Hendrick cars receive "competition yellow"?

So how can it be that fans can see the same events from so many different sides?  While listening to various call-in shows since the Jimmy Johnson and Jeff Gordon cars failed inspection on Friday; I am amazed at the fans who think, "it is finally time that the Hendrick guys get treated like everyone else".  But, there are just as many fans out there that think Jeff and Jimmy's cars were within the rule book and were just working the "gray areas" as with the CoB.

It is interesting that the two Hendrick cars that share a shop were found to be illegal, while the other two Hendrick cars (#5 and #25) which operate out of a separate facility were not guilty of massaging the CoT rulebook.

I believe NASCAR when they say that they are adamant about no-touch zones on the new car.  Leave it to perennial cheater Chad Knaus to be in violation of the rules.  I have no problem with NASCAR sending a big message to Knaus to get him to "cease and desist" with his cheating.  It is time for NASCAR to set Knaus down for the rest of the season, dock the driver and owner 200 points and a $200,000 fine.  Why so harsh?  Because of a history of cheating, that's why.  Knaus' suspension at the beginning of 2006 obviously wasn't enough to get him to change his ways.

Steve Letarte should be suspended for 6 races.  The team should receive the same 200 point penalties and $200K fine as the 48 car.  As Barney Fife once said, "nip it in the bud--nip it in the bud."  What would have sent a better message would have been for NASCAR to send these cars home without being allowed on the track at all.  The point penalty would have been less than what I proposed above; but the appearance would have sent a much louder message to ALL the teams.

Or does all of this look like that "competition yellow" that we, ON PIT ROW were wondering if NASCAR would eventually throw at the Hendrick team?

See--there are a lot of ways to look at these situations.

photocredit: livinginstereo.com

Comments

[marc]

"So how can it be that fans can see the same events from so many different sides?"

An excess of pharmaceuticals?

More to the point, how do you "set Knaus down for the rest of the season" for an infraction that NASCAR admits is a "10-inch gap between the two body templates [and] is not something routinely measured by NASCAR?”

BTW basing a penalty on Chad's "past" has little relevance, he's not on probation.

Why do I sense a bit of Hendrick Derangement Syndrome?

At most they will get the "Junior treatment" on penalties, but I'd be far from surpized if it were less due to the gray area factor.

[Steve]

marc--

I don't suffer from HDS, but the fact remains that NASCAR told ALL the teams early on, not to mess with the CoT. Don't mess with the wing brackets. Don't mess with the splitter. Don't mess with the templates. Now you can try and spin the gray area thing any way you want, but NASCAR sees the CoT in good ole 50's B&W. I believe NASCAR has and will continue to enforce this B&W program, until everyone in the garage area screams Uncle; regardless of what initials are on the entry form.

[charlie]

OK I can't stay silent on this deal. First of all Steve, you are the freakin' poster boy for HDS. You probably have HDS tatoo'd somewhere that I don't want to know about. Setting Knaus down for anything more than whatever NASCAR plans to set crew chiefs down for, for any future, similar infractions, would be feeding your own "NASCAR IS INCONSISTENT" frenzy. The fact is these guys bent some sheet metal and it was more than the Frenchies wanted bent in a place that the Frenchies didn't want it bent and now the Frenchies get to charge the offending teams some cash that the teams will win back in prize fund money anyway and take away points that they can afford to lose anyway because they have bonus points for winning all the pre-chase races. Whew. Next race please.

[michael]

Alllrighty then!! senario after senario but I side with steve on the Knaus perennial thing... he pushes the envelope to the limit and a slap on the wrist would not help but as charlie stated either will a severe points docking. Bottom line...they could afford the risk.

[Steve]

Charlie--thanks for agreeing with me. Knaus and Letarte should be punished in accordance with NASCAR's current crew chief penalty policy. But, as always, you don't know what that is, do you? The crew chief penalty, as set forth by NASCAR, is an ever increasing arithmetic progression. Knaus in "06 got 5 races. Eury Jr. got 6 races this year. By NASCAR logic and their insistance on "nipping it in the bud", my proposed penalties are right in the ballpark. Face it, whether it is this year, last year or previous years, Chad Knaus is a cheater. Was, is and will be unless the penalty is so severe that Rick Hendrick's sponsors start to yelp like a dog in heat.

[Charlie]

I was actually agreeing with Marc. I will admit to not knowing the progressions that you work up in your feeble little mind. It usually takes me a couple of days to catch up, but by then, you have PROGRESSED to something even more....convoluted, usually. Check out what Kyle Petty said about Knauss in my next post. It was interesting, as it came from an owner's perspective. As a side note: I don't give a rat's pattoot if Chad Knauss gets keel hauled for this. I would just like the keel hauling penalty defined.

[marc]

Steve says:

"Knaus and Letarte should be punished in accordance with NASCAR's current crew chief penalty policy. But, as always, you don't know what that is, do you? The crew chief penalty, as set forth by NASCAR, is an ever increasing arithmetic progression."

Then you go on to compare apples to oranges. Your next sentence describes 2006 infractions and totally unrelated to both 2007 AND the CoT.

If Knaus and Letarte is to be penalized IAW "NASCAR's current crew chief penalty policy" it MUST come from both current rules regarding the CoT and the MEMO that was sent outlining 100pt reduction for both drivers an owners plus suspensions for crew chiefs.

Geesh, Steve and you claim I'm "spinning" something and you have to drag out an example from 2006 and totally unrelated to present day.

Whatever!