Does Fairness Matter?

Originally Posted on July 1, 2007 on Foxsports.com

Historically, Nascar has battled the perception that it is unfair in issuing penalties to competitors. Many times, Nascar has made the right call. Other times, Nascar has acted in its own best interest. The over arching question is: Does Fairness Matter?

As Nascar inches its way forward in the popular sports sweepstakes, outsiders want to know that the sport does not kow-tow to sponsors, drivers, or fans and that the penultimate goal is winning - with a rules legal car. If observers perceive that the fix is in, they will not remain or become fans, sponsors, or competitors. Thus, fairness, or at least the perception of it, is crucial.

To add to the confusion is the rule book of Nascar. A document not available at your local library but solely handed out to the annointed - licensed drivers, mechanics, and owners. The frustratingly vague document lists rules such as 12-4-A, which lists "actions detrimental to stock car racing," as guidence for competitors' actions. The rulebook also governs such mundane things as weight of the car and number of crew members over the wall in a pit stop.

Rule 12-4-A is frequently cited as authority when competitors are sanctioned: Everyone from Steve LaTarte, Jeff Gordon's crew chief, to Chad Knaus, Jimmie Johnson's crew chief, to Dale Earnhardt Jr. to Tony Stewart have been found in violation of this catch-all.

Last week, LaTarte and Knaus violated the rule by "Fixing" bumpers on the Car of Tomorrow. In 2005, Earnhardt Jr earned his violation by saying "s$%#" in victory lane at Talladega. Tony Stewart has multiple violations of 12-4-A, most recently for failing to meet his post race media obligations.

The vagueness of the rule gives Nascar the room to manuever when it sees something it doesn't like - whether on or off the track. While the manipulation of the rule helps Nascar, it leaves competitors in a grey zone. And leaves Nascar open to complaints of unfairness and favoritism.

If the rules don't specifically say I can't do it, then I should be able to do it, right? While this works sometimes, such as the coil-binding advantages last year which were legal, it doesn't at other times, such as when Jimmie Johnson's car had a device that lowered the car (Nascar promptly sent out a technical memo advising crew chiefs not to try it even though Johnson was not penalized).

To a casual fan, the way these rules play out is confusing. Why is a competitor saying "s#$@" worth 25 points when another one says "F$#@" and gets no sanction? Why is one competitor sent home with a 1/8 height variation while another keeps his win? How come two competitors who completely miss qualifying are allowed to race when another is sent home? Why is running into a competitor on the track worse than hitting him on pit road with a crewmember present? Is there any modification you can do to the COT and if not, is any "modification" that is caught mean a 6 race suspension, 100 points, and $100,000 fine?

Does it make a difference who you are? Who your sponsor is? Where you stand in points? If it does, then Nascar cannot claim it fairly metes out punishment. Equity requires that you be blind to things that don't matter i.e. sponsor, popularity, or point standing. Equity by definition is impartial justice, fairness.

Some Nascar fans would tell you that it absolutely makes a difference who you are and how you will be penalized. It should not be that way.

Of course, fans are not the most impartial people in the world. They have favorite teams that can do no wrong. They want wins, sometimes at any cost. But they want to know that going into the game, their team has a chance to win. A chance to shine.

How many tickets would the Yankees sell if you knew before hand that whatever happened in the game, the umpires would insure that the Red Soxs beat the Yankees? Or that the Royals would win the World Series this year? Does the steriod scandal in baseball affect ticket sales or viewership?

Nascar television ratings are falling. Is it because the "new" fans are falling out of love with the sport? Is the fad over? Or is it because of the perceived favoritism given some teams? Was Tony Stewart right when he complained about yellow flags being thrown at the end of races for a green-white-checker were deliberate to help some teams? Or was it that his statements hit a nerve in fans who perceive that is the case?

Fairness matters. If Nascar wants to continue to grow, it must address this issue. Nascar must look at its penalty scheme and determine if it is genuinely being equitable in the punishments it hands out. Nascar has to articulate why the penalties are fair. And it must deal with the perception that there are favorites.

And dealing with the perception may be the hardest task of all.

Parity Among Cheaters, Swearers, Wreckers & Other No-Good Rascals?

Originally Posted on June 30, 2007 on foxsports.com.

The past few weeks have shed an interesting light on the way Nascar disciplines. From Kurt Busch's pit road run-in to Junior's bracket-gate to Hendrick bumper-gate to Musgrave's melt-down, Nascar has had to deal with various infractions of the rules.

The overall view to the observer appears to be disjointed and frankly, unfair.

COT issues:

Dale Earnhardt Jr's COT showed up with unapproved brackets. Nascar sat his crew chief for six weeks (Eury Jr is back next week at Daytona), fined both owner and driver 100 points with a $100,000 fine.

Jeff Gordon's and Jimmie Johnson's COTs showed up with a modified bumper. Both crew chiefs are out for six weeks and another $100,000 fine. Neither car could qualify or practice on Friday, but were allowed to practice on Saturday and start the race on Sunday.

Seems like virtually identical penalties, right? Well, here's my problem with this whole situation: Chad Knaus, Jimmie Johnson's crew chief, is a perennial rule breaker. Steve LaTarte, Gordon's crew chief, and Tony Eury Jr have not had violations to the degree Knaus has. Why does Knaus get the SAME penalty as two penalty virgins?

Knaus's last suspension was 4 races after a car body violation at Daytona in February 2006. Prior to that, there were rule violations at Dover and Las Vegas. Do you think another 6 races will stop him from tinkering with the car again?

Brian Vicker's car was found to be too low after qualifying. So, his time was disallowed, and since he isn't in the top 35 in points (unlike Gordon and Johnson), he was sent home. It should be noted that Vicker's car passed inspection prior to qualifying, and the car was walked onto the track, qualified and walked back to inspection. Could the car have settled on its own? Yes. But his penalty for something that may or may not be intentional, was worse than the penalty for two cars who clearly and intentionally tried to circumvent the rules (Gordon and Johnson).

Swearing

Dale Earnhardt Jr famously dropped an S-bomb on national TV over his elation in victory lane. He was penalized points and fined by Nascar.

Last week, Kyle Petty dropped an F-bomb on national TV during an on-track incident. He will not be penalized.

I don't understand why an F-bomb is less objectionable than an S-bomb. When I was growing up, I couldn't get away with either one, but the penalty for an S-bomb was much less than an F-bomb. F-bombs left you standing for a week, an S-bomb maybe 24 hours.

Nascar needs to be consistant. I don't think either situation should be penalized, and frankly, I think the networks should be shot for not delaying things for about 5 seconds to bleep that language. Oh, wait, didn't they all agree to do that after Junior's incident? Must have forgot how to bleep since these boys rarely ever swear...

Wreckers

Nascar has had a few famous "wrecks" lately. First, there was the Clint Bowyer, Tony Stewart, Carl Edwards mess at Pocono. The penalty for that one was losing a lap for Stewart, and a brief parking for Edwards.

Carl Edwards bashed into Dale Earnhardt Jr after a checkered flag at Michigan when he believed Junior had punted him out of the way for the win.

Kyle Busch and Kasey Kahne had an ongoing spat during a race that ended up with both of them having significant damage, and a visit to the red trailer.

Kurt Busch parked beside Tony Stewart on pit road, almost hitting a crewman. He was fined and lost points, after Nascar parked him for the rest of the race.

Ted Musgrave bashed into Kelly Bires in a truck race, and is parked a week.

To me, the Musgrave incident looks a lot like the Kyle Busch fiasco and the Edwards-Junior mess at Michigan last year. I don't understand why Musgrave is parked for a week and the others got off with barely a slap on the wrist. The Stewart-Bowyer-Edwards tangle at Pocono probably should have resulted in someone sitting for a race as well. Likely candidate: Tony Stewart, another perennial probationer.

Where do we go from here?

To be consistant, Nascar needs to remember that the perennial rule violator's should not be given a pass when they break the rules. Knaus's suspension should have been for at least 12 races, and should include the Chase and the two races prior to it. Nascar should also mandate that during the suspension he is to have NO contact with the team. If that rule is broken, then it should be a one year suspension for Knaus and whomever broke the rule with him. The car should also have been parked for at least 1 race. And by that I mean the WHOLE car is parked. Each and every team member from sponsor to Driver to shop boy prevented from entering the race track. Harsh, yes, but this team knows Knaus breaks the rules. He's been caught on multiple occasions, and if Nascar continues with the slaps on the wrist and a wink, nothing will change. Park the whole team one week, and No one will gamble.

I'm afraid that Nascar will not handle this the right way. In other words, even if the next car to break a rule has never been in violation before, they will send them home, while guys like Knaus and Ray Evernham are allowed to continue on their way.

On the swearing, Nascar needs to get out of the business of limiting speech. Should the competitors be aware that they should use appropriate language? Yes. But let the broadcasters do their job and keep the slip-ups off the air.

Nascar needs to define where the line is on these on-track incidents. In the past, they have had a hands off policy for those incidents, probably rightfully so. Unless a driver admitted on the radio to doing something (ie Junior admitting he spun deliberately at Bristol), there were no penalties. Several of these incidents seem intentional, and Nascar should do something about that, especially those that put people in the pits in danger while doing their jobs. But the penalties should be consistant - why park one guy but not another?

On the Vicker's issue, let's just get rid of the top 35 rule. If you are one of the fastest 43, then you race. Otherwise, you go home. Fail inspection, then you are going home. Period.

Breaking News: Jimmie Johnson Requests Longer Suspension for Knaus

Originally Posted on Foxsports.com on March 15, 2006.

In a startling development, driver Jimmie Johnson and Hendrick Motorsports have petitioned Nascar to extend crew chief Chad Knaus's four race suspension.

"We have won two of the last three races and finished second in the other race, all while Chad has been at home.  This team has really pulled together, and we're afraid that it will just be a big letdown when he comes back,"  commented Johnson.

Added owner Rick Hendrick, "The team does well with Chad using text messages, instant messenger, and phones.  The inevitable power struggle between Chad and Darian (Grubb), the interim crew chief, can be avoided if Chad stays home." 

"Chad and the whole team really want to win the Championship this year"  Remarked Johnson, "But as well as we have been doing, I mean, there really isn't anywhere to go but down.  I don't want to be the Mark Martin of my generation.  I want to win the Championship this year and back to back Daytona 500s.  Chad is 100% behind this."

The petition alleges that Nascar was too soft in only issuing a four race suspension and not docking the team any points.  The petition cites complaints from competitors, sponsors and fans and claims that "Nascar's soft penalty gave the appearance of preferential treatment which is detrimental to the overall sport."  Johnson and Hendrick ask that Knaus's penalty be extended through the 2007 Daytona 500.  "Such a penalty will send a clear message that there are no favorites in Nascar Nextel Cup racing, and will give other crew chiefs pause when considering bending the rules,"  according to the petition. 

Hendrick explained the reasoning behind asking for the additional penalty, "We've heard the complaints from the fans, sponsors, and competitors.  Lowe's is particularly concerned that there has been a backlash from customers refusing to use their #48 Jimmie Johnson Lowe's Chevrolet Monte Carlo credit cards due to the soft penalty.   That translates into thousands of dollars in interest revenue gone everyday.  And despite Tony Stewart's ontrack antics, nascar fans are boycotting Lowe's and shopping at Home Depot instead."   Both Hendrick and Johnson believe the additional penalty will clear the air, motivate the team, and put those dollars back into Lowe's pocket.

Apparently the suspension has not been too grueling for Knaus.  While serving his suspension, he has been spotted on both Hendrick's and  Jeff Gordon's yachts as well as skiing in Colorado.  He could not be reached for comment, but his voice mail message indicated that he was learning "all about" traction control at the F1 race in Bahrain last weekend.

Knaus in the House?

Originally Posted on Foxsports.com on March 13, 2006.

Jimmie Johnson's crew chief Chad Knaus was penalized after qualifying for the Daytona 500.  He has not been present at the track since Nascar escorted him from Daytona during the week of February 12th. 

Knaus, a student of Ray Evernham, has been serving a 4 race suspension at home.  However, he is able to contact the team via cellphone, computer, instant messages etc. 

Is that fair?  Is it really a penalty to not be present, but to be able to make the call long distance?  In this age of technology, Knaus may have a better idea what is going on in a race via his track pass/ cellphone then he would have sitting on the box.  Presumably, he doesn't have to deal with the circus that goes on at the track.  But if a basketball coach is ejected from the game, he doesn't get to instant message the assistant.  He doesn't get to e-mail the next pay into the point guard.  Why does Nascar allow Knaus to communicate with the team when he's being punished?  Are they so naive to think he can't run the team from home in his pajamas?

Granted, it is more difficult to visualize something than to see it, but given that Knaus has worked with his team (and selected the individuals for the team), I don't imagine he has much difficulty understanding what they are explaining to him.

Johnson has admitted to speaking daily with Knaus about the cars, set up and life in general.  Other than his physical presence missing at the track, Knaus hasn't missed a beat. 

Meanwhile, Johnson continues to march onward, collecting two wins and a second in three races.  While that appears to be a testiment to Darian Grubb's interim crew chiefing, it may be due to Knaus's finger still being on the trigger.