I saw Ian has left the MR team as manger too. Wonder what he’s doing next and who wilf will recruit to replace him
Iain is working with the (Leon Haslam) Affinity Race Academy, bringing on young riders. I’m guessing the Kawasaki Superteen series. Andy
So the only issue is that rules are rules (fair enough), but it must be galling to have this caveat! "... The Tribunal acknowledges that the decision was arrived at despite a consensus that the use of the component was not likely to be performance- enhancing, and despite the failure of the post-race technical control procedures and the absence of an appropriate protest against the eligibility of the motorcycle..."
Yeah it’s disgraceful really. Someone must have seen a picture and protested (guessing). If done after the race, or within 24hrs and actual physical evidence gathered, fair enough. But this is a bit stinky…
For those interested, here is the Tribunal Report Sorry about the punctuation issues but when you read it fully there are some.. er... odd observations, including the protest timings, thrown-outs, re-submissions. MCRCB TRIBUNAL (NATIONAL COURT) Background On 20th October 2023 the Motorcycle Circuit Racing Control Board (MCRCB), following receipt of a report from the MCRCB Stewards present at Brands Hatch (13th - 15th October), stated that they wished to investigate the circumstances of potential irregularities concerning post-race technical control following the Pirelli National Superstock Championship race (2) on Sunday 15th October. Accordingly, under Article A6.3 of the MCRCB Sporting Code (2023), this Tribunal (National Court) was appointed by the MCRCB. The composition of the Tribunal is as follows: Mrs Jillian Shedden (MCRCB Director) – Chair Mr David Francis – appointed by the MCRCB Mr Gary Thompson – ACU Representative Procedure It was established that the Tribunal would hear from interested parties concerning the post-race technical control processes following the Pirelli National Superstock Championship race (2) on Sunday 15th October, and also to consider whether there had been a breach of class technical regulations involving the front brake master cylinder of competitor #4 Dan Linfoot (Optimum Bikes Honda). The Tribunal obtained written statements from; 1. The BSB Chief Technical Official 2. The BSB Technical Director 3. The MCRCB Chief Steward 4. A representative from Optimum Bikes Honda 5. A representative from AMD Honda 6. A representative from Honda UK 7. Representatives from Brembo & Mode Performance Findings – Post-race technical control processes The Tribunal found, from the statements received and from its further enquiries, that there had been a number of significant weaknesses in the post-race technical control processes following the Pirelli National Superstock Championship race (2): 1. Access to individual motorcycles in parc ferme was not restricted to authorised officials (and necessary team personnel); this particularly applied to those machines in parc ferme adjacent to the winners’ podium. 2. Poor communication which allowed a motorcycle (#4) to be released from parc ferme, when investigations into a possible breach of its eligibility were still ongoing. 3. The post-race timelines were a cause for concern. The race result was approved at 14.08 hrs. A protest was received at 15.38 hrs and this was rejected by Race Direction on the grounds that it was “out of time” (by 90 minutes) and was not accompanied by the appropriate fee; an Appeal (to the Stewards) against that decision, with the appropriate fee, was received at 17.29 hrs and subsequently withdrawn at 18.05 hrs. 4. The motorcycle in question had been released from parc-ferme before the Protest had been received, hence rendering questionable, both (a) any meaningful subsequent technical examination and (b) the referral of this issue to this Tribunal. 5. As part of the Tribunal process, the team of #4 was requested to present the motorcycle for reinspection at Donington Park on 31st October, with the same front brake master cylinder as at Brands Hatch on 15th October; the machine was presented at Donington with a different front brake master cylinder (identified by a different casting number). 6. There were unfortunate gaps in the levels of detailed understanding of the MCRCB’s Protest and Appeal regulations. 7. There was an absence of a specialist Superstock technical official, able to be consulted by and to liaise with Teams at this event and throughout the season. The Tribunal will be writing to the MCRCB and MSVR, recommending improvements to address the above matters, in time for the start of the 2024 season. Findings – Breach of class technical regulations The Tribunal convened on Thursday 23rd November by electronic meeting, and has decided that #4 Dan Linfoot (Optimum Bikes Honda) should be excluded from the results of the Pirelli National Superstock races at Brands Hatch on 14th & 15th October (Article B 4.5.1.2). The Tribunal has based its decision on reports received from three independent technical consultants that the front brake master cylinder on the motorcycle of #4 was not as originally produced by the manufacturers for the homologated machine - see Article 5.2.7.10.7 of the MCRCB Sporting Code (2023), and the failure of the team of #4 to prove otherwise. The Tribunal acknowledges that the decision was arrived at despite a consensus that the use of the component was not likely to be performance enhancing, and despite the failure of the post-race technical control procedures and the absence of an appropriate protest against the eligibility of the motorcycle (see above). There is no right of appeal against this decision - see Article A6 a) of the MCRCB Sporting Code (2023). Decision published on Tuesday 28th November 2023
Optimum Bikes Honda, through inexperience or a lack of knowledge or just plain stupidity, fitted an incorrect (not homologated) front brake master cylinder to Dan Linfoot’s race bike. Forget all about the procedural cockups over the initial appeal (MCRCB take note), had the Optimum Bikes Honda presented that bike for scrutineering at the Donington appeal, Brembo may have been able to make an argument that there was no performance gained (the difference was a threaded hole for a reservoir mount). However Optimum Bikes Honda presented the race bike with a different front brake master cylinder fitted. It’s a real shame for Dan Linfoot but his team hung him out to dry because of their crass stupidity. Andy
This is a big oversight by the team though, the ‘performance’ may not have to be material such as the fact it produced more power in the brakes, but even if it allowed more feel and precision therefore confidence it’s still really a performance enhancement
