NASCAR’s Penalties Rooted in Tradition, Equity
Written by Josh Katinger · April 2, 2005
Richard Childress, one of NASCAR’s most successful modern era team owners, stated recently that a driver should not be penalized for the team’s misdeeds. Kevin Harvick, driver of the No. 29 Chevrolet out of Childress’ stable, was penalized 25 driver points after his crew chief, Todd Berrier, installed an illegal fuel cell prior to qualifying for the Las Vegas race. Berrier was fined $25,000 and suspended for four races. Childress lost 25 team owner points.
Childress objects to penalizing drivers for the actions of their crew members, yet such penalties are steeped in tradition in nearly every form of racing known. In Sports Car Club of America amateur road racing, the driver is specifically stated to be responsible for the actions of their crew, with penalties levied against the driver when needed.
SCCA General Competition Regulations Rule 4.4.1.1 states: “Drivers and entrants shall at all times during an event be responsible for the conduct of their crew. An offense during an event against the GCR or the Supplementary Regulations committed by a crew member is directly chargeable to the driver and the entrant. For purposes of this section, an event begins with the opening of registration and ends when the driver, entrant and all crew members have left the track property.” Similar rules appear in the regulations for USAC, NHRA, AMA and most other sanctioning bodies.
“When NASCAR put the new points system in, I totally disagree with taking away points from the drivers — in any situation — unless the driver has something to do with it,” said Childress. “If he gets out and jumps on the hood of somebody’s car he should lose points.”
Childress has been one of those drivers and then team owners who tried to illuminate the gray areas in the rules. Quite often, this was accomplished to the tune of a penalty. In this writer’s opinion, had a similar incident occurred at an SCCA race, especially a National points event or even the Runoffs, where the Club’s national champions are determined, the result might well have been more severe than loss of points, a fine and a brief suspension for the crew chief. The offending driver might well suffer a suspension as well.
The theory here is that the driver is ultimately responsible for the racecar and the actions of the crew. It’s a rule that has stood the test of time and numerous appeals. True, the money involved is minuscule compared to the NEXTEL Cup purses and salaries, but the principle is the same. If I am a driver and go out in a car that is illegal, whether or not I installed the parts and whether or not I have been told by my crew chief, I am responsible. I might not like it. I might, and possibly would, appeal any penalties levied, but the fact remains that the rule is in black and white. I’m responsible for what my crew does. And this extends to their behavior while at the track.
Yes, I somewhat agree with some of Childress’ arguments, but not enough to do more than ask him “What were you guys thinking?” about the modified pieces. From Berrier’s unrepentant comments after the infraction was discovered, when he said he’d do it all again, the team may well be fortunate that he only received a four-race suspension instead of a longer one, or even a team penalty. If I were John Darby, I think I might have simply allowed Harvick to start the race with the car in the same configuration it qualified. Then, when it ran out of fuel in the first few laps, pointed out that they dug their own hole.
At Las Vegas, Harvick finished fifth, earning 155 points. If he had started the race with a plugged fuel cell and run only a handful of laps, he’d have finished 43rd and earned only 34 points. Let’s see now, a net of 130 points earned after the penalty, vs. only nine. Which do you think Childress would prefer?
The impoundment of cars after qualifying helps to avoid rigged fuel cells and other cheating in qualifying but it still can not totally prevent rules bending. Some wags in media centers and press boxes suggest that, if and when the NASCAR “Future Car” comes about, drivers will draw their cars just before practice and qualifying, similar to the IROC method. Then the crew would have a couple of hours to apply a full-body “wrap” to the car so the sponsors’ names will be visible for the TV audience. (Similar wraps are used by teams to apply special paint schemes and for backup cars today. Think of a giant, heat-shrink vinyl sticker on the car that’s pre-printed with all the numbers and decals the team wants. Instead of a car taking a couple of days to paint and decal, it can take only a couple of hours.) Just how this would affect manufacturers’ participation is very much open to debate.
Comments
Got something to say?
You must be logged in to post a comment.