Kinda Late?

How in the world do you fine a team after the awards have been given out? The head boys at NASCAR have to be on crack! :blink:
 
The offense occurred before the end of the season, during a scheduled NASCAR Event.
Hendrick was fined owner's points, not driver points. Would have no effect on the driving championship or anything to do with the awards banquet.

Believe this car was out of specs in the same area as the car which NASCAR confiscated from Gibbs earlier in the season.

Sorta might make a fella wonder what some folks might be thinking of, doesn't it?

But of course it was all a minor mistake in measuring at the shop, right?
 
Was this the only race for the #60?

Did they finish with negative points?
 
Looks like it wasn't the only race for the #60. The #60 had 245 points and now has 220 points which drops the #60 from 48th in owners points to tied for 53rd.
 
I didn't remember the 60 running any races. But I have slep since then. And it took long enought to come out with the fine. :dual9mm:
 
Originally posted by Gollum@Dec 17 2003, 09:51 PM
I didn't remember the 60 running any races.
Click to expand...
David Green ran the Firecracker 400 and the fall Talladega race in the #60.
Brain Vickers ran the fall Charlotte race in the #60.
 
Is my memory failing ??? I don't recall Gibbs Racing or Tony Stewart getting any points taken away when this same miscalculation of the tape measure was found to be so egregious NASCAR confiscated the car for further study.

Or dos this mean the original offender gets a free pass on points loss and/or fines for some undisclosed reason ??? :unsure:
 
Wasn't there a fine and did not NASCAR keep the body off the Gibbs' car?

Wasn't it rather dumb on the part of another team to try and pull off the same stunt so soon after the indescrection had been discovered?

Isn't it rather approriate that the first team caught was fined and forfeited the car and that another team foolish enough to try the same thing is fined and loses some owner's points?

Want to bet whether anyone will try the same thing in the immediate future?
(Actually, someone probably will. They'll figure that NASCAR has caught a couple so they won't be looking quite so closely again for a little while.)
 
You know it's always the 2nd offender that gets the boom lowered on them.

Can't imagine what the guys in the shop were thinking --- or maybe, they weren't. LOL
 
Was there a fine ??? Were points taken away ??? I truly do not recall. I do know NASCAR confiscated the offending car and later returned parts of it, keeping other parts due to the unique configuration of same.


How much was the fine and when was it levied ???

As for the Hendrick team, if they violated the rules they deserve whatever punishment is necessary but only if the same penalty was assessed was placed on other teams for the same offense.
 
It really is all in Material Anyway >> I don't think that car # had acquired many points if any at all With Hendrick!
 
Originally posted by rajflyboy@Dec 18 2003, 05:46 PM
It really is all in Material Anyway >> I don't think that car # had acquired many points if any at all With Hendrick!
Click to expand...
It is pertinent. If JGR and Tony Stewart were not fined or penalized points for the same offense, why was Hendrick ???

If NASCAR is going to establish any creditability, they must be consistent.

In the event no points or no fine was assessed againt JGR and/or Stewart, then why was Hendrick fined for what, on the surface, appears to be the same body configuration ergo the same violation.

As far as thinking the car had few if any owner points, that is not the issue. There should be no delineation between a top contender or a last place car in owner points when it comes to assessing penalties.

The question still has not been answered and since I don't have total recall on the event, was JGR fined and points taken ???
 
Here ya go Whiz..........an answer to your question.

TALLADEGA, Ala. - NASCAR announced Saturday that it would not further penalize Joe Gibbs Racing after impounding Tony Stewart's car last weekend. A series official would not say if Stewart's car would be returned, though.
The trunk area of Stewart's car was not aligned properly with the roof, officials found in an inspection before the first practice last week at Texas. Series officials said that such an alteration could make the car more competitive.

John Darby, Winston Cup series director, said Saturday that no further penalties would be issued because the violation was an infraction to the car body. Series officials allow teams to fix the car body before going through inspection again. That's why Stewart's team wasn't penalized money or points.

"We did not have any discussions assigning a point penalty to it," Darby said of Stewart's team. "Although the infraction was severe it's still a body infraction. Already the team has received a penalty to a point by the loss of the use of the car."

NASCAR kept the car because the needed repairs could not be made at the track. Also, keeping the car allows series officials to further study the changes made.

Darby said NASCAR might take the car to the wind tunnel. He said that if there were outside costs to study the car, Joe Gibbs Racing might have to pay those bills.

Some questioned why NASCAR didn't penalize Stewart's team after deducting points from Jimmie Johnson and Rusty Wallace last season for infractions found before they took to the track. Darby said those were different than the Stewart infraction.

"In both of those infractions, we're pretty sensitive about things at superspeedways because there's a lot of specialized rules that we use at Daytona and Talladega," Darby said. "Both of the pieces that were involved were pieces of equipment that were created to deceive the measuring devices that surrounds those specialized rules or to circumvent those specialized rules. They served no other purpose
 
I do not see that big of a deal about taking points from hendrick even though they didn't take points from Gibbs. All the other teams saw what happened with the gibbs car and were told that it was not acceptable. So the next infraction (even though not by the same team), Nascar upped the ante to help get there point accross that it is not acceptable.

Same point in football. I believe Joe horn's fine for the cell phone call was larger than than Terrell owen's fine for the Sharpie.
 
Originally posted by Dinoforthe3@Dec 18 2003, 09:20 PM
I do not see that big of a deal about taking points from hendrick even though they didn't take points from Gibbs. All the other teams saw what happened with the gibbs car and were told that it was not acceptable. So the next infraction (even though not by the same team), Nascar upped the ante to help get there point accross that it is not acceptable.

Same point in football. I believe Joe horn's fine for the cell phone call was larger than than Terrell owen's fine for the Sharpie.
Click to expand...
With your logic, NASCAR should have overlooked the penalty not taken points from Roush Racing and Mark Martin in 1990. If they did it the way you suggest, the first time is a free pass and the second time you get fined. I could deal with that if it were consistent because under that scenario, the record books would read one seven time champion, one six time champion and one four time champion.

NASCAR gives the impression they twiddle with the points according to the owner rather than implementing a solid policy.

As stated in a previous thread, ya can't have it both ways. Ya can't bitch NASCAR is right with one call and wrong with the same call at a different time.

It makes no never mind who is the offender, just show me the decisions and penalties are the same for every body and consistent in thier application.
 
Originally posted by Whizzer@Dec 19 2003, 07:43 AM
With your logic, NASCAR should have overlooked the penalty not taken points from Roush Racing and Mark Martin in 1990.  If they did it the way you suggest, the first time is a free pass and the second time you get fined. I could deal with that if it were consistent because under that scenario, the record books would read one seven time champion, one six time champion  and one four time champion.
Click to expand...
According to Jack Roush (but this is in my words, not his), if the good 'ol boy network wasn't in place...there would have never been a penalty on Mark back in 1990. The Nascar inspector let Mark's car pass inspection because the spacer didn't serve any advantage what-so-ever. But good 'ol boy Richard Childress called his good 'ol buddy Big Bill that was layed up in the hospital at the time and complained. Big Bill didn't want no yankee having an unfair advantage & penalized the #6 team. :rolleyes:
 
Whatever !!! Jack in the box always gets mistreated. :eek:

and you know what 17 i would like matt if it wasn't for jack, i just can not pull for anyone that drives for him.
 
Originally posted by de7xwcc@Dec 19 2003, 01:09 PM
Whatever !!! Jack in the box always gets mistreated. :eek:

and you know what 17 i would like matt if it wasn't for jack, i just can not pull for anyone that drives for him.
Click to expand...
For me, if I dis-liked a driver just because I didn't like the owner, that would be shallow thinking on my part. I personally can’t stand Rick Hendrick, but I like all his drivers.
 
Originally posted by de7xwcc@Dec 19 2003, 07:09 PM
Whatever !!! Jack in the box always gets mistreated. :eek:

and you know what 17 i would like matt if it wasn't for jack, i just can not pull for anyone that drives for him.
Click to expand...
Does anyone really think Jack Roush is a bigger whiner than Childress ???

When Jack Roush first came on the scene, there was a chip on his shoulder the size of Montana. There was also a tremendous difference in the personal styles between Roush and Childress, who was more laid back and well established within the framework of the NASCAR "family" with his foot-shufflin', back country, play the low key approach. Take nothing away from Childress as he is an intelligent manipulator of people. Put him on a par with Lou Holtz or Vince Lombardi.

When Jack Rousch felt things were not fair, he kicked the doors open and did not ask, but demanded things be fair. For this he is labeled as being "mistreated"?
Chidress, and others, followed the NASCAR protocol by waiting until eveyone left the track and slipping over to the powers in charge to quietly made thier complaints or requests for "change" known.

The difference between Childress and Roush is the manner they handle thier grievances. And the region they came from. Jack Roush might have lost more than one championship because of his being so outspoken.

Do not fail to overlook the fact Jack Roush made the playing field a lot more level by being the way he is. And there are a lot of guys in the game who find it hard to play when the field is level instead of tipped in thier direction.

You don't need to be a Jack Roush fan to see what the man has done to place things on an even keel, and this in turn has made NASCAR racing a better sport and given it more creditability.

Like him or not, without Jack Rouch the changes made in NASCAR since his entry have been an improvement. Jack Roush does not ask for, but demands fairness, and demands it for everybody.

You don't need to like the guy for his personality but he deserves respct for the way he has helped change the sport, and this is where I stand as far as Roush is concerned.

You might call it "mistreated" and I would call it getting things even, for everybody.

Expected howls of protest and varying opinions are welcome.

MERRY CHRISTMAS :salute:
 
you have your opinion i have mine, all the owners out there wine to some extent, but when your driver is in victory lane at daytona and instead of being happy your crying the your car is not as good the chevys, need i say more, and lets not forget the tire thing.

hope you all have a great holiday !!!!!
 
Originally posted by de7xwcc@Dec 23 2003, 11:38 AM
you have your opinion i have mine, all the owners out there wine to some extent, but when your driver is in victory lane at daytona and instead of being happy your crying the your car is not as good the chevys, need i say more, and lets not forget the tire thing.

hope you all have a great holiday !!!!!
Click to expand...
Funny thing about everyone's opinion is that I don't think that Alan Kulwicki would have won a championship, doing it his own way by turning down a good ride with Junior Johnson, without someone being as outspoken about the the treatment of Ford teams as Jack Roush was.
 
And don't think that Jack is a FORD man from hat to shoe. Granted his budgets and loyalties are Ford, but he does a lot of research in Livonia for GM & D-C.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom