The 48's empty seat.

Bob Pockrass not pulling any punches!

Linky

Chad Knaus, Hendrick team got what it deserved

AVONDALE, Ariz. – Once NASCAR confiscated the C-posts of Jimmie Johnson’s Hendrick Motorsports car two weeks ago at Daytona, it had to come down hard on crew chief Chad Knaus.
A crew chief who has won five Cup championships will always get extra scrutiny.
A crew chief with a long history of violations will always get extra scrutiny as NASCAR tries to keep that competitor in line.
A crew chief at Hendrick Motorsports, considered the most powerful organization in the sport, can’t be treated with kid gloves.
So NASCAR did the right thing in suspending Knaus for six races for the illegal C-posts taken during opening-day inspection for the Daytona 500.
There have been plenty of arguments why Knaus shouldn’t have been suspended.
The first is that the car met the templates. It’s absurd to think that if the car just meets NASCAR’s templates, that it is legal. Under that theory, cars could have metal dimples, or even shards, sticking out on every area where the template doesn’t affix to the car. And Hendrick teams know this best because they were nailed in 2007 at Sonoma for flaring out their fenders.
One of the rules NASCAR cited for the violation says nothing about templates. It does say this: “Streamlining of the contours of the cars, beyond that approved by the Series Director, will not be permitted.”
Another argument is that Johnson’s car passed inspection for previous races. It is extremely hard to believe that a crew chief as good as Knaus just covers a car up after one race and does no work on it between races. That’s why cars go through inspections every week. And even if he did – just because someone drives 85 mph past cops for a month doesn’t give them an excuse when another cop whips out a ticket.
What about the fact that the car never made it on the track? That’s a bogus argument, too. NASCAR allows teams to make tweaks to the cars so they can meet the templates. In this situation, NASCAR took the C-posts and forced the team to replace them before it could practice. If the car actually had been used in competition, Knaus likely would have gotten ejected from the track immediately.
Some want to argue that Knaus is being treated too harshly and they point to Joe Gibbs Racing’s unapproved oil pans last year and how JGR didn’t lose points nor have anyone suspended. Oil pans can be and often are submitted for approval. Teams are pretty much told the parameters of the C-posts and not to alter them.
There also is the theory that NASCAR might have been looking for something after Knaus’ comment to Johnson last year, in which he told his driver to “crack” the back of the car if he won at Talladega in case it was too low to pass postrace inspection.
While it wouldn’t be good for NASCAR to target a team, that comment certainly didn’t help Knaus. It probably didn’t mean that NASCAR would confiscate a piece of his car at Daytona, but it probably meant that he was going to get little, if any, leeway.
If NASCAR didn’t come down hard on Knaus, it would have looked as if it played favorites with Johnson and the Hendrick teams. If it did come down too hard, then the appeals board will reverse the decision or lessen the penalty.
If NASCAR can show that Johnson’s car was illegal, then Knaus is going to be watching six races from home. Just like he should be.
Click to expand...
 
dpkimmel2001 said:
Man of the hour.....

Knaus%20said%20he%20didn%27t%20expect%20to%20be%20in%20this%20situation,%20before%20or%20after%20C-posts%20taken.%20Said%20issue%20of%20templates%20never%20put%20on%20car%20part%20of%20appeal.
529130938.jpg
Click to expand...

Pics not coming through for me.
 
I'm still on the fence as to this being cheating or playing the game. Someone on race hub said that c-post covers are supplied by the manufacturer and cannot be modified. If that's true, it's out right cheating.

If not, I still have some problems with this whole thing.

Joe Gibbs Racing’s unapproved oil pans last year and how JGR didn’t lose points nor have anyone suspended. Oil pans can be and often are submitted for approval.

Let's not forget that Gibb's never submitted those pans for approval. They showed up at the track with an unnapproved aero advantage and got caught.

Teams are pretty much told the parameters of the C-posts and not to alter them.

What does "pretty much" mean?
 
He's not denying the posts were illegal, he's appealing how the inspector determined them to be illegal.
That's kinda twisted thinking in my book.
 
FenderBumper said:
I think Chad has a very good argument here. Now that the cover have been removed without an accurate measurement, what proof does NASCAR have? They can't present any measurement to the appeals board. What are the going to do, base it all on some guys hands?
Click to expand...

I'm pretty sure it is the covering that they are talking about here. They do have that as they cut it off the car.

48 penalized for having component of car not previously approved by NASCAR installed or modified to enhance aerodynamic performance. It is written in penalty release NASCAR issued with Knaus penalty. Nothing in that rule says anything about templates.

Page 30 of your 2012 Sprint Cup Series Rulebook, all spelled out. (Not available to public, however) It is to the media. Maybe Andy can get a copy? :cool:

Here's rule in ?: "Steamlining of the contours of the car, beyond that approved by the Series Director, will not be permitted."

Don't shoot the messenger. Just trying to get out the info.


350w5qp.jpg
 
dpk, let me try to explain this again.

Here's rule in ?: "Steamlining of the contours of the car, beyond that approved by the Series Director, will not be permitted."
Didn't the template define what was permitted? "Must fit the template" and "Don't mess with the template" is all I've ever heard nascar say on this issue. If "The template" defines the contour, why wasn't it used?

Here's a contradiction for you.

48 penalized for having component of car not previously approved by NASCAR installed or modified to enhance aerodynamic performance.

Isn't that EXACTLY what Gibb's did when they tucked the cross members into the modified oil pans, which were never submitted for nascars approval?

It seems to me NASCAR is applying a double standard here. They more or less said that in Gibbs case, the car was submitted for approval with the pans on it, so they wont be penalized. Chad presented those panels 3 or 4 times, so why the penalty in this case?
 
You don't need to explain anything to me. I think I'm looking at the same picture as you. The rules that I pasted into the thread are what they are. Read some of what I posted earlier. The car never had them template placed on it. This is according to information that we are now hearing today. The thing is either legal or illegal. If it is, which NASCAR contends then the penalty will be upheld and even possibly increased. If it's not, then it could be overturned. Here's the stats again for those of you that missed them the last time I posted them.

APPEALS - results 1999 to current
134 total appeals
90 upheld
32 reduced
10 overturned
2 increased
(NASCAR)(thru last appeal 11-5-2010)
 
FenderBumper said:
It seems to me NASCAR is applying a double standard here. They more or less said that in Gibbs case, the car was submitted for approval with the pans on it, so they wont be penalized. Chad presented those panels 3 or 4 times, so why the penalty in this case?
Click to expand...
I'm surprised that you find it surprising that NASCAR is being inconsistant in their penalty process.:D
 
Chad Knaus says team owner RickHendrick has a deep bench, if his suspensions sticks. But Knaus says he's got good 'documentation' for appeal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom