Grand-Am Rolex Series Teams Penalized For Rule Infractions At Barber Motorsports Park
DAYTONA BEACH, Fla. (July 23, 2009) -Three teams competing in the Grand-Am Rolex Sports Car Series presented by Crown Royal Cask No. 16, have been fined and penalized for rule infractions committed this past weekend at Barber Motorsports Park.
Penalized were two teams competing in the Daytona Prototype class, the No. 99 GAINSCO/Bob Stallings Racing Pontiac Riley and the No. 01 TELMEX Chip Ganassi Racing with Felix Sabates Lexus Riley, along with the No. 86 Farnbacher Loles Racing Porsche GT3 competing in the Acxiom GT division.
The three teams were found to be using equipment in violation of Section 9-7 (refueling equipment).
The infractions were discovered following the race on July 19.
The two Daytona Prototype teams were fined $15,000, while the GT team was fined $7,500. In addition, each team and driver was assessed a 15-point penalty in their respective championship.
‘Sup, anyway?
First, it might’ve been helpful for Grand-Am to have “thrown the book at ’em” by reminding everyone of yet another Grand-Am rule or three which would have provided an explanation of the base from which the organization was proceeding, like:
General Sporting Regulations, Rule 1-6, Principal Rule of Interpretation and Application – The Grand-Am regulations are intended to insure that Events are conducted in a manner that is as fair as possible for all Competitors …” (SIC).
Fast-forward to GSP Rule 9.7, give it a read and one starts getting the gist of Grand-Am’s (and others’) gripe (hint: “BSR,” “BSR,” “BSR”) but, as usual, omitted from the sanctioning body’s “Darn Thee!” release (as do most sanctioning bodies) is the specific “why.”
Insofar as at least two of the involved teams are concerned, the involved infraction centered around the use of an improper part (no duh; hang in there).
Excerpted from GSP 9.7 (italics and bold, added):
“The fueling rig must be used as designed and delivered from the manufacturer, with no modifications of any kind. BSR fuel rig part # BSR FR 2005GA will be the only permitted fueling rig …” and “…Each fueling hose must be fitted with a BSR Blue one inch restrictor used to connect the clear 1.5-inch ID fuel hose to the clear 2 ¼ inch ID hose on dry break fueling probe. All fuel must pass through the restrictor. Daytona Prototype fuel rigs may machine the blue restrictor to an inside dimension of 1.300 with square edges…” and “…Mandatory Supplier: BSR Products…”
(Left for a future discussion is the idea that “Daytona Prototype fuel rigs” are capable of machining anything at all, their being aggregated inanimate objects and all.)
At least one of the above teams acquired the “restrictor” from a source other than BSR and may have improperly machined it. The net result: faster fuel flow and quicker pit stops.
One can understand the import of faster refueling when given the recognition that Rolex Series racing is a “game” wherein less than one second has repeatedly meant the difference between first and second place finishes.
Reportedly, penalty discussions at the sanctioning body ranged far and wide, up to taking away all points - driver, team and manufacturer - gained by the offenders at Barber Motorsports Park’s Porsche 250.
As it is, insofar as the 2009 championship points battle is concerned, the top-three Daytona Prototypes (Telmex, Gainsco and SunTrust) are close to where they entered the race, though prior to the event SunTrust drivers Max Angelelli and Brian Frisselle were wedged between Gainsco’s Alex Gurney and Jon Fogarty, on the low side, and Telmex’s Scott Pruett and Memo Rojas above.
Pursuant to the ruling’s “execution,” the Telmex and Gainsco drivers remain tied in the championship lead after Birmingham, with the SunTrust driving duo one point behind, instead of 16.
The telephone calls and e-mails yours truly has thus far received from some of the involved and peripheral parties vary widely in their viewpoints, some feeling especially perturbed over the levied fines, while others felt the penalties didn’t fit the crime; they wanted still more.
In the latter case, one competitor asked, “What about the rest of the year?” The presumption being that the unfair (illegal?) advantage had not been limited to the one event.
While the point is well taken, the answer – especially given our proud adherence to U.S. constitutional principals – is: “prove it.” It is precisely the same principal behind a person having a right to be tried for each supposed crime and not many separate crimes at once; one must prove that such occurred each time and cannot, really should not otherwise extrapolate.
Still, one might note the levied fines are some of the stiffest in memory, with past presumptions having played a role.
Rarely do opposing parties walk from a courthouse fully satisfied with an adjudication and such is the case, here.
Whatever howling and complaining may follow, the race for the championship still is on.
Later.
DC
Thanks for the further clarification of the recent rules infractions and penalties that were levied.
ReplyDeleteHopefully this will be a wake up call to any other teams who may try to stretch the rules. The Rolex Series is proving to be another tight race to the finish and I hope it is a clean one as well.
Really enjoying the blog and tweets!
Todd