November 24, 2017, 06:53:51 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
   Home   Help Search Login Register  
Poll
Question: What do you think of the disqualification of Johnny Sauter from Saturday's Busch race?  (Voting closed: April 18, 2005, 04:42:00 PM)
Too strict - 2 (28.6%)
Just right - 4 (57.1%)
Not strict enough - 1 (14.3%)
Total Voters: 6

Pages: [1] 2   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Punishment against Sauter  (Read 2179 times)
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Desmond
All-Star
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3672



« on: April 18, 2005, 04:42:00 PM »

NASCAR has done something that hasn't been done in a long time, if ever.

Sunday, it stripped Johnny Sauter of his performance in Saturday's Busch Series O'Reilly 300.  Sauter, who finished 14th, was eliminated from the finishing order and will not receive any points or prize money.  In addition, car owner James Finch will receive no points in the standings.

Spokesman Jim Hunter also implied that the team will be fined and that one or more persons connected to the team will be suspended.

What do you think of the punishments?
Logged

Buddy Wayne Barefoot, unhappy with Baby Brian's handiwork, finds his true passion.Smiley
Cheryl
Moderator
Hall of Fame
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5407



WWW
« Reply #1 on: April 18, 2005, 05:23:16 PM »

Quote from: "Desmond"
What do you think of the punishments?


What did he or his team do???  I hadn't heard about anything concerning him, so it's hard to make a judgment on the penalty without knowing "the crime."   :wink:

Cheryl
Logged
Vivian
Guest
« Reply #2 on: April 18, 2005, 08:35:51 PM »

Try this link for the story:

http://www.nascar.com/2005/news/headlines/bg/04/17/jsauter_dq/index.html

Very interesting and I hope they are setting a precedent and will continue to follow through on different infractions.  JMHO...
Logged
sally
Guest
« Reply #3 on: April 18, 2005, 10:19:24 PM »

If they DQ'd everyone who was illegal after the race, I would find it most appropriate.

Sally
Logged
Cheryl
Moderator
Hall of Fame
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5407



WWW
« Reply #4 on: April 19, 2005, 12:39:17 PM »

This morning driving in, I was listening to the NASCAR channel on XM.  Claire was talking to Jim Hunter about the Sauter deal.  He couldn't stress enough how big a deal this was!  Used several analogies to describe the severity of the carberator deal.  Said "it's like one guy has a 390 carb and the other guy has a 700 one."  The other analogy was "if the engine ratio is 12:1 and someone had a 11.9999 after the race, and said they didn't do it on purpose, we'd probably let that slide.  If another guy had a 14:1, that would be this big."  

Claire asked if the team had tampered with something under the hood after it had been inspected by NASCAR and given the official "seal" and he said yes, that was another severe violation.

Hunter also said besides disqualifying Sauter and Finch's team from the Busch race, "other" penalties would be announced early this week.

This sounds REALLY big to me.

So to answer Desmond's original question, yes, I believe in cases of such blatent cheating, DQing the team is appropriate.  I think the 11.999 engine ratio example is a good example of grey area, whereas. 14:1 is blatendly illegal.

Cheryl
Logged
Lou
Administrator
Living Legend
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1045


I wish my seat at the track was this close!


WWW
« Reply #5 on: April 19, 2005, 12:46:15 PM »

<sarcasm on>
I think they should let Sauter and team run that carb every race. It obviously did not propel him to the front of the pack - unless lining up in the laps down lane on restarts counts as 'front of the pack'. So where was the advantage he gained??
<sarcasm off>



Lou
Logged

Cheryl
Moderator
Hall of Fame
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5407



WWW
« Reply #6 on: April 19, 2005, 02:24:35 PM »

Quote from: "Lou"
<sarcasm on>
I think they should let Sauter and team run that carb every race. It obviously did not propel him to the front of the pack - unless lining up in the laps down lane on restarts counts as 'front of the pack'. So where was the advantage he gained??


I'm just curious how they even knew to check his carb after the race?  I haven't heard that part of it yet, but wondered the same things as Lou when I saw he wasn't a strong car on the recap on IWCR last night.  I'd suspect someone "ratted" him out as that is usually how NASCAR finds out these things.  

Cheryl
Logged
Desmond
All-Star
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3672



« Reply #7 on: April 19, 2005, 03:50:49 PM »

I also think that it's too strict, if for no other reason than he finished 14th.  

It appears that Johnny Sauter is once again being made an example.  Remember that after the Super Bowl XXXVIII "wardrobe malfunction" (February 2004), Sauter cursed on live radio and was fined and stripped of driver points.  His owner at the time, Clarence Brewer, lost owner points.

That he was punished in this way, just after Jimmie Johnson and Kyle Busch merely lost some money and some points, means that either NASCAR is trying too hard or that it is once again playing favorites.
Logged

Buddy Wayne Barefoot, unhappy with Baby Brian's handiwork, finds his true passion.Smiley
Cheryl
Moderator
Hall of Fame
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5407



WWW
« Reply #8 on: April 19, 2005, 04:11:14 PM »

Quote from: "Desmond"
That he was punished in this way, just after Jimmie Johnson and Kyle Busch merely lost some money and some points, means that either NASCAR is trying too hard or that it is once again playing favorites.


Desmond, I think you are missing the distinction Hunter was trying to make in his analogy of 11.999 vs. a 14:1 engine when 12:1 is the standard.  I take that to mean if the teams are a small amount off tech, they don't see that as being as blatant as what they are saying Sauter's team did.  

Cheryl
Logged
ronbarnes77
Legend
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


« Reply #9 on: April 19, 2005, 06:56:26 PM »

something else you miss cheryl it's possible either the inspector miss this in the tech area or the inspector was paid off to pass the car through.this is as serious as it gets.
Logged
Cheryl
Moderator
Hall of Fame
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 5407



WWW
« Reply #10 on: April 20, 2005, 12:39:54 PM »

Last night, I happened to catch Claire from XM in a phone interview with James Finch, the owner of Sauter's Busch car.  He was very believable in his contentions that NASCAR is making him some sort of a scapegoat.

He said the carberator showed from 5 to 12 additional horsepower on his team's chasis dyno, so they took it to NASCAR at Bristol and asked if it was legal.  NASCAR directed them to make some changes to bring it in line with tech and they sent it out to a contractor to make the required changes.  They got it back in time to take it to Texas.  He claims his crew chief specifically asked the inspector to make sure it was legal before the race and supposedly were assured it was by the fact it passed inspection and was given a NASCAR "seal."  He said he has since learned that inspector has been fired by NASCAR.  

He doesn't believe they were "randomly" selected for post-race teardown as claimed by Jim Hunter.  He thinks NASCAR knew the carberator was too large even though it had been passed through tech inspection prior to race, so they purposely selected his team for teardown.  

I'll tell you he makes a very credible case as far as I'm concerned.  I have absolutely NO faith in the integrity of NASCAR!  I wouldn't put it past them to select a small Busch team to use as an example of how swift their judgment can be these days.  Perhaps they felt this would be more palatable to the mega teams like Hendrick, Roush, Childress and DEI.  I mean, if you are in a conspiracy frame of mind, what kind of weight does a small car owner like James Finch really have to fight the NASCAR machine?  

Claire also commented that Finch has been known to be very outspoken against NASCAR and suggested to him that this might also explain why his team was picked to be made an example of this past weekend.

I'm not really sure what I believe about this deal now.  Finch said he was filing an appeal, but we know how that usually goes with the small teams.  

All I know is that NASCAR is leaving themselves open to more criticism as to their selective justice as far as I'm concerned.

Anybody else with XM catch this conversation?  Dick, Michael (Allfers), or Beth?  Was anything like this mentioned on NASCAR Nation last night?  I asked Lou to record it for me, but then forgot to watch it when I got home.

Just to make sure I remembered all that right, I went to Jayski's cause I knew he'd report what was said in the XM interview.  Also, the crew chief has been suspended.  Here's what Jayski has on his BGN page:

"UPDATE 2 - Penalties: NASCAR announced Tuesday that Joe Shear Jr., crew chief of the #1 Dodge driven by Johnny Sauter in the NASCAR Busch Series, has been suspended until May 18 (the next four races beginning at Phoenix) and placed on probation until December 31, 2005 after rule violations Saturday at Texas Motor Speedway. Shear violated Sections 12-4-A (actions detrimental to stock car racing) and 12-4-Q (car, car parts, components and/or equipment used that do not conform to NASCAR rules) of the NASCAR Busch Series rule book due to an unapproved carburetor. The violations were determined following post-race inspection.(NASCAR PR)(4-19-2005)
UPDATE 3 to APPEAL: Moments after the penalty was handed down, Phoenix Racing owner James Finch told Claire B. Lang live on XM Satellite NASCAR Radio that he would appeal: "We're appealing the penalty as it came down for Joe. We're also going to appeal the suspension in the race because NASCAR has a procedure to inspect these cars. They charge $900 per car in the Busch Series, and $2425 in the Cup Series, so NASCAR took in around $163,000 this weekend to inspect these cars. We gave them the carburetor--the specific carburetor in question--and asked them "Check this carburetor; we want to see if we can run this carburetor this weekend." They did that. They checked it, they put it on the car, they put a seal on it, we went out and qualified, they impounded the car on Thursday afternoon. Saturday afternoon--late--they pulled the car and says "This is going to be a random check." And they tore the motor down and they took the carburetor apart and said it was illegal, and it's too big. I think it's NASCAR's mistake, it's not my mistake."(Claire B. Lang - XM Satellite NASCAR Radio)(4-20-2005)"

Cheryl
Logged
Desmond
All-Star
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 3672



« Reply #11 on: April 20, 2005, 04:42:39 PM »

James Finch made similar comments on last night's NASCAR Nation when he was interviewed by Apprentice loser Jon Willenborg.

A specific example of Finch's past criticisms: He complained openly about the Busch Series race in Mexico in March.  He pointed out that, since this was part of the championship season, all the contending teams had to race there, at a cost of thousands of dollars, for only a fraction of the prize money of a Nextel Cup race.  It has since been reported that NASCAR paid the Mexican government $40 million to put on the event and that Carlos Slim Helu, one of the 10 richest people in the world according to Forbes magazine, was also influential in making the race possible.

Finch may have been the only owner to go public with the same complaints that many of us fans had about the race, and certainly was the only one to question who was really making the money from the Mexico race.

I certainly appreciate getting his side of the story on the DQ in Texas.
Logged

Buddy Wayne Barefoot, unhappy with Baby Brian's handiwork, finds his true passion.Smiley
ronbarnes77
Legend
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


« Reply #12 on: April 20, 2005, 06:29:40 PM »

desmond i do too but i don't hear you or cheryl commenting on my above concerns.if the car passed inspection due to an incomptent inspector that person should be fired and if this inspector was paid off he should arrested because this is bigger than one issue the intergity of the sport is at stake and you guys as fans should be concerned.please i would welcome your thoughts and comments.
Logged
Vivian
Guest
« Reply #13 on: April 20, 2005, 06:37:04 PM »

Ron, it seems like I  heard somewhere or read that a couple of inspectors did get fired.  I will try to confirm this.  And, I think there is a lot of stuff that may get overlooked depending on who you are.  JMO

Boy, do I love that disclaimer of JMO!!!  Works for me.   :wink:
Logged
ronbarnes77
Legend
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 545


« Reply #14 on: April 20, 2005, 06:49:46 PM »

keep me posted vivian because this important to me.the integity of the inspection process should be as clean as possible.
Logged
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!