Jack Roush calls NASCAR appeals process ''a kangaroo court''

D

DEF3

Guest
Jack Roush calls NASCAR appeals process ''a kangaroo court''

Posted on Sat, Nov. 09, 2002

Roush undecided on appeal, other options
By DAVID POOLE
The Charlotte Observer

AVONDALE, Ariz. - Jack Roush, who has until Wednesday to appeal the $5,000 fine and 25-point penalties levied against Mark Martin's team after last week's race at Rockingham, has not yet decided what he's going to do.

Roush says he has little faith in the fairness of NASCAR's appeals process, calling it "a kangaroo court," but that lawyers advising the team have suggested that going through with an appeal may be helpful if Roush Racing takes legal action against the company that manufactured the spring that led to the penalty.

Martin lost 25 driver points, Roush was docked 25 car owner points and crew chief Ben Leslie was fined $5,000 because the left-front spring on the No. 6 Ford that Martin drove to second did not have the minimum 4½ coils required under NASCAR rules.

Team officials said this week the spring provided no competitive advantage and that it came directly from the box after being purchased from a NASCAR-approved parts manufacturer.

"They gave us a part that was presented to us with the implied warranty that it was acceptable to NASCAR's rules," Roush told he Associated Press. "For us to have the opportunity to get our relief from them, we may have to go through the appeal process so that we've done what we could to get our relief before we go after the spring manufacturer."

The penalty means Martin is 112 points behind championship leader Tony Stewart going into the final two races.
 
IMO, it's a closed issue. NASCAR is not going to change its mind. It's a shame it happened, but that's the breaks. At least NASCAR is showing some consistency in thisd matter.
 
My opinion.

Jack is posturing in the court of public opinion. No problem with that, it is a part of his job.

The fact that he uses the term "implied warranty" indicates to me that Jack knows full well what his crew chief has freely admitted. The responsibility for the use of any part lies with the team.
 
Weel, HS...If, in fact, the spring manufacturer is selling these parts with any kind of implied or explicit warranty as to merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose then Jack may have a case.

If I sell you a computer telling you that you will be able to use it to check email but make it impossible to check email with it, you have a right to complain...as I implied merchantability and purpose.

If, however, I simply said, "Here's your computer, it's up to you to get it to work" you can't turn around and complain.

It all lies on the relationship between Rousch and the spring manufacturer.

I would bet that Rousch won't be buying from them in the future.
 
Originally posted by paul


If I sell you a computer telling you that you will be able to use it to check email but make it impossible to check email with it, you have a right to complain...as I implied merchantability and purpose.

Using that comparison, NASCAR would be the ISP. And you complain to the ISP because your computer (with it's implied warrenty) won't let you check email? The problem is with the person who sold you the computer......not your ISP. Your ISP is not responsible to make it right.......it's between you and the person you bought that computer from. NASCAR can listen to Roush and maybe ammend it's decision, but it's under no obligation to do so! Rules are rules, it's your responsibility to stay within them.:)
 
They're talking about legal action against the spring manufacturer, not NASCAR.
 
Correct, paul.

But someone needs to tell Mike Mulhern that. Read his latest article to see what I mean.

What we do not know is what kind of "warranty" , if any, is given by the manufacturer.

That is strictly legal stuff though. The final responsibility from a racing standpoint is the teams.

Lord knows if such a suit ever went to a jury what they find given some of the findings we see nowadays.
 
but all the warranty might get Roush is a replacement spring that meets NASCAR's specs at best....

if the spring was "defective", which it really wasn't (it did its job)- that would be a different story.....
 
Maybe Roush's guys should check the equipment better and learn from this. NASCAR is not going to change there call. Because if they do, then we will be seeing this very thing happen again and again because NASCAR gave in.
 
It's Rousch's problem they didn't check to be sure the part was legal. Sorry Jack you lose.
 
almost no warranties of any kind are ever given by any racing manufacturer.


Although we are ignorant of what exact warranty may or may not have been given, we don't want to say that for fear that ignorance of the meaning of the word ignorant may cause us grief.
 
The $2.3million difference between 1st and 2nd in points should be an easy case in court against the manufacturer.
 
Back
Top Bottom