Fair Is Fair - Or Is It?
On Sunday, September 23rd, Carl Edwards picked up his third victory of the season at Dover International Speedway, and it couldn’t have come at a better time … just two races into his bid for the 2007 NASCAR Nextel Cup Championship. Edwards later went on to fail post-race inspection as his car did not meet NASCAR’s minimum car heights according to the series rulebook. As a result, the driver of the No. 99 was penalized 25 driver points and Crew Chief Bob Osborne was fined $25,000 for the incident. The penalty assessed by NASCAR took him from third place in the standings – just 3 points back from leader Jeff Gordon – and has dropped him all the way down to sixth place. He is, however, still listed as the winner of the Dodge Dealers 400.
Roush Racing president Geoff Smith is obviously appealing NASCAR’s decision to dock Carl Edwards of 25 points in the midst of his bid to win his first Cup Championship. Smith stated that the rule infraction actually hurt Carl’s car rather than helping it, and that the rule is actually in place to address restrictor plate races (as opposed to downforce races). The Roush President also claims that if you do the math that a 25 point penalty assessed to a Chase contender serves as a much harsher penalty than to a non-chase contender based on the total number of points they’re competing for. Smith says that the team should have been hit with no more than ten driver points.
Let me ask you this, Mr. Smith … shouldn’t a team be scrutinized more harshly because they’re competing for a championship? It’s no secret that NASCAR has some serious issues with their schematics for awarding penalties, as there’s absolutely no consistency there. Earlier this year at Darlington in May, the number 8 Budweiser team was levied with a $100,000 fine, a six-race suspension for their Crew Chief, and Dale Earnhardt Junior was penalized 100 driver points, which ultimately cost him his chances of making the Chase four months later. Granted, that incident involved an actual illegal part on the car, but all the same, an infraction is an infraction, and an infraction is usually caused by somebody attempting to cheat. Regardless of the consistency issues that NASCAR has with their penalties, though, what it all really comes down to is the fact that somewhere along the way somebody has to be accounted for. This is not little league baseball where the umpire might be willing to turn the other cheek for an unintentional rule violation, this is NASCAR – the competition is the absolute best of the best and the dollar signs are huge. As an avid fan of the sport, I expect more from the teams that fall into the upper tier. Now, I know, I know … it is very likely that this particular incident was not a blatant attempt to gain an advantage, but all the same, I also expect those teams to have such a level of attention to detail that these things do not happen.
Did the infraction help Edwards’ car? Probably not. Did it hinder the car’s performance? Doubtful. Am I being too harsh on the no. 99 Office Depot team? I don’t think so, but then again, maybe I just expect too much from guys that consider a six-figure annual salary to be a bad year. I actually like Carl Edwards, and I very rarely ever complain when a fellow Missourian brings home a trophy, but I find it absolutely appalling that this race team was only hit with the loss of twenty-five points for this incident.
Tags: bob osborne, Carl Edwards, dale earnhardt jr, darlington raceway, dodge avenger 500, dodge dealers 400, dover international speedway, geoff smith, jeff gordon, NASCAR, nextel cup series, Roush RacingRelated Stories
POSTED IN: NASCAR
0 opinions for Fair Is Fair - Or Is It?
No one has left a comment yet. You know what this means, right? You could be first!
Have an opinion? Leave a comment: