Howdy,
Thanks for posting the other side of the story. Now it makes (at least
some) sense.
On Mon, 20 Sep 1999, Kevin McCormick wrote:
> Q: What was the purpose of the protest?
> A: To have the perch heights (rear in particular) checked on Ms. Kelly's
> car. No, I was not protesting ride height. Her car is setup use the above
> mentioned middle grove. That's the specifics of the protest - the effect
> that I'd hoped to accomplish was to get a clarification on using an
> aftermarket manufacturer's 'word' (Koni's) that their setting is correct. I
> know, write a letter - been down that path for another issue with less than
> satisfactory results.
I find it faintly horrifying that someone feels they have to accuse
someone else of cheating to get a rules clarification. And not only that,
but that they must pad the accusation with things they believe are legal,
just to get the protest committe to pay attention to the real accusation.
I've got no idea, having not been in the sport that long, if Kevin had to
do what he did to get the rules clarification he wanted (which it sounds
like he didn't anyway, namely that stated specs are an ok judge of
legality, despite production tolerances). Either way, this story
and others about compulsory teardowns pretty much makes me feel beter
about staying home during nationals. The consoloation that others have
gone through a bunch of crap like this as well is hollow at best.
Just my opinion from the sidelines,
Mark
|