NASCAR competitors perplexed by Hendrick ruling
By Bob Pockrass | SceneDaily
FONTANA, Calif. – Analyzing the fallout from the shocking decision by NASCAR’s Chief Appellate Officer to rescind severe penalties against Hendrick Motorsports this week might be harder than getting a car through NASCAR inspection.
Drivers and teams are perplexed by CAO John Middlebrook’s decision Tuesday to rescind the six-week suspensions for Hendrick crew chief Chad Knaus and car chief Ron Malec and the 25-point penalty for driver Jimmie Johnson, while upholding Knaus’ $100,000 fine.
Just how bizarre was Middlebrook’s decision?
Johnson, who should have felt vindicated by the ruling, barely cracked a smile in assessing the outcome of Tuesday’s appeal hearing. Johnson was not happy that Knaus’ $100,000 fine stood.
And NASCAR President Mike Helton demonstrated complete confidence in NASCAR’s inspection process, despite most of the penalties being overturned, by saying that NASCAR would again confiscate the C-posts on Johnson’s car if they did not look right. He also said that the fine being upheld proved there was a violation.
NASCAR rarely has penalties overturned by its self-appointed arbitrators, and the decision Tuesday was a blow to the sanctioning body.
“I’ll keep my personal reaction to myself,” Helton said. “But I got through that in 30 seconds to go on to the fact that we did what we felt was correct. Our inspectors did their job. We collectively made a decision on how to react to it.”
Hendrick Motorsports appealed the penalties based on the fact that NASCAR did not place templates on Johnson’s car during the Feb. 17 inspection at Daytona and because it did not allow the team to fix the C-posts, as other teams were allowed to do. It lost its first appeal to a three-member panel but then convinced Middlebrook in the final appeal that the penalties, for the most part, should be overturned.
“I think this came down to NASCAR maybe not doing everything down to the letter of the law at Daytona and the penalties being assessed before the team had a chance to defend itself or work on any problems,” said Fox analyst Darrell Waltrip, a former Cup champion and car owner.
Middlebrook did not provide an explanation for his ruling.
“If they were right, they shouldn’t have got fined at all,” Joe Gibbs Racing driver Denny Hamlin said. “It’s either all right or all wrong. I don’t know how you can be partially right and partially wrong on some things. … It should be a black-and-white issue.”
The impact of the decision can be seen in two different ways. One is that teams have an appeals process they can have confidence in (although Middlebrook’s former GM ties have come into question). Or it can be viewed as NASCAR having lost control of its inspection process and any stiff penalties may get overturned on appeal.
“I don’t feel any different about NASCAR than I did before,” said Hendrick driver Dale Earnhardt Jr., who also owns a team in the Nationwide Series. “They themselves provide the appeal process, and I think it is there for a reason and does a good job. … You know when you are right or wrong and you fight your battles on that intuition.”
But typically those fights don’t end up with the competitors winning.
“It’s a platform for everybody to state your case, and sometimes you win and sometimes you lose, just like in the court of law,” said Richard Childress Racing driver Kevin Harvick, a former truck and Nationwide team owner. “It’s really no different than that. It’s no different than watching a case like O.J. (Simpson), and watching O.J. go free. Watching that case, there’s no way you thought that was going to happen.”
The fact that there are different views on whether the C-posts on Johnson’s car were illegal further clouds the issue.
“This is one of those positions where we agree to disagree, and through the appeal process we’ve proved that those C-posts were legal,” Johnson said. “… If we didn’t prove that those C-posts were legal, we wouldn’t have won the appeal.”
Obviously, not all his competitors feel that way. Many viewed the C-posts as an illegal piece, which NASCAR said violated the rules of unapproved aerodynamic adjustments to the contour of the car.
“It’s not like they were trying to hide something,” Roush Fenway Racing driver Greg Biffle said about the C-posts, which run from the roof to the rear quarter panel. “The part that they brought that NASCAR didn’t like was right in front of you.
“It’s right there, so the appellate officer obviously felt like it indeed wasn’t legal because they upheld the fine, but maybe this is a little severe for what they did on the car or what they tried to get through inspection.”
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by Ford Dude
