P
pettyfan4life
Guest
Mark does not get the points back more to come
Yep, appeal denied by unanamos decision. SIGH
P
pettyfan4life
Guest
* Roush may file appeal on Wednesday UPDATE 5 APPEAL DENIED: If Roush Racing does in fact opt to file an appeal to NASCAR's 25-point penalty, it won't come until Wednesday's deadline, team president Geoff Smith told NASCAR.com on Monday. The penalty was issued after NASCAR found what it deemed an illegal left front spring on Mark Martin's Ford following the Pop Secret 400 at North Carolina Speedway two weeks ago. The spring in question included 4 3/8 coils, 1/8 of a coil shorter than NASCAR's required 4 1/2 coils. "No, we're not quite ready," Smith said. "We took the opportunity these past few days for everyone to have a cool down period, where we could all soberly look at the facts and circumstances, hear what our competitors had to say and the media had to say about our situation. I left Phoenix with what I considered good information, but there were no competitors taking a position that was different than ours. There was no one saying anything that said it made any performance difference whatsoever, and also got to see if those 25 points are likely or are not likely to make any difference in the championship."(NASCAR.com)(11-12-2002)
UPDATE: Roush Racing president Geoff Smith said Tuesday that the team will announce Wednesday morning whether or not it will appeal a 25-point penalty from NASCAR against Mark Martin. The team scheduled an 11:00am/et. teleconference with Smith and Martin to announce and discuss their decision with the media. Today is the deadline for filing an appeal to the penalty(ThatsRacin.com)
UPDATE 2: Roush Racing announced today that Jack Roush and Mark Martin have exercised their right to appeal the 25 point penalty assessed for using an "unapproved" spring at the November 3, 2002 NASCAR Winston Cup event in Rockingham. Said Geoff Smith, president of Roush Racing, "According to NASCAR rules (sec.12-4) penalties for violation of NASCAR rules '?are determined by the gravity of the violation and its effects on fairness of competition?' Since the spring in question had an inconsequential deviation from the rule-specified length, since its use had absolutely no effect on the fairness of competition, and since the penalty imposed was harsher that the intent of its own published standards for the imposition of penalties, we have elected to take advantage of the review process NASCAR has provided to us. We applaud NASCAR both for laying out rules that confirm its interest in insuring that its managers impose penalties only after due regard is given to the fairness the circumstances require, and applaud them even further for providing us with an appeal mechanism that is unprecedented in professional sports. The existence of this rule and the appeal rights granted to us by NASCAR are powerful statements that NASCAR has established and is committed to upholding and maintaining a policy of fairness in connection with the imposition of penalties for the violation of its rules. Fairness, however, can only exist when there is equal punishment for equally situated offenders. That is a concept that is a cornerstone of the entire American experience. It is our firm conviction that Roush Racing was not "equally situated" with the two other teams who suffered penalty points reductions in 2002. NASCAR's examination into the 'gravity of the violation and its effects on the fairness of competition?' of each of the three situations requires that it evaluate the presence or absence of two very significant facts: (1) Did the examination of the part reveal the offender's intention to violate a rule? (2) Was the part's function altered in any way to attempt to improve performance? Both of those factors were conspicuously absent in our case, and both were present in the other two cases. Fairness requires a different penalty result for us. We hope that these 25 points have no impact in this year's championship race, and do not enjoy having this issue present itself at this late date, yet we cannot passively submit to a punishment that is so excessive for the offense. We also recognize that the list of successful appellants can fit on the back of a postage stamp, but we remain hopeful that after a sober review of each of the spring related penalty violations, the Commission will confirm NASCAR's written commitment to fairness by reinstating our points."
Roush Racing also announced that it will not seek legal recourse against the manufacturer or seller of the spring in question, regardless of the outcome of the appeal.
"There was little question that we have legitimate, meritorious claims, but, ultimately we concluded that Roush Racing can better serve the sport by terminating any contemplation of litigation. In this business, the words "racing" and "litigation" should never appear in the same paragraph if at all possible," concluded Smith.(Roush Racing)
UPDATE 3: Fox Sports Net's Totally NASCAR reports that NASCAR will hear the appeal Saturday, Nov 16th in the morning and expect to announce a decision later that afternoon. The appeal will be heard by a three-member panel from the National Stock Car Racing Commission. If the appeal is denied, Roush could then take its appeal to NASCAR national commissioner Charles Strang.(11-13-2002)
UPDATE 4: A three-man board representing the National Stock Car Racing Commission has been selected to hear Roush Racing's appeal of penalties of Winston Cup driver and owner points and money following a spring violation two weeks ago at North Carolina Speedway. NSCRC chairman George Silbermann and commission members Johnny Capels and John Bishop are scheduled to hear Roush Racing's appeal somewhere on the grounds of Homestead-Miami Speedway Saturday morning at 8:00am/et.(NASCAR.com)(11-15-2002)
UPDATE 5: per NBC's BGN race coverage, the National Stock Car Racing Commission has denied Roush Racing appeal, so the penalty stands and Martin remains 89 points behind Stewart. Roush Racing could still appeal to NASCAR national commissioner Charles Strang. Imagine that decision would depend on what happens in the race on Sunday.(also see a story at ThatsRacin.com and at NASCAR.com)(11-16-2002)
UPDATE: Roush Racing president Geoff Smith said Tuesday that the team will announce Wednesday morning whether or not it will appeal a 25-point penalty from NASCAR against Mark Martin. The team scheduled an 11:00am/et. teleconference with Smith and Martin to announce and discuss their decision with the media. Today is the deadline for filing an appeal to the penalty(ThatsRacin.com)
UPDATE 2: Roush Racing announced today that Jack Roush and Mark Martin have exercised their right to appeal the 25 point penalty assessed for using an "unapproved" spring at the November 3, 2002 NASCAR Winston Cup event in Rockingham. Said Geoff Smith, president of Roush Racing, "According to NASCAR rules (sec.12-4) penalties for violation of NASCAR rules '?are determined by the gravity of the violation and its effects on fairness of competition?' Since the spring in question had an inconsequential deviation from the rule-specified length, since its use had absolutely no effect on the fairness of competition, and since the penalty imposed was harsher that the intent of its own published standards for the imposition of penalties, we have elected to take advantage of the review process NASCAR has provided to us. We applaud NASCAR both for laying out rules that confirm its interest in insuring that its managers impose penalties only after due regard is given to the fairness the circumstances require, and applaud them even further for providing us with an appeal mechanism that is unprecedented in professional sports. The existence of this rule and the appeal rights granted to us by NASCAR are powerful statements that NASCAR has established and is committed to upholding and maintaining a policy of fairness in connection with the imposition of penalties for the violation of its rules. Fairness, however, can only exist when there is equal punishment for equally situated offenders. That is a concept that is a cornerstone of the entire American experience. It is our firm conviction that Roush Racing was not "equally situated" with the two other teams who suffered penalty points reductions in 2002. NASCAR's examination into the 'gravity of the violation and its effects on the fairness of competition?' of each of the three situations requires that it evaluate the presence or absence of two very significant facts: (1) Did the examination of the part reveal the offender's intention to violate a rule? (2) Was the part's function altered in any way to attempt to improve performance? Both of those factors were conspicuously absent in our case, and both were present in the other two cases. Fairness requires a different penalty result for us. We hope that these 25 points have no impact in this year's championship race, and do not enjoy having this issue present itself at this late date, yet we cannot passively submit to a punishment that is so excessive for the offense. We also recognize that the list of successful appellants can fit on the back of a postage stamp, but we remain hopeful that after a sober review of each of the spring related penalty violations, the Commission will confirm NASCAR's written commitment to fairness by reinstating our points."
Roush Racing also announced that it will not seek legal recourse against the manufacturer or seller of the spring in question, regardless of the outcome of the appeal.
"There was little question that we have legitimate, meritorious claims, but, ultimately we concluded that Roush Racing can better serve the sport by terminating any contemplation of litigation. In this business, the words "racing" and "litigation" should never appear in the same paragraph if at all possible," concluded Smith.(Roush Racing)
UPDATE 3: Fox Sports Net's Totally NASCAR reports that NASCAR will hear the appeal Saturday, Nov 16th in the morning and expect to announce a decision later that afternoon. The appeal will be heard by a three-member panel from the National Stock Car Racing Commission. If the appeal is denied, Roush could then take its appeal to NASCAR national commissioner Charles Strang.(11-13-2002)
UPDATE 4: A three-man board representing the National Stock Car Racing Commission has been selected to hear Roush Racing's appeal of penalties of Winston Cup driver and owner points and money following a spring violation two weeks ago at North Carolina Speedway. NSCRC chairman George Silbermann and commission members Johnny Capels and John Bishop are scheduled to hear Roush Racing's appeal somewhere on the grounds of Homestead-Miami Speedway Saturday morning at 8:00am/et.(NASCAR.com)(11-15-2002)
UPDATE 5: per NBC's BGN race coverage, the National Stock Car Racing Commission has denied Roush Racing appeal, so the penalty stands and Martin remains 89 points behind Stewart. Roush Racing could still appeal to NASCAR national commissioner Charles Strang. Imagine that decision would depend on what happens in the race on Sunday.(also see a story at ThatsRacin.com and at NASCAR.com)(11-16-2002)
D
DE Wrangler 2
Guest
A little off subject but related.
I've read 3 or 4 times on NASCAR.com where they are talking about the points difference between Tony and Mark. They keep saying 89 points......wasn't that the point deficent after last week's Phoenix race before the 25 point penalty? I thought Mark was 112 points back.......what did I miss?
I've read 3 or 4 times on NASCAR.com where they are talking about the points difference between Tony and Mark. They keep saying 89 points......wasn't that the point deficent after last week's Phoenix race before the 25 point penalty? I thought Mark was 112 points back.......what did I miss?
P
pettyfan4life
Guest
nope hes 89 befor the phoenix race he was 112 if he kept his 25 points he would only be 64 back