Comments on: Jenna Fryer Takes a Flyer

By: Marc

Marc — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 22:31:01 +0000

Lorraine, your “behind” on more things that posting here. A few examples:

“(and don

By: Lorraine

Lorraine — Tue, 17 Jul 2007 20:39:51 +0000

I may be a little behind on writing this comment but now that a few races have gone by since Gordon and Johnson were caught altering their race cars (and don’t think for a second that these two didn’t know everything that was going on in the garage area. Jenna Fryer is right on the money…..the two should have been suspended no questions ask.
Have they won a race since? NO!!!!! That should tell the world and NASCAR that they may have cheated their way to victory on the races they have won this season and just didn’t get caught.
One team can’t have all the luck that those two (Gordon & Johnson) did and then all of a sudden after cheating and getting caught are like two different drivers.
Come on people……let the light bulb turn on.
They cheated this whole season one way or another.
A lot of it was NASCAR baby sitting Gordon to the finish line
and of course they backed off after the fans were ready to charge on them.
Jenna, you go girl!

By: Marc

Marc — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 04:03:30 +0000

I got your point Charlie. I don’t have a problem with the current penalties, in fact I would have been just as happy with just the race day penalty of starting at the back.

By: Charlie

Charlie — Thu, 28 Jun 2007 02:25:20 +0000

Just to clarify guys. I am not advocating any penalty. I’m not even sure, after an interview on our show last night, that any penalty should have been given to these guys, this time. I just pointed out what I thought a driver suspension might look like to NASCAR.

By: Marc

Marc — Wed, 27 Jun 2007 04:27:43 +0000

Oooooo…. I’m soooooo scared Dude! Do you know of a good protection service, preferably with a name ending in a vowel, that can keep Queen Jenna from crackin’ my skull?

Charlie, I agree a nukem application may be ok at times but not in this case and damn sure not in a sorry attempt to “force” a driver to babysit a teams Fab Shop.

I’d love to see what a sponsors reaction would be the first time a driver missed a sponsor appearance because he was babysitting his crew chief. My guess they would be mighty pissed, if not GONE!

By: Diecast Dude

Diecast Dude — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 23:18:50 +0000

Better be careful, Marc. Keep writing posts like this one and Ms. Fryer is likely to be filling your inbox. And it won’t be with notes of appreciation.

By: George

George — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 17:16:22 +0000

What a load of crapola! When caught exploiting a gray area penalties and fines, only, are appropriate. Once a ruling is issued, another offense would merit suspensions. Competition in anything is always about creatively exploiting the rules, specifically the gray. That’s way different then flat out violating a known rule.

By: charlie

charlie — Tue, 26 Jun 2007 13:13:22 +0000

The merit in suspending a driver would be that it is a “nuke ‘em” penalty. As NASCAR has said, parking the driver hurts the fan. J J and other drivers cry that they are in the dark as to what there crew chiefs may be doing, so the driver gets hurt for the transgressions of others. All true. But the key, to me, is that the damage to the sponsor is minimized. The car (assuming it qualifies) and the billboard are still in the race. So extra pressure would be put on the team from the fan and the impact on the driver and his championship possibilities, but sponsor relationships are cushioned. I can totally see NASCAR doing something along these lines for what they may consider “ultimate” penalties. I am not sure, however, that this deal would qualify as such. There are arguments, believability aside, for both sides.