The following topics are sorted by a chronological order, since there are at least two of them equal in importance.

1.: Protests

1.1: 02.05.09, Grand Prix of Westhill:

Quote from dekojester :

Chief Race Administrator Executive Decision:

Driver of Car #24 I.Perez (ivan.f) is being excluded for 90 days from NDR events for removing a competing driver from the start grid. This occurred prior to the start of the LFSCART Round 2 Sprint Race.

d

One race later, 16.05.09, British Grand Prix in South City Town Course:

04 Rudy van Buren removes a competing driver from the grid.
...
No penalty, no warning, no protests, no reaction or consequences at all.

Admins how do u explain this? Satisfying explanation demanded.


1.2: 16.05.09, British Grand Prix in South City Town Course:

- Admin Hynninen: says something concerning the race.
- 04 Rudy van Buren: "Shut up while racing!"
- Admin Hynninen: "Did u even listen to what i said ?!"
- No penalty, no warning, no protests, no reaction or consequences at all.

Admins how do u explain this? Satisfying explanation demanded.


1.3: 2009 Kyoto 500:

1.3.1: 123 Ronald Kasemier is put on probation period for no reason / absolutely nothing. His behaviour throughout the sessions and the race is reproachless.

An apology from the admins for this unexcusable injustice is demanded. Of course the penalty must be canceled.


1.4: Quote from an NDR rulebook: "... the Race Director has the option to recall the Safety Car and restart the race
with not all cars caught up."

The driver, who, unlike the author of this ununderstandably idiotic idea and the race director beeing just as ununderstandably idiotic by supporting it, is not an idiot, has the right to inform both of them about the fact that they are unfair idiots.


so far the formal part.


2.: Critics and improvement suggestions (no order from here on)

2.1: referring to these 2 posts:

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1198978#post1198978
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1198983#post1198983

Quote from lizardfolk :

... Personally I am still very very frustrated and like many here I want justice (my race lasted one straight and half of T1 for godsake!!!!). However, I took a step back decided to hold my tongue about this incident or any of other clockwork's incidents that saw all three of us get into someone else's mess. So...why am I bring this up? Very simple, this is gradually turning into a witch hunt. Although we're all not yelling "off with their heads" yet, I ask you (and the admins) to be cautious on reviewing these incidents. Many of these are really just racing incidents...

sure you can argue that you must be careful. But keep in mind, we're in a 30 car oval race with no spotters. This is the main thing, no spotters. Which means what we have left is just our senses and intuition. That's really quite insane when you think about it. I mean sure, you can diligently look, but unless you are racing in chase view the entire race there is really no way that you can be 100% sure of where everyone is around you. Unless of course we have a competent spotter...which we dont.

So what happens? This is a long race, after a while we start to use our intuition much more than actual looking, then from this we start assuming and it is the assuming that's what gets people wrecked. But tbh, what are we really suppose to do? No competent spotter and our only means of driving safetly is just looking around? This would probably cut it if it's 10-20 competitiors but we're looking at 30 cars and all of which are competently fast...We're all human who've been basically thrown in the dark with the pack scrunched up going 3 and sometimes 4 wide. Mistakes, I'm not excusing stupid mistakes or suicide runs, but honest and reasonable mistakes will be made. We're not psychics, and heck most of us aren't real racecar drivers and even the pros on oval make the same mistakes that some people made during the 500

I've gotten the feeling early on that racing incidents were being viewed as deliberate wrecking or incompetency in the practice sessions, and I've talked to Clockwork guys about this as well, but I'm breaking the silence now because things have gotten so heated recently. Angry that your race was unjustly cut short? Unfortunately, that's just the nature of oval racing. One mistake, nay one unlucky situation and you're out. Look at some of the NASCAR/IndyCar wrecks and you'll see similar if not identical wrecks in the 500 (as well as the finger pointing and frustration that follows).

Of course, some wrecks are inexcusable. I'm not saying that everyone was just involved in unavoidable racing incidents and no one's to blame for anything. But, again, all I'm saying is to just not blur the line between incompetency and hard racing gone wrong however fine that line may be.

Lizard

I agree on the first part (marked in blue). On the rest i totally disagree, since it sais that we cannot do anything about stupid behaviour. This is as wrong as it gets. It sais that at a certain point a limit is reached and nothing can be done about it. This cannot be it, can it? If you base on that then there will never be improvement. Instead one never must be satisfied and always develop further, become better. This can be done by improving the driving, improving the way of usage of the driving devices and by improving oneself, the way one behaves and interacts. All this can be done without spotters ... seriously ... how low can one's expectations be?


2.2 the ventrilo recording:

Something which actually should be as clear as it gets: FM-Team, it is not about the race director beeing allowed to record or not, it is his duty! He must do everything in favor of an as just as possible management.


2.3 the restrictions:

NDR I would like to ask u something:

- Do u like the dirt FIA, Max Mosley, ... ?
- Do u know that anyone liking them is a piece of dirt?
- Do u want to be among those pieces of dirt?

No? Why do u do the same as them then? This is the introduction for a discussion i would like to have with u. The point are the numberless restrictions u enforce. The arguments against restrictions couldn't be stronger. Just compare the sorry state motorsport is in now with the glorious time until the millenium.


2.4 the pits:

U guys already made a great decision by putting as harmless marks as possible on the track (the cones) which seperate the race area from the pit road and mark the point from where the leader may step down after yellow. Unfortunately even those cones are too dangerous and affect the racing too much. Lines, such as used in other context, would be much better and safer.


2.5: the good:

It always is the trappings which make something better or worse. The programme u guys did for the Kyoto 500 is something truly great. If u ask me there shoud be a special effort put in such trappings. The programme simply is an excellent enrichement to the whole. Just two little things: The grid on page 14 is designed strange. U should have made either only the first row or the first 3 rows big. Then the cars should either show in straight direction or be shown from the side and that going left, not right.


so far for now.


U find it is a lot of hard critics expressed all unmasked and at once? Well I've told u once and I'll tell u again: I only criticise what is important or at least matters to me. I dare dream of NDR becoming much more than it already is.

I'll keep adding things.

with the wish to soon hear about the next oval event

Ori

I'll reply to the bits that are actually my stuff

Quote from Ori :

1.2: 16.05.09, British Grand Prix in South City Town Course:

- Admin Hynninen: says something concerning the race.
- 04 Rudy van Buren: "Shut up while racing!"
- Admin Hynninen: "Did u even listen to what i said ?!"
- No penalty, no warning, no protests, no reaction or consequences at all.

Admins how do u explain this? Satisfying explanation demanded.

This is timo. We cannot be held accountable for anything he says.

Quote from Ori :

1.3: 2009 Kyoto 500:

1.3.1: 123 Ronald Kasemier is put on probation period for no reason / absolutely nothing. His behaviour throughout the sessions and the race is reproachless.

An apology from the admins for this unexcusable injustice is demanded. Of course the penalty must be canceled.

Wait, where does it say that?

Quote from Ori :

1.4: Quote from a NDR rulebook: "... the Race Director has the option to recall the Safety Car and restart the race
with not all cars caught up."

The driver, who, unlike the author of this ununderstandably idiotic idea and the race director beeing just as ununderstandably idiotic by supporting it, is not an idiot, has the right to inform both of them about the fact that they are idiots.

Wait, what?

Quote from Ori :

NDR I would like to ask u something:
- Do u like the dirt FIA, Max Mosley, ... ?
- Do u know that anyone liking them is a piece of dirt?
- Do u want to be among those pieces of dirt?

No? Why do u do the same as them then? This the introduction for a discussion i would like to have with u. The point are the numberless restrictions u enforce. The arguments against restrictions couldn't be stronger. Just compare the sorry state motorsport is in now with the glorious time until the millenium.

Again, what? Timo is our facist fetish expert.

Quote from Ori :

2.5: the good:

It always is the trappings which make something better or worse. The programmu guys did for the Kyoto 500 is something truly great. Just two little things: The grid on page 14 is designed strange. U should have made either only the first row or the first 3 rows big. Then the cars should either show in straight direction or be shown from the side and that going left, not right.

Blame d for that - he did the grid.

Quote from Ori :

1.1: 02.05.09, Grand Prix of Westhill:


One race later, 16.05.09, British Grand Prix in South City Town Course:

04 Rudy van Buren removes a competing driver from the grid.
...
No penalty, no warning, no protests, no reaction or consequences at all.

Admins how do u explain this? Satisfying explanation demanded.


1.2: 16.05.09, British Grand Prix in South City Town Course:

- Admin Hynninen: says something concerning the race.
- 04 Rudy van Buren: "Shut up while racing!"
- Admin Hynninen: "Did u even listen to what i said ?!"
- No penalty, no warning, no protests, no reaction or consequences at all.

Admins how do u explain this? Satisfying explanation demanded.

I was unaware of the removal part, and I will investigate that and the chat during the week. I was not in server that day that I remember, or I missed that if I was. I will check into this.

Quote from Ori :

1.3: 2009 Kyoto 500:

1.3.1: 123 Ronald Kasemier is put on probation period for no reason / absolutely nothing. His behaviour throughout the sessions and the race is reproachless.

An apology from the admins for this unexcusable injustice is demanded. Of course the penalty must be canceled.

The probation was for his actions surrouding the incident with car 116 during the laps 148-153 period. The probation will not be cancelled, it was deemed to be fair for the behaviour displayed by both drivers at the time.

Quote from Ori :

1.4: Quote from an NDR rulebook: "... the Race Director has the option to recall the Safety Car and restart the race
with not all cars caught up."

The driver, who, unlike the author of this ununderstandably idiotic idea and the race director beeing just as ununderstandably idiotic by supporting it, is not an idiot, has the right to inform both of them about the fact that they are idiots.

The purpose of the rule is to allow the Race Director to send the field back to racing, generally after a long caution should there be problems or so. I rarely exercise this option.

I'll respond to part 2 tommorow after I've had a nice sleep.

i love this.

Some people takes that too seriously me thinks.

Omg serious biznes!

Quote from Ori :

The following topics are sorted by a chronological order, since there are at least two of them equal in importance.

1.: Protests

1.1: 02.05.09, Grand Prix of Westhill:


One race later, 16.05.09, British Grand Prix in South City Town Course:

04 Rudy van Buren removes a competing driver from the grid.
...
No penalty, no warning, no protests, no reaction or consequences at all.

Admins how do u explain this? Satisfying explanation demanded.

If we/someone missed this, it was probably before the actual gridsetting. So presumably you would have got away with a warning anyway. Besides didn't we use the application to sort the grid?

Quote :

1.2: 16.05.09, British Grand Prix in South City Town Course:

- Admin Hynninen: says something concerning the race.
- 04 Rudy van Buren: "Shut up while racing!"
- Admin Hynninen: "Did u even listen to what i said ?!"
- No penalty, no warning, no protests, no reaction or consequences at all.

Admins how do u explain this? Satisfying explanation demanded.

I haven't got the slightest idea of what I said. Besides IIRC they were two seperate occasions.

Anyway, unless someone provides a recording, there's no point in anyone trying to remember what the **** it was I said.

Quote :

1.3: 2009 Kyoto 500:

1.3.1: 123 Ronald Kasemier is put on probation period for no reason / absolutely nothing. His behaviour throughout the sessions and the race is reproachless.

An apology from the admins for this unexcusable injustice is demanded. Of course the penalty must be canceled.

Again, no point in arguing about the decisions of the stewards. Even though I agree that it was the most stupid call ever, it's still the decision of the jury and it is final.

Quote :

1.4: Quote from an NDR rulebook: "... the Race Director has the option to recall the Safety Car and restart the race
with not all cars caught up."

The driver, who, unlike the author of this ununderstandably idiotic idea and the race director beeing just as ununderstandably idiotic by supporting it, is not an idiot, has the right to inform both of them about the fact that they are idiots.

I fully support the rule. Stop calling me an idiot.

I hope to see a change to that rule, just for clarification, in a way that it allowes the race to be restarted without having to wait for one person.

Quote :

so far the formal part.


2.: Critics and improvement suggestions
...
2.3 the restrictions:

NDR I would like to ask u something:

- Do u like the dirt FIA, Max Mosley, ... ?
- Do u know that anyone liking them is a piece of dirt?
- Do u want to be among those pieces of dirt?

No? Why do u do the same as them then? This is the introduction for a discussion i would like to have with u. The point are the numberless restrictions u enforce. The arguments against restrictions couldn't be stronger. Just compare the sorry state motorsport is in now with the glorious time until the millenium.

What the hell are you on about? R2's only or what?

Quote :

2.4 the pits:

U guys already made a great decision by putting as harmless marks as possible on the track (the cones) which seperate the race area from the road to the pits and mark the point from where the leader may step down after yellow. Unfortunately even those cones are too dangerous and affect the racing too much. Lines, such as used in other context, would be much better and safer.

But if the markings look cool! Besides people would use the runoff area and argue they didn't go off the racing track as there are no markings.

Quote :

2.5: the good:

It always is the trappings which make something better or worse. The programme u guys did for the Kyoto 500 is something truly great. If u ask me there shoud be a special effort put in such trappings. The programme simply is an excellent enrichement to the whole. Just two little things: The grid on page 14 is designed strange. U should have made either only the first row or the first 3 rows big. Then the cars should either show in straight direction or be shown from the side and that going left, not right.

I did that. I didn't wan't to use too much pages for the grid, that would have looked even more stupid. So I scaled the cars as much as possible while still making them recogniseable. The cars are pointed towards right because there are no infield grandstands in Kyoto Ring, thus no one sees the left side of the cars.

Quote :

so far for now.

U find it is a lot of hard critics expressed all unmasked and at once? Well I've told u once and I'll tell u again: I only criticise what is important or at least matters to me. I dare dream of NDR becoming much more than it already is.

We should employ you full time to keep a log of everything that happens during any race.

Quote from Ori :

The following topics are sorted by a chronological order, since there are at least two of them equal in importance.

1.: Protests

1.1: 02.05.09, Grand Prix of Westhill:


One race later, 16.05.09, British Grand Prix in South City Town Course:

04 Rudy van Buren removes a competing driver from the grid.
...
No penalty, no warning, no protests, no reaction or consequences at all.

Admins how do u explain this? Satisfying explanation demanded.

I don't remember him doing it... I know once he helped me to remove everyone from the grid as the grid was in the wrong order. But that help was demanded by race administration back then... back then I did not know the /clear function. If it was that special scene you have in mind then I have to say: It has got a different quality to what Ivan has done: Ivan kicked someone out of the grid, after he hasn't qualified.

Quote from Ori :

1.2: 16.05.09, British Grand Prix in South City Town Course:

- Admin Hynninen: says something concerning the race.
- 04 Rudy van Buren: "Shut up while racing!"
- Admin Hynninen: "Did u even listen to what i said ?!"
- No penalty, no warning, no protests, no reaction or consequences at all.

Admins how do u explain this? Satisfying explanation demanded.

I cannot remember it honestly.

Quote from Ori :

1.3: 2009 Kyoto 500:

1.3.1: 123 Ronald Kasemier is put on probation period for no reason / absolutely nothing. His behaviour throughout the sessions and the race is reproachless.

An apology from the admins for this unexcusable injustice is demanded. Of course the penalty must be canceled.

I cannot give a statement on this, as I cannot judge it.

However, off topic: Can you excuse something unexcusable? I just wonder as the verb for the noun "appology" is "to excuse"

Quote from Ori :

1.4: Quote from an NDR rulebook: "... the Race Director has the option to recall the Safety Car and restart the race
with not all cars caught up."

The driver, who, unlike the author of this ununderstandably idiotic idea and the race director beeing just as ununderstandably idiotic by supporting it, is not an idiot, has the right to inform both of them about the fact that they are idiots.


so far the formal part.

This rule was introduced as reaction to our early (especially oval) races In which, during a full course yellow, every lap guys came in. The caution enlengthened heavily, so this was introduced to keep cautions short and actually to have more on track racing.

Quote from Ori :

2.: Critics and improvement suggestions

2.1: referring to these 2 posts:

http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1198978#post1198978
http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1198983#post1198983




I agree on the first part (marked in blue). On the rest i totally disagree, since it sais that we cannot do anything about stupid behaviour. This is as wrong as it gets. It sais that at a certain point a limit is reached and nothing can be done about it. This cannot be it, can it? If you base on that then there will never be improvement. Instead one never must be satisfied and always develop further, become better. This can be done by improving the driving, improving the way of usage of the driving devices and by improving oneself, the way one behaves and interacts. All this can be done without spotters ... seriously ... how low can one's expectations be?

I'm basically agreeing Ori, but I remember the early oval races in reallife. Because of the "mass" of accidents spotters were introduced

Quote from Ori :

2.2 the ventrilo recording:

Something which actually should be clear to anyone who is not an idiot: Dear FM, it is not about the race director beeing allowed to record or not, it is his duty! He must do everything in favor of an as just as possible management.

Another thin I don't want to say something about.

Quote from Ori :

2.3 the restrictions:

NDR I would like to ask u something:

- Do u like the dirt FIA, Max Mosley, ... ?
- Do u know that anyone liking them is a piece of dirt?
- Do u want to be among those pieces of dirt?

No? Why do u do the same as them then? This is the introduction for a discussion i would like to have with u. The point are the numberless restrictions u enforce. The arguments against restrictions couldn't be stronger. Just compare the sorry state motorsport is in now with the glorious time until the millenium.

Actually you need to clearify yourself what restrictions you mean.

Quote from Ori :

2.4 the pits:

U guys already made a great decision by putting as harmless marks as possible on the track (the cones) which seperate the race area from the road to the pits and mark the point from where the leader may step down after yellow. Unfortunately even those cones are too dangerous and affect the racing too much. Lines, such as used in other context, would be much better and safer.

This might be discussed. Thanks for your feedback.

Quote from Ori :

2.5: the good:

It always is the trappings which make something better or worse. The programme u guys did for the Kyoto 500 is something truly great. If u ask me there shoud be a special effort put in such trappings. The programme simply is an excellent enrichement to the whole. Just two little things: The grid on page 14 is designed strange. U should have made either only the first row or the first 3 rows big. Then the cars should either show in straight direction or be shown from the side and that going left, not right.


so far for now.


U find it is a lot of hard critics expressed all unmasked and at once? Well I've told u once and I'll tell u again: I only criticise what is important or at least matters to me. I dare dream of NDR becoming much more than it already is.

I'll keep adding things.

with the wish to soon hear about the next oval event


Ori

Quote from TFalke55 :

This rule was introduced as reaction to our early (especially oval) races In which, during a full course yellow, every lap guys came in. The caution enlengthened heavily, so this was introduced to keep cautions short and actually to have more on track racing.

Quote from dekojester :

The purpose of the rule is to allow the Race Director to send the field back to racing, generally after a long caution should there be problems or so. I rarely exercise this option.

Quote from hyntty :

I hope to see a change to that rule, just for clarification, in a way that it allowes the race to be restarted without having to wait for one person.

(Timo it is not about the number of drivers.)

Until now I haven't seen any abuse of this rule but I mentioned it because it's crucial.
My suggestion to solve it: If an accident occurs which has a safety-car or, to speak more in general, a longer lasting yellow-phase as a consequence then it can be dealt like this: The race director announces that there is / will be a yellow phase with possibilities to pit during this phase. He openes the pits at a point when all drivers have the same chances to enter the pits. The drivers are given enough time to catch the field - even if they have to repair every single part of the car and even if the repairing lasts aeons.
BUT!: This goes only for drivers who entered the pits at the first possibility. If they enter it later then they do it in their own risk.

Quote from TFalke55 :

I'm basically agreeing Ori, but I remember the early oval races in reallife. Because of the "mass" of accidents spotters were introduced.

I can't believe how small horizons u guys have. Widen ur horizon for Satan's sake! Fv<k Indy, Le Mans and F1! They are just an inspiration or maximally an orientation! That's it! Not more! Why not aim to reach with the NDR Kyoto 500 a higher level than the Indy 500 ever had? Live up to your name and think in new dimensions!

Quote from TFalke55 :

This might be discussed. Thanks for your feedback.

Quote from hyntty :

... people would use the runoff area and argue they didn't go off the racing track as there are no markings.

Well to me this is as simple as it gets:
- Just like on road courses and traffic, there is a continuous, solid line they may not cross.
- If they cross it to avoid a dangerous situation or the creation of a such: everything's fine
- If they cross it for unfair purposes: You guys have a satisfying choice of punishments u can impose.

I can't think of any case where the judgement would be difficult. Other than that it certainly is not too much demanded to respect the damn rules, is it?

Quote from TFalke55 :

Actually you need to clearify yourself what restrictions you mean.

Quote from hyntty :

What the hell are you on about? R2's only or what?.

Since it is one of the most important topics and in some aspects THE MOST IMPORANT BY FAR, i will treat this in a special post.



Some more things i forgot in the first post:


2.6: Incidents:

I would suggest an option in the treatment of incidents: The involved drivers discuss the incident between each other. If they agree on a conclusion and the race director doesn't see the need to treat the incident anyway or interfere at all in any form then the case ends.
If they do not come to a conclusion then they can hand in a protest.
I'm suggesting this since many incidents were clearified this way and because I am confident that thus a better atmosphere and automaticly better circumstances are given.


2.7: The rulebooks:

2.71: The rulebooks need a directory / table of content at the beginning and legal statements / clarifications at the end.

2.7.2: The rulebooks have too many grammatic and spelling mistakes. I would gladly help here.


2.8: The way of driving on ovals:

I'm basicly replying to the discussion on page 4 of the 2009 500 race discussion thread (http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=58718&page=4)

Of course one cannot tell people how to drive or even force them to drive a certain way. But there should be something like a recommendation by NDR. The point is: You can either race for positions all time, which is more fun but also much more risky OR u can drive tactical and as effective as possible. This especially means faster cars pass inside and using draft to pass is done on the straight.

What can be obliged is SENSITIVE DRIVING. If I was an admin I would punish the hell out of people driving like barbarians.


2.9: Clockwise 111 ending under SC:

How can one possibly do that? May the flying rubber chicken punish u for that http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gWni4qUnNMM


3. PR and trappings:

3.1: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iV5KoGOdcns :
This video is simply lovely. The muic , the pictures and and speaker fit perfectly together. The soundtrack and the text create this good old times - 80s/90s - atmosphere. More of this please!
(Deko can u tell me names of track and author please?)


3.2: Posters:
Except for the 2009 GP of Japan, the Mediathek stuff is not much of a deal. To be honest the rest is just bad. LFSn00b's 500 poster for an instant is incomparably better - of course u must imagine it without the crashing:

(http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1179317#post1179317)
(http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1179343#post1179343)


3.3: If u want to have a big audience u must use every chance and possibility advertise.


personal:

- I would like to thank NDR for organising all these leagues and events.
- I have the personal need to thank Thilo for great skin templates. If it wasn't for him I'd probably never have made an at least a bit satisfying, own, self-made skin. Also thanks for the skin offers.
- I would appreciate it if u guys involved me in the trappings.
- It is nice to have fun outside the track. Just two things I laughed hard on:
- http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?p=1197755#post1197755
- http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=57051 (a little hint in case u don't notice it: mind huntty's posts)


two more to come:
- restrictions post
- participants post



racingly yours

Ori

Quote from Ori :

2.7.2: The rulebooks have too many grammatic and spelling mistakes. I would gladly help here.

They're not mistakes. It's called American English.

Quote :

- http://www.lfsforum.net/showthread.php?t=57051 (a little hint in case u don't notice it: mind huntty's posts)

Jesus Christ what happened here?

Quote from pik_d :

Jesus Christ what happened here?

to be serious, i have still the same thought everytime I take a look at this thread here...

Quote from pik_d :

Jesus Christ what happened here?

Almost the perfect statement. But I will quote it because I will keep my post PG rated.

Quote from Ori :

(Timo it is not about the number of drivers.)

Until now I haven't seen any abuse of this rule but I mentioned it because it's crucial.
My suggestion to solve it: If an accident occurs which has a safety-car or, to speak more in general, a longer lasting yellow-phase as a consequence then it can be dealt like this: The race director announces that there is / will be a yellow phase with possibilities to pit during this phase. He openes the pits at a point when all drivers have the same chances to enter the pits. The drivers are given enough time to catch the field - even if they have to repair every single part of the car and even if the repairing lasts aeons.
BUT!: This goes only for drivers who entered the pits at the first possibility. If they enter it later then they do it in their own risk.

This is important!
If we have before race rules where the rules says : on the race you have one mandatory pitstop with tires change on GREEN. You can not act on the race and says "yea ok , but now we are have yellow and SC lets pit and we will count that" , My team in first race on light winter series are loose many points for that , we are not pitted on sc period , we are pitted on the end off the pit period , and the others are given to one lap advantage.
But iff someone realy count the true is that just our team pitted in the proper maner on that race.

Quote from Ki-Men :

This is important!
If we have before race rules where the rules says : on the race you have one mandatory pitstop with tires change on GREEN. You can not act on the race and says "yea ok , but now we are have yellow and SC lets pit and we will count that" , My team in first race on light winter series are loose many points for that , we are not pitted on sc period , we are pitted on the end off the pit period , and the others are given to one lap advantage.
But iff someone realy count the true is that just our team pitted in the proper maner on that race.

The LLWS rules never stated that the pit must be taken under green flag. The rules stated at the time of the race (going by v1.05 of the rules) that there should be at least 2 green flag laps run on each tyre compound. This does NOT mean that the pitstop must take place under green. Nowhere in the rules does it or did it say that.

Also, what Ori mentioned about pitting has been included in the rulebooks since the issue became a problem. We instruct in the rules, via a reccomendation, but not a strict enforcement that that be done. The "Green without all cars in formation" is there and will only ever be acted upon when drivers have been given fair time to pit but still chose to wait for several laps. We will always leave the caution car out for sufficient time for everyone to pit and rejoin the queue within the first two laps pitlane is open (since pitlanes can support no more than 16 at a time).

d