I have noticed this before in GP events when drivers have retired near the end of races and been classified in the results. I believe it's done because in the old days you could have a leading driver crash on the last lap and yet still finish technically ahead of lapped drivers and score points.
I am not sure of the exact ruling - personally considering that there were about 4 or 5 laps and about 10 minutes left to go and both ended up buried in the wall, subsequently passed on the road by all remaining finishers including the Minardis. Under these circumstances It would be most harsh on people who had backed them not to finish to have them classed as "finishers".
I've backed both of them not to finish, and I'll be a bit miffed if I don't get paid out, backed a number of drivers anticipating a wet race, and things didn't go as well as hoped for due to the lack of any additional rain. In my case These 2 going out makes the difference between a slight loss or a substantial gain. I fear the worst though.
I'm not a small player, and yes I should have been more professional and read the rules, especially after making a fortune out of the Indianapolis race, by doing just that. But we can all have lapses, and fortunately on this occasion it hasn't cost me money. In all honesty though I didn't bother to read the rules. Why?
Because in truth it seems to obvious to me. "Will they Finish"? Come on how clear should it need to be. A car starts the race and doesn't finish.
People don't have to be smart and quote rules, 99% of well educated people wouldn't think the rules need to be read on a market which SHOULD be clear.
|
