controversial.A few brock fans were the only ones who tried to justify it,but people saw it for what it was,a very sad way to win.

A lot of teams and drivers cross-entered drivers and it was actually John Harvey who did the entries for the enduros so Slug was well aware that should 05 fail that Peter would jump into 25

Guys like Bob Morris, Allan Moffat, Dick Johnson, Allan Grice, etc all cross-entered and it would have been the same result had Dick Johnson have won Bathurst in 1988 when he and John Bowe were cross entered in 3 Sierra's or Moffat and Hansford started two RX7's at Bathurst in 1984 with the intention being to ditch whichever car was furthest down the order at around 1/3 race distance and then they would focus on the other car

Roadways did the same thing that year but both of the teams 'second' cars didn't become a factor due to early incidents and even the man this thread is about used to chop and change his drivers across cars in ETCC, BTCC, WEC, IMSA and WSPC championships to ensure his best drivers always had the better chances to win races and maybe the championship

I guess you'd be against Dick Johnson's 1983 effort of fronting up on race day in a car he wasn't even entered in as well then ?

Sure it's not the nicest way to win but at least we didn't have spare cars like F1 and MotoGP where drivers or riders can crash out on the first lap then jump in/onto the spare and potential win a race that they shouldn't be still racing in

 

[Brett_jjj]

Ive heard all this before years ago,a few people tried to justify it and say the same sort of stuff, even back then, they reckoned that they all knew this and that would happen etc beforehand,they all turned out to be wrong mostly anyway...Thats why most aussies (Both hoden and ford fans ) felt about it the way they did and classed it as a poor attempt at winning.You can try to justify it and say that the other teams did this and that.The whole point was that none of the other teams finished the race in a different car to the one they started the race in.

 

[Reaper]

Ive heard all this before years ago,a few people tried to justify it and say the same sort of stuff, even back then, they reckoned that they all knew this and that would happen etc beforehand,they all turned out to be wrong mostly anyway...Thats why most aussies (Both hoden and ford fans ) felt about it the way they did and classed it as a poor attempt at winning.You can try to justify it and say that the other teams did this and that.The whole point was that none of the other teams finished the race in a different car to the one they started the race in.

I still go back to the point that firstly it was purposely written into the rules to begin with and then even when somebody managed to win because of this rule, it was left in place for near 1/2 a decade and was allowed to be repeated. On the other hand Skaife/Richards won the race in a car that wasn't running in '91 (?) and this is ok??? I personally don't have an issue with that either - the rules of the day (and afaik still apply) were applied and the winner announced however I think you will find many many many more people have an issue with that result over the Brock win(s)

Reaper

 

[crazyspoon05]

Ive heard all this before years ago,a few people tried to justify it and say the same sort of stuff, even back then, they reckoned that they all knew this and that would happen etc beforehand,they all turned out to be wrong mostly anyway...Thats why most aussies (Both hoden and ford fans ) felt about it the way they did and classed it as a poor attempt at winning.You can try to justify it and say that the other teams did this and that.The whole point was that none of the other teams finished the race in a different car to the one they started the race in.

Moffat finished 3rd at Bathurst in 1984 in the car he didn't 'start' the race in and Dick Johnson finished 2nd in 1988 in the #18 car after #17 expired earlier in the race so the point is that others did pretty well out of cross-entering as well

Johnson would probably have finished 2nd in 1990 as well had he of been able to fit in the seat of the #18 car so whilst not as successful as Brock's cross entering he still did pretty well

Bottom line is you can't single out one team for exploiting it but obviously a race won in such a fashion is remembered more than a podium or multiple podiums achieved using the same

 

[383 hatch]

LOL, this was how long ago? And people still have a bee on there bonnet about it.....Seriously Brett_jjj, get over it, he won the race and the results still reflect that, and the record book still says he won Bathurst 9 times, it's not going to change.

Also, as said already, Brock wasn't the only one to cross enter and change cars part way though the race. It was done quiet a few times, just he was the only one to win the race by doing so. If the rule is in place, why not take advantage of it?

 

[Brett_jjj]

As I said before,a few people try to justify it with little stories about how this and that went on,the truth of it is no one but the teams and cams officials knew what really went on.Ive heard and read all this crap thousands of times like whats posted above etc about cross entries and using other cars etc,no one on here can say 100% for sure if its all true or not,not unless they were part of the teams or officials back then, I suppose someone will get on here now and say they were an official at the race or a race team member and that they are right and everything and everyone else is wrong, anyway ,the main point I was making was that most aussies saw it for what it was,a sad way to win a race,plain and simple,so you can say to get over it all you like,at the time 90% of the public thought it was a poor sad thing to do to win,they cant even finish a race in the same car that they started in,says it all.Holden and ford fans alike said the same thing.Thats why the rules were changed the next year or the one after that,to prevent this sad stupidity from happening again.