msrpk.com blog

"Mayfield Wins Injunction, but at What Cost"

Jeremy Mayfield, as I'm sure you now have read elsewhere, has prevailed for the moment and can now resume driving in NASCAR's Sprint Cup Series until the court cases have been decided, or NASCAR decides to appeal the ruling handed down in Federal District Court in Charlotte, to the Appeals Court located in Richmond.

The defense used by his legal team will be familiar to those people who may have beat a charge of driving under the influence--bring up as much doubt as possible about the validity of the testing and care of the sample. Where this gets twisted is that the sanctioning body (NASCAR) has NO, repeat, NO published list of banned substances. The sanctioning body says they want flexibility to be able to test for anything. Therein lies the rub.

NASCAR has been notorious for using "gotcha" clauses to mete out its punishment. Section 12-4 (a) (the infamous actions detrimental to stock car racing) can be invoked for any reason. The lack of a published list of banned substances is again a "gotcha". That is the reason that you will see the "lash of NASCAR justice" tag here, or hear it on my "Race-Talk program when I am describing the sanctioning body's disciplinary actions.

NASCAR is certainly within its rights to allow or not allow drivers or participants to drive or participate, and suggested that Federal drug testing regulations (which include lists of banned substances) do and should not be applied to its operations.

Those "gotcha" clauses are patently unfair. How does one know how not to break a rule, when the rule is a moving target and can be changed at any time? Moses knew that instinctively when the Ten Commandments were written in stone. More importantly, this is a trust issue.

If an organization resorts to ambiguous language in its dealings, then that organization ultimately has only its own best interests at heart; pious blatherings to the contrary. Do the interests of any organization have more primacy than the legal, ethical and moral rights of the individuals involved? There's nothing wrong with properly directed self-interest; that's the force that makes entrepreneurs survive. When self-interest is improperly directed whether by organizations or individuals, bad stuff happens.

The inspection process has for years been referred to as the "room of doom". Were I employed by Mr. Mayfield as a crew chief, or if I were an owner and considered him for a relief driver, I would make damned sure that every facet of the car conformed 100 percent to the portion of the NASCAR rule book that is in black and white. Even then, with the "gotcha" clause, cars could still flunk--and receive big fines--that would make Carl Long's indiscretions look like schoolyard follies. Would NASCAR do that? Very likely--they have done so in the past to send messages. Would Mayfield's legal team go to court to have that struck down? It'd be like a baseball player taking an umpire to court over a called third strike--a judgement call. No court would ever rule on a judgement call by a sporting official.

Mayfield will likely be tested every time he appears on track--I don't have a problem with that. It is his chance to prove his innocence and start to regain the trust of the garage area, which, for whatever reason, has been bruised. We will likely never know with any degree of certainty if Mayfield was using meth, as NASCAR alleges. If Mayfield did, he got a major league wake up call and break to get and stay straight. If he did not, Mayfield's reputation has been damaged--perhaps beyond repair--and needs to be made whole.