Now Bowie, naughty words

. As a former scrutineer, my favourite rule was the one that says the owner/entrant is fully responsible that the vehicle meets the rules, not the scrutineers. So a post race scrutiny finding a problem previously not picked up, is valid.
But what is odd here (to me) is that the speed seems to be the problem, and you say there is a "soft" limit of 2min09. Interesting if there were several quick cars, how would they race? Call it a reliability run? Are they virtually Sports Sedans running in the "combined event?
Anyway, having now watched the full 12 hour, it was a good race, and if someone doesn't have time to watch it all, start watching with 90 mins to run. The various possible final pit stop strategies, with different fuel loads to go in, and some with new tyres, trying to get track position for the final run, makes for an exciting last 90 mins. Plus a curved ball thrown in for the leading car. And safety cars did not play a part in it at all, the race ended with a 4.5 hour green flag run.
Do you know, in WA, the main newspaper "The West Australian" has not mentioned the race except a paragraph the day before with Valentino Rossi as the subject. A well attended (53000 3day attendance) International event at Australia's most iconic track, hasn't rated a mention. And they are a part of Seven West Media, with Warburton at the helm - I just don't understand. Maybe they have a misguided form of censorship policy, because organised motorsport must cause more accidents on the roads? Or just ignorant editing by football centric editors.