Indy 500: Scott Dixon and Scott McLaughlin have a day to forget at Indianapolis 500
The New Zealand contingent have had a day to forget at the 109th running of the Indianapolis 500.
Scott McLaughlin didn't even start the race after crashing on the practice lap while mechanical issues ruined Scott Dixon's day early on.
I truly don't know what happened. Just touched the throttle and around we went. I'm absolutely gutted for my crew, @Team_Penske, @Pennzoil and all of our fans. We'll be back stronger next year. I'm sorry. See ya in Detroit. ✌️ #INDY500 #INDYCAR
— Scott McLaughlin (@smclaughlin93) May 25, 2025
Starting fourth on the grid, Dixon was aiming for his second victory at the Brickyard but a brake issue saw him head to the pits at lap 31 and lose ground on the field. He re-joined three laps back and was chasing for the rest of the race, finishing 23rd.
Marcus Armstrong was the best of the Kiwis in 21st.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
1News
6 hours ago
- 1News
Warriors coach remains wary of NRL's 'giant killers'
Andrew Webster has described St George Illawarra as the "giant killers" of the NRL as the Warriors fight to get their season back on track against the mercurial Dragons. A three-game losing streak has forced the Warriors out of the top four ahead of Friday's game in Auckland, where another defeat could leave them as low as seventh to finish the weekend. Webster is wary of an 11th-placed Dragons side that is fighting for its own season, with the Saints likely needing to win their remaining four games to have any chance of making good on their slim top-eight hopes. The Dragons are coming off back-to-back wins over finals-bound Cronulla and Canberra, and upset fellow top sides Melbourne and Brisbane earlier in the season. Nine of their 12 losses this year have been by a single-figure margin, including a one-point defeat to the Warriors during the Kiwi side's hot start to the season. ADVERTISEMENT "(The Dragons) have been in almost every contest. They're like the giant killers of the competition," said Warriors coach Webster. "They're probably the best team that aren't in the eight at knocking off top-four teams. They've beaten the Storm, they've beaten the Raiders, Sharks. They've been very good at that this year." The morning's headlines in 90 seconds, including police fatally shoot a woman in Christchurch, sausages recalled over glass fears, and why McDonalds Japan isn't loving its customers right now (Source: 1News) The Warriors' season is threatening to unravel at the worst possible time, with the injury-hit Kiwis still not guaranteed to play finals despite spending 16 consecutive rounds in the top four before last week. The clash with the Dragons comes before similarly intriguing fixtures against Gold Coast and Parramatta, who will both miss finals but have shown promise in recent weeks. Last week's loss to premiership hopefuls Canterbury marked the first time this season that the Warriors failed to register a line break or record 1000 metres in a game. But one more win is likely to punch the Warriors' top-eight ticket and Webster is remaining positive. ADVERTISEMENT "We'd obviously like to be doing some things better, but we've been really consistent with it," he said. "There's always accountability at our place. 'I thought our commitment and our contact in going after the opposition (last week) was really good." Dragons forward Jack de Belin will become the fourth man to play 250 games for the joint venture on Friday night, joining Ben Hornby, Ben Creagh and Jason Nightingale in the elite club.
Otago Daily Times
2 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
Will axing petrol tax be a game-changer?
Scrapping petrol tax may, or many not, be transformative, Angela Curl and Caroline Shaw write. The way we get around is unfair, and unhealthy. Some people travel a lot, creating disproportionate harms on people and the planet, such as pollution, injury risk and physical inactivity. Others cannot afford to travel enough, missing out on things that are important, such as catching up with loved ones or healthcare appointments, or end up having to forego expenditure on other important things, such as food. Replacing fuel excise duty (or petrol tax) with electronic road user charges for all vehicles — as announced by Transport Minister Chris Bishop last week — offers an opportunity to transform the way we fund and pay for our transport system in a way that works for people and the planet by reflecting the true costs imposed when we use the roads. Bishop said "it isn't fair to have Kiwis who drive less and can't afford a fuel-efficient car paying more than people who can afford one and drive more often." On the whole, we agree. We know that those households with the lowest income drive far less (about 100km a week less) but also have to spend a much greater proportion of their income on getting around (16% of income compared with 9% for higher-income households). Those on lower incomes are also far less likely to be able to afford an electric vehicle with cheaper running costs, instead paying the relatively more expensive petrol tax. However, Bishop's proposal represents a narrow view of the harms, or wider costs, of driving to society. It is largely based on the assumption all vehicles should contribute "fairly" (based on weight and distance travelled) towards road maintenance, operations and improvements. But a pricing structure that also accounts for the costs to our health system of injuries, pollution and physical inactivity caused by the transport system, might also include differential charging for different types of vehicles. For example, we know that SUVs cause more severe injuries to those outside of the vehicle, and while EVs reduce tailpipe emissions, they still contribute to congestion and injury risk. The proposal does suggest that weight, as well as distance travelled, will be factored into pricing; however, it should also consider the damage that heavier and larger vehicles do to people and the environment. A change in the way we are charged for using the roads offers a real opportunity to design a progressive charge that alleviates costs pressures for those already struggling to pay for the driving they need to do, while reducing levels of driving overall. One way to achieve this would be through increasing the rate per km, above a certain amount of kilometres driven. Given the costs involved in running and operating the scheme, and that this needs to be revenue-generating for government, it seems unlikely there will be a reduction in the cost of travel in real terms for everyone. However, if the government is committed to fairness, it needs to ensure costs do not escalate for those who can least afford it and who have few alternatives. The proposed changes to road user charges are most likely to be successful and acceptable if they are accompanied by investment in public transport, walking and cycling and alongside strategic urban planning that supports local access to the things we all need such as shops, schools and sports grounds. The most straightforward way to ensure that charging for using the roads does not force people into situations where they have to forego other essentials is to ensure that it is easy and safe to get around in other ways, or that we do not need to travel as much. For both fairness and health and wellbeing we need to continue to improve travel options other than driving. Bishop presented this as a new way to fund our roads, but we should be taking a more holistic view — this is an opportunity to think about how we fund our transport system. Using revenue raised to reduce the need to drive can make charging for driving more acceptable. Bishop said: "This is a once-in-a-generation change. It's the right thing to do, it's the fair thing to do, and it will future-proof how we fund our roads for decades to come." This policy has the potential to be truly transformative and be part of creating a transport system (not just roads) that is fairer, and healthier for everyone. It can be done. The question is, will it? — Newsroom • Dr Angela Curl is a senior lecturer in the University of Otago department of population health, Christchurch; Caroline Shaw is a lecturer and researcher in the department of public health, University of Otago, Wellington.
Otago Daily Times
2 days ago
- Otago Daily Times
Are Zimbabwe just chance to pad stats?
The Black Caps posted the biggest test win in their history when they crushed Zimbabwe by an innings and 359 runs in Bulawayo last week. Reason to get excited or just a little embarrassing for the pure format of the game? Sports editor Hayden Meikle suggests this is further evidence the hapless Zimbabweans have no place in test cricket, while cricket writer Adrian Seconi argues there is no need to devalue an outstanding New Zealand performance. MEIKLE'S VIEW That blasted Jacob Duffy. If it was not for the Otago fast bowler, I would completely unleash and label what we have just seen in Zimbabwe as an outright farce. Duffy is such a nice story — a top bloke, who grafted away for years before deservedly making his test debut for the Black Caps, and claiming his first two wickets — that my fury is a little tempered, as I do not want to devalue the greatest achievement of his career. But let's get honest here. Zimbabwe should not be playing test cricket. They're a joke, and while it is perfectly fine to celebrate the New Zealand men marking their biggest test win, indeed the third-biggest win for ANY team in the ultimate format, it is also justifiable to question what it all means. The hapless Zimbos have played 128 tests. They have won 14 of those — a measly winning rate of 10.93% — and eight of those wins came when the Bangers were equally inept. They are basically a club team who, for some reason, are retaining test status. Can Zimbabwe get better without being allowed to stay in test cricket? Perhaps, perhaps not. But this isn't a support group. Test cricket is, and should be, the preserve of the very best. Only those nations who are equipped for the demands of five-day cricket should be allowed to play it. In Zimbabwe's case, they can barely survive five days over an entire series. A closer look reveals this is a Zimbabwe team clinging on to their international status but soon to face a reckoning. Their top six for the second test against New Zealand included 39-year-old Brendan Taylor, 38-year-old Sean Williams, and Craig Ervine, who turns 40 on Tuesday. The rest are unproven kids, and it is almost cruel to keep serving them up as test cricket cannon fodder. I know the Black Caps can "only play who is put in front of them", as they say. But the basic pointlessness of this test series was revealed when, with the Kiwis at 601 for three after day two, people were openly salivating about the Black Caps pushing on to become the first test team to score over 1000 runs in an innings, and were pondering if Rachin Ravindra or Henry Nicholls — Henry Nicholls! — could have a crack at Brian Lara's 400. That is not test cricket. That is playground challenge stuff. Another point is that, while the Black Caps have played plenty of good cricket in recent years, it is a stretch to say the XI for the second test was one that should be breaking all sorts of records. In fact, you could name a completely separate XI that would have won the test quite comfortably. Tom Latham, Kane Williamson, Glenn Phillips, Mark Chapman, Michael Bracewell, Nathan Smith, Kyle Jamieson, Lochie Ferguson, Will O'Rourke, Ajaz Patel, Ben Sears — you will never see that XI, but the fact it would likely beat a test nation by an innings speaks volumes. Zimbabwe, Ireland and Afghanistan have test status. And, to be blunt, they really should not. Test wins should be hard-earned, and they should be memorable. This one was utterly forgettable. Though not for our man Duffy, obviously. SECONI'S VIEW Hayden, Hayden, Hayden. Hopefully, that struck the right condescending tone. Just because you endured a joyless season with the Highlanders, and can't remember what winning feels like, that does not give you the right to dismiss the efforts of the mighty Black Caps or pile on the poor old Zimbabweans, who, in the words of every Highlanders coach ever, are doing their best. What your hot take is missing is some historical context and deep, thoughtful analysis, which you won't read here either. And before you say, 'hold on, you're playing the man, not the ball,' that is exactly what I'm doing. Zimbabwe were terrible. No. Zimbabwe are terrible. But listen up, my malcontent friend, now is not the time for snarky nitpicking or undermining opinions you fundamentally agree with. Now is the time to revel in the beauty of Rachin Ravindra padding his batting average the way Kane Williamson could have done if he hadn't opted to play in The Hundred instead. It is time to celebrate Otago seamer Jacob Duffy claiming his maiden test wickets, or complain that the Southland right-armer went wicketless in the first innings. Let us hold Zak Foulkes up to the light and prophesy the Second Coming. Loosen that jaw because Henry Nicholls is back, baby, whether your teeth are clenched or not. But every argument needs some structure and a coherent train of thought, so here is a list of the top four reasons Zimbabwe should retain their status as a test nation. 1. It gives former Otago coach Dion Ebrahim something to do. He is the Zimbabwe batting coach and, well, um ... yeah, it has not gone that well to be honest. They have lost nine, drawn one and won one of their last 11 tests. 2. One of the stats that got trundled out after the second test was that it was only the third time in history three players had scored 150 or more in an innings. Meikle will point to a stat like that as a reason to jettison Zimbabwe's test status. Would he also have booted Don Bradman's 1938 Australian team? They were pummelled by England by an innings and 579 runs at The Oval. Len Hutton (364), Maurice Leyland (187) and Joe Hardstaff (169) provided the backbone for England's colossal first innings total of 903/7. Bradman got injured while bowling and Jack Fingleton did not bat either. But Australia were routed for 201 and 123. Actually, maybe Meikle is right. They should have booted Australia. 3. So what if Zimbabwe have a winning percentage of a shade under 11%? A lack of success has not thwarted Meikle's beloved Highlanders nor put the Black Caps off. It took New Zealand 26 years and 45 tests to post their first win in the format. New Zealand's overall winning percentage is just 25.20 — only Bangladesh (14.93%) and Zimbabwe have a worse record. 4. Computer says no. "Zimbabwe should keep its test status, but the ICC should push for stronger development pathways and better governance to improve competitiveness." (Thanks, ChatGPT.) — sport@
