Nascars Penalty of Jr. was too harsh

[Apache Racing]

100 points
100K$
and Eury gone for 6 races
That is BullSh$%

Thats the the same Penalty they gave Waltrip (except the CC was indefinate) and this infraction was no way near as serious.

Nascar you trully have lost touch you jackoffs!!!


I'll stop now before I type really bad things

http://www.nascar.com/2007/news/headlines/cup/05/15/dearnhardtjr.teuryjr.penalties/index.html

Duck

[HUDSON HORNET]

A sin is a sin.
And it's a sin, in The Brian's opinion, to
obviously break his rules.     

Teresa!
Are ya gonna protest?   

[south jersey girl]

apparently, from what they were reporting Sunday on Race Day, the teams had been warned going into the COT, that there would be 100 pt penalties, 100K fines, for teams messing with the wing

[The Voice]

Thats the the same Penalty they gave Waltrip (except the CC was indefinate) and this infraction was no way near as serious.

I guess they think it is.

[HUDSON HORNET]

What/Who is "messing" with the wing?

As I understand it, D.E.I. had used that wing for testing. Now NA$CAR is saying that the wing they tested with is illegal? Then why test with a wing that won't be able to be used when racing? What good are test notes if the wing tested is at a different angle than the wing raced?

If that's correct, and please correct me if I'm mistaken, didn't NA$CAR "change" the wing, NOT D.E.I.?

In The Brian's eyes, blatent cheating is the same as a mistake?

[The Voice]

What/Who is "messing" with the wing?

As I understand it, D.E.I. had used that wing for testing. Now NA$CAR is saying that the wing they tested with is illegal? Then why test with a wing that won't be able to be used when racing? What good are test notes if the wing tested is at a different angle than the wing raced?

If that's correct, and please correct me if I'm mistaken, didn't NA$CAR "change" the wing, NOT D.E.I.?

In The Brian's eyes, blatent cheating is the same as a mistake?

If they allow for "mistakes," then all you have to do to get out of a penalty is say it was a "mistake."

Well, wait, they've already allowed that--on the 24 car earlier this year.

[HUDSON HORNET]

If they allow for "mistakes," then all you have to do to get out of a penalty is say it was a "mistake."

Well, wait, they've already allowed that--on the 24 car earlier this year.

B I N G O!

[Ovals Only]

It has been reported that is was the mounting brackets, not the wing.

[Jr88girl]

I thought Nascar officials said the Car of Tomorrow is a work in progress. The rules should be the same for all drivers all the time.

[HUDSON HORNET]

It has been reported that is was the mounting brackets, not the wing.

O  O!   

Thanx!

As I understand, the angle of the wing was not correct either. Were the mounting brackets responsible for that?

One kind of bracket for testing, and another set for racing?
Why aren't they the same?
Hmmmmmmmmmm

OH, O.O.,
BTW,

Did I ever get around to saying:


W E L C O M E   to  FRONTSTRETCH! O.O. 

                                          

[FS_Amy]

Well, I do think it was an honest mistake...HOWEVER...  The wing was at a legal angle before and after practice and BEFORE qualifying.  Then AFTER quals, it was off 2 degrees.  I can see where that would sound fishy...if an hour or more of practice didn't chage it with the air, how would two laps of qualifying?  Not saying it was cheating, just saying I understand why it could be interpreted that way.

[Matt]

Here's my read on the situation from what I have learned.

FIrst off, as stated above the wing itself was standard issue. It had to be. The wings are randomly issued by NASCAR prior to the start of each weekends race.

The mandated mounting brackets on the cars allow the wing to be mounted from zero to sixteen degrees, the maxlimum legal limits. Prior to the aborted start of the race on Saturday night the wing on the eight car was found at 18 degrees.

The team's contention is that set of brackets was manufacturered back before the rules had been in place. As you remember there was a lot of flux and change during the testing period for the CoT and the rules were adjusted after and during each test. Originally the wing wasn't even part of the CoT design but with the front cowcatcher they found they needed to add rear downforce to keep the cars from being crazy loose. It is the team's contention, and I can't vouch for this, those brackets which to the naked human eye would be indiscernable from a legal set were added to the car.

But here's where I have a question. At Darlington obviously you are going to crank all the downforce you can into the car, even during qualifying. If the brackets were capable of supporting an 18 degree rake, and the team presumably pushed the spoiler to full downward position, why was the spoiler at a legal angle post-qualifying? Me thinks I detect a whiff of something fishy.

But 100 G and 100 points? NASCAR themselves has said that this CoT deal is a work in progress. (I just wish it was a work in progress of exiting stage left, but let's not muddy the waters here.) To date the cars still don't have to meet all the templates because as it turned out no team has been able to produce a car that meets them perfectly. So don't use dynamite to eliminate a cockroach when a well placed boot heel would get the job done.

[falcon325]

I'm a freshly minted Junior fan, but part of me hopes he misses the Chase by 99 points.   

[The Voice]

I'm a freshly minted Junior fan, but part of me hopes he misses the Chase by 99 points.   

Why?

[falcon325]

Why?

Flame?  If you haven't eaten 'em yet, I'm gonna need those blunt crayons back, buddy.