Long's Cup ban cut to 8 races; $200K fine stays

[Scooters]

Originally Posted by greg @ Scooters and Schwartz Fan as a preface I hope you will not take my strong disagreement as a personal attack. Your contributions to RacingNascar is far greater than my few comments, and I want you to know I do respect you. Futhermore I am only reference your thought as starting point to address the bigger issue. I also apologize for not using quotes, I am posting with a simple mobile smartphone. I just disagree very strongly with your idea that giving Carl Long any special consideration would further compromise Nascar or regulate them to communist mindset. So many angles for rejection, it is even hard to pick a starting point. Nascar has been run like a dictatorship with special rules almost from the start. It in no way shape of form resembles a purist or fair competition business model. The word stock car should be a big hint, we don't see the best Ford, Chevy,Dodge, or Toyota win. We see the team and car who made the most of the rule package. If a certain brand wins to much, and another doesn't the rules are adjusted not to reward the best engineered brand, but to insure business remains good. It is already run like communism, the end justifies the means, which is all about keeping the France commissar happy. The same goes for the 35 provisional racket. It insures corporate suites don't their get panties a bunch on Sundays. A faster car can be sent home, to insure that an overpaid pretender competitor gets to act like he is worthy on Sunday. If that twisted insult doesn't protect the privileged enough to get him in, then a team owner can pimp a used up point champion's almost guaranteed status. The whole system is pitted against a Carl Long, the sponsors will gravitate to a used up champ, because an owner can sell his current pseudo ability, with the guaranteed spot. Nascar had said screw you to the Nemechecks, the Longs etc..... Long before Long was the issue. In addition the penalty on Petty was a direct result of a (Maurice) Petty in house built engine. They also cheated with running all left tires at Charlotte, which if memory serves me correctly meant they also had softer tires on the right side of the car then the competition. They flagrantly stole the race from Waltrip who had been more dominant prior, with the late tire set in addition to the already cheated up motor. It was blatant, and Maurice told Richard about the infractions before Nascar did, it only is similar in that a rule was broken in the absolute technical sense ( and I was and still am Petty fan going back to my first race, I wouldn't make this up), and they still have the 'W in the record books. Nascar isn't heart and soul spirit of competition. It is business that just sees Long as unneeded 'Riff Raff' so he will not be granted any exceptions that others are given on a routine basis. His type was great in the 70s, but we don't need you any more, go away we have outgrown you. While it isn't sensible, I can relate to Long, I have raced cars that I had a signature loan on, I also have raced engines that I had a $ 5000 balance on the Visa card riding along with it as well. I am no Earnhardt but I think I know how he felt in the 70s when there was no money, and creditors to pay. When they reject Long they are also rejecting a 70ish Dale as well. When the car companies, and sponsors go through the bad bye bye times ,Riff Raffs like Long will still be the believers and the ones chasing the dream. I think the Nascar officials who are disrespecting Long now are bunch of disgusting parasite maggots. Mentally I want to spit on them, they are despicable, and short of injury or tragedy I hope they will have miserable day to match their existence. Last of all I have no problem busting a Mayfeild were stupid disregard was the issue. But Long is just a guy who has had to race hand me down stuff his whole life. He didn't have the personal to check out the engine prior, he was acting in good faith and deserves more respect.

Greg, I think I can speak for SF as well as myself (and probably the whole crew here) re the disagreement... no one would even begin to think that it would be a personal attack to have a different opinion. Especially since you were so eloquent My rebuttal/agreement comments follow:

"Nascar has been run like a dictatorship with special rules almost from the start.

As a governing body, NASCAR has the right to dictate what is and what isn't acceptable to them. No different than when I have contractors working at my home; I have certain rules that they need to follow or they can pack up their tools and go home. And like NASCAR, I always write that into the contract so there is no confusion about where they can go to the bathroom, what to do with their cigarette butts and how I expect the job site to be left when the work is completed.

"We see the team and car who made the most of the rule package."

That is the job of the team -- to take the raw materials and mold them within spec of the rules to produce the best combination they can get. Yes, the ONLY difference between brands on the track, pretty much, is the decals. Especially now with the manufacturers pulling back financial assistance and only providing engineering assistance. That I also see as a big plus -- if a team wants to stay (or attain) a top team status, it is up to them to budget time, manpower and talent to achieve that goal.

"If a certain brand wins to much, and another doesn't the rules are adjusted not to reward the best engineered brand, but to insure business remains good."

Yes, there have been concessions in some ways to brands who aren't doing as well and other brands have been held back in some areas. This, I believe, works as a plus in NASCAR's favor; they aren't J. D. Powers -- their aim to provide competition across the board not to market (overtly) a given brand. And it isn't NASCAR's decision as to what brand any team goes with -- its the team owner.

"The same goes for the 35 provisional racket. It insures corporate suites don't their get panties a bunch on Sundays. A faster car can be sent home, to insure that an overpaid pretender competitor gets to act like he is worthy on Sunday.

If that twisted insult doesn't protect the privileged enough to get him in, then a team owner can pimp a used up point champion's almost guaranteed status."

!!!!! Totally agree !!!!! And lets not forget buying up a team with sufficient owner points to get in. IMO, owner points should not be transferrable when a team is sold.

"The whole system is pitted against a Carl Long, the sponsors will gravitate to a used up champ, because an owner can sell his current pseudo ability, with the guaranteed spot."

This, again IMO, falls on the sponsors, not NASCAR. The sponsors want a salable driver in the car and the team owners are more than happy to bend over. NASCAR's only responsibility is to insure that said driver has some degree of ability to maybe not wipe out the field every week.

"In addition the penalty on Petty was a direct result of a (Maurice) Petty in house built engine."

And that cost Petty 104 points and $35,000 1983 dollars. I'm not sure what the scale was back in those days, but the penalty sure was more than pocket change.

"Nascar isn't heart and soul spirit of competition. It is business that just sees Long as unneeded 'Riff Raff' so he will not be granted any exceptions that others are given on a routine basis."

We'd have to discuss the exceptions for me to bounce this back and forth with you. I'm not sure of what you speak. :) I do know that NASCAR has let the teams know that penalties will continue to increase until they (the teams) figure it isn't worth it. Reference Michael Waltrip's fuel violation that cost him $100,000.

"While it isn't sensible, I can relate to Long, I have raced cars that I had a signature loan on, I also have raced engines that I had a $ 5000 balance on the Visa card riding along with it as well."

A lot of us know exactly that feeling. But then again, we were 'on our own' operations -- not with an owner and fairly hefty sponsors (except maybe Dick's Transmission Shop or Lottie's Hairdressing). Those days aren't long gone, they just aren't NASCAR. Its still that way for most local track drivers.

Bottom line for me ... I'm sorry that Carl Long is in this situation but had the violation not been found, he would have benefited and perhaps continued this practice until he was caught.

We wouldn't be having quite this conversation if it had been Jimmie Johnson or Jeff Burton or Matt Kenseth or Denny Hamlin. Its only because Carl started doing the "Pity me, I'm poor" routine that any of this is worth of discussion.

So to wrap up my rather rambling dialog I will quote from a tee shirt one of our buddies is fond of wearing:

If you can't run with the big dogs, stay on the porch.

[greg]

Scooters the link I am posting is an exception that I believe applies to the Long case.


I respectfully believe there is a difference in the Waltrip case, where gaining an illegal competitive advantage was the goal.

Robbie Gordon was an exception


While nose-gate and Long's engine are totally different, a lot of the principle arguments apply to both cases. They both contested that the vender or a third party supplied the offending parts or violations.


Gordon also moaned and whined, and even talked about going back to Indy if Nascar didn't respond accordingly, and he got his wish.


Of course Robbie Gordon had corporate Jim Beam, and Nascar is all heart and soul with the rule book when it is a dollar and cent issue, in contrast a loyalist peasant like Long means nothing.

[Scooters]

Originally Posted by greg Scooters the link I am posting is an exception that I believe applies to the Long case. I respectfully believe there is a difference in the Waltrip case, where gaining an illegal competitive advantage was the goal. Robbie Gordon was an exception While nose-gate and Long's engine are totally different, a lot of the principle arguments apply to both cases. They both contested that the vender or a third party supplied the offending parts or violations. Gordon also moaned and whined, and even talked about going back to Indy if Nascar didn't respond accordingly, and he got his wish. Of course Robbie Gordon had corporate Jim Beam, and Nascar is all heart and soul with the rule book when it is a dollar and cent issue, in contrast a loyalist peasant like Long means nothing.

The thing is, greg, that nose gate can't be the exception to the rule. It didn't relate in any way to Waltrip's situation or Long's situation. I agree that in Waltrip's case it was an attempt at gaining an edge. Especially since the fuel used is all from the same pumps. There was some kind of additive there that wasn't in anybody else's car.

Whether or not Long's issue is the same still does not matter. NASCAR has said over and over and over and over and over and.. whew... that extremely severe penalties will be levied when messing with engines, tires and fuel.

Remember, too, if the mistake was by the engine builder, Long, et al, have the option of suing THEM for damages incurred.

Carl appealed to the National Stock Car Racing Commission (which by the way is NOT controlled by France or NASCAR); he has one more appeal in the process.

Here is the info on the Commission:

• NASCAR's appeal process
  1. A written request for an appeal must be made to the National Stock Car Racing Commission within 10 calendar days of the notice of the penalty.
  2. The Chairman of the National Stock Car Racing Commission will set a date and location.
  3. From the pool of 31 commission members, the chairman will be joined by a minimum of two to constitute a quorum. Commission members are selected based on their knowledge and experience. They include men and women from a variety of motorsports backgrounds, some active in the sport and some retired. They include promoters, industry leaders, and dignitaries from other forms of professional motorsports.
  4. Appeal would be heard; decision handed down.
  5. If the team is not satisfied with the decision, they could make a final appeal to the National Stock Car Racing Commissioner Charles D. Strang. All decisions by the commissioner are final.
• 2009 National Stock Car Racing Commission
  National Commissioner: Charles Strang Retired CEO and chairman of the board of the Outboard Marine Corp.
  Commission Members for 2008
  Member Title
  Mark Arute Stafford Motor Speedway chief operating officer and general manager
  Buddy Baker Retired driver
  Lee Baumgarten Phoenix International Raceway director of operations
  John Bishop Founder, IMSA
  Clay Campbell Martinsville Speedway president
  John Capels USAC chairman
  John Cooper Former president of Daytona International Speedway and Indianapolis Motor Speedway
  Barbara Cromarty Riverhead Raceway (N.Y.) owner
  Doug Fritz Richmond International Raceway president
  Harry Gant Retired driver
  Richard Gore Old Dominion Speedway (Va.) owner
  Janet Guthrie Retired driver
  Russell Hackett Carraway Speedway (N.C.) owner
  David Hall Former co-founder and president of TNN/CMT
  Jack Housby President, Housby Trucking
  Spencer Lueders NASCAR Competition and Patent Counsel
  Grant Lynch Talladega Superspeedway president
  Denis McGlynn Dover International Speedway president and CEO
  Leo Mehl Former director of Goodyear racing, former executive director of the Indy Racing League
  Bud Moore Retired car owner
  Steve Page Infineon Raceway president
  Dale Pinilis Bowman-Gray Stadium (N.C.) operator
  Cathy Rice South Boston Speedway (Va.) general manager
  Les Richter Ex-NFL linebacker, former president Riverside Raceway, former NASCAR director of competition
  George Silbermann (Chairman) NASCAR managing director of racing operations
  Lyn St. James Retired driver
  H.A. "Humpy" Wheeler Jr. former Lowe's Motor Speedway president
  Kevin Whitaker Greenville Pickens Speedway (S.C.) operator
  Jim Williams Irwindale Speedway (Calif.) president
  Jo DeWitt Wilson Former president of North Carolina Speedway
  Wadell Wilson Former crew chief/engine builder
  Robert Yates Retired car owner

Taken from Jayski

[24n48fan]

This is not a slam at Scooters but Robby Gordon and his nasty attitudes like I've mentioned in previous threads is one of the very reasons I don't like him. It's just that to me Scooters doesn't like people with agressive attitudes like Carl Long is displaying but takes exception with Robby Gordon. That I'll never understand. Carl Long has a valid reason to be the way he is now and personally I think NASCAR screwed him over. Robby Gordon on the other hand really has/had no reason to be as arrogant as he was before. To this day, I still won't wish any success to Robby Gordon as long as he is in NASCAR. I liked him better when he was doing open wheel racing. I'll wish Robby success on running a race safely but not to win a race.

[Scooters]

Originally Posted by 24n48fan This is not a slam at Scooters but Robby Gordon and his nasty attitudes like I've mentioned in previous threads is one of the very reasons I don't like him. It's just that to me Scooters doesn't like people with agressive attitudes like Carl Long is displaying but takes exception with Robby Gordon. That I'll never understand. Carl Long has a valid reason to be the way he is now and personally I think NASCAR screwed him over. Robby Gordon on the other hand really has/had no reason to be as arrogant as he was before. To this day, I still won't wish any success to Robby Gordon as long as he is in NASCAR. I liked him better when he was doing open wheel racing. I'll wish Robby success on running a race safely but not to win a race.

Good grief, once again you miss the mark by two barn lengths.

[24n48fan]

I said it wasn't a slam. I just don't get it is all.

[Scooters]

Originally Posted by 24n48fan I said it wasn't a slam. I just don't get it is all.

Ok... here's what you said "It's just that to me Scooters doesn't like people with agressive attitudes like Carl Long is displaying but takes exception with Robby Gordon."

Readsome of my back posts ...aggressive (assertive is probably a better word) attitude on the track, especially, will always earn a plus from me, no matter who the driver is. The "Oh excuse me, would you like to pass? Certainly, go ahead" doesn't cut it for me -- unless there is an issue with the car like a tire going down.

And I applaud Carl Long for appealing, as well. I'm a firm believer in the 50/50 school of thought. If you go for it, there's a 50/50 percent chance you'll get it; if you don't, there's a 100 percent chance you won't. That holds true in all phases of life.

What I don't get is why folks want to cut him a special break just because he doesn't have deep pockets. He (and his team) have the same opportunities as everyone else to insure that their equipment is up to par as far as the rules; whose fault is it that they failed in that respect? I don't see that that would be fair to anyone else who is caught playing fast and loose with the Sacred Triad, that's all.

If Carl's cash penalty were reduced to an "affordable" amount, and in a couple of weeks an engine that was in Jeff's car was out of spec by the same amount but the penalty of $200,000 was kept firm, would that be fair to Jeff? No it absolutely would not! I don't care how much money he has... its the principal of the thing.

[greg]

Scooters, I have enjoyed the discussion. I realize we aren't going to change each other minds, but it is good to discuss respectfully and exchange food for thought. It also would be a boring world if everyone agreed, if we did what would happen to the internet forums? So here is a little more windbagging of mine, back at you.


I haven't read any of your comments on Long outside of this thread, but Longs driving style has nothing to do with my thoughts on the penalty. Personally I do not care for a more passive style of driving. I like drivers who push the envelope, especially ones who know how to pick their battles wisely.


I question Robbie's ability to pick worthy battles, making an enemy to gain 20th position rather than 21st seems futile, while doing the same to win on the last lap is quite different.
Fans eats those moments up as well, and Long doesn't offer that kind of pizzazz. He loses to even a Robbie Gordon on that account.


But even so, Long was racing and trying to make it before the big Fox network deals came along. I hope that the Independents never are completely banished, once in a blue moon an Àlan Kulwicki will come along and turn the Goliath's world up side down.


Long isn't one of those talents in my less than humble opinion, but he like anyone else should have the right to try. A $200k fine is devastating to a mom and pop deal like his, and it isn't the same as hitting a Hendrick motor sports with the same fines.


Neither is Chad Knaus (sp?) infraction the same. In those instantances a definite move was made to beat other teams by someone who was fully capable to win already. The goal was simpler and more exploiting , to win unfairly.


Long is just a guy whose success is measured by staying out of the way, not getting lapped is a good race for him. If he called Ernie Elliott and told him to build a cheater than I would be with you all the way.


In addition the engine could have been sealed, what is the point of buying a motor that you need to partially disassemble and hand mic, that seems unreasonable to me.
I also remember a few years ago that the Yates engine program was a sealed package, it was like a lease program and you didn't do things remove the heads. I would be surprised if that has changed, or if Elliott would be any different.


In my limited experience of paying someone to build an engine I never considered investigating or improving upon the venders product. I would have built my own if I hadn't needed his expertise. I even asked him things like where to set my timing and what kind of plugs to run , I felt I had purchased the consulting as well as the engine.


With Longs mom and pop deal I expect he did the same. In addition it was an Ernie Elliott engine , someone who knows the rules and had no credibility issues with Nascar. It shouldn't be considered to be presumptuous to believe you can legally run what he is selling.

[Scooters]

Greg I enjoy talking with you too :) That's the thing on RacingNASCAR... we all can have opinions < t h i s f a r a p a r t > and we will all go down trying to convince the other guy that we are right LOL but we do (mostly) stay civil and have -- to us -- good reasons why we hold those opinions.

The sealed engine is a good point .. one that I hadn't thought of. But that brings up more questions like, was it inspected before it was sealed and by whom? Is there documentation that it was all in spec before it was shipped and who signed it?