Guest Column by Cathy Elliott

Have you heard about NASCAR’s massive conspiracy against Richard Childress Racing? It’s a humdinger.

On September 22, NASCAR announced that Mr. Childress and driver Clint Bowyer had each been penalized with the loss of 150 championship owner/driver points for one, actions detrimental to stock car racing; two, a determination by NASCAR officials that equipment used in a race did not conform to NASCAR rules; and three, that car body location specifications in reference to the certified chassis did not meet NASCAR-approved specifications.

VIDEO: SEE THE WAR OF WORDS – HAMLIN VS. HARVICK

Additionally, the crew chief of Bowyer’s No. 33 Chevrolet, Shane Wilson, was fined $150,000, and both Wilson and car chief Chad Haney were suspended from the next six NASCAR Sprint Cup Series events and placed on probation until the end of the calendar year. This ruling dropped Bowyer from second to 12th place in the driver standings and left him with a serious staffing deficit in the shop, the garage and on pit road.

Ouch.

After Bowyer raced his way into the Chase for the NASCAR Sprint Cup at Richmond, NASCAR warned RCR that his car was, according to Mr. Childress himself, “very close to their maximum tolerances. They also told us they were going to take our New Hampshire car to the NASCAR Technical Center after that race,” he said.

If you spend much time on message boards or listen to NASCAR Radio, you know there’s generally some sort of outcry when NASCAR levies a penalty for “actions detrimental to stock car racing.” People say the phrase is simply a non-specific catch-all excuse for a penalty, and that it means nothing.

But it does mean something. The NASCAR rulebook works roughly the same way as a beach town souvenir shop — if you break it, you buy it.

Well, don’t you know Bowyer went to New Hampshire and won the race, the first of the 10 Chase events?

As they said they would, NASCAR took the car — a different car than the one Bowyer raced at Richmond — back to its Research and Development Center and gave it a thorough going-over, after which it was determined that the left rear corner panel was about 60 one-thousandths of an inch too high. That’s about as thick as a fake fingernail, for those of you who know about stuff like that.

“We feel certain that the cause of the car being out of tolerance … happened as a result of the wrecker hitting the rear bumper when it pushed the car into the winner’s circle. The rear bumper was also hit on the cool down lap by other drivers congratulating Clint on his victory. That’s the only logical way that the left-rear of the car was found to be high at the tech center,” Mr. Childress said.

“It doesn’t make any sense at all that we would send a car to New Hampshire that wasn’t within NASCAR’s tolerances. I am confident we fixed the area of concern and the New Hampshire car left the race shop well within the tolerances required … We will appeal NASCAR’s ruling and take it all the way to the NASCAR commissioner for a final ruling, if need be.”

In the hours following the announcement, a calm Bowyer basically said he had no clue what the deal was, that he just showed up at the track with a helmet and a HANS device each weekend and raced the car.

But in a press conference at Dover on September 24, a much more agitated Bowyer implied that violations could be found on most, if not all, of the 43 cars in any given race if examined under the R&D Center microscope, and that he was being unfairly punished for breaking “a rule nobody in this room even understands.”

About 14 seconds after the news initially broke, Facebook exploded with a wide variety of its own grassy-knoll theories. While many of the complainers were disgruntled RCR supporters, there were plenty of fans claiming, “The fix is in.” NASCAR wants a Hendrick Motorsports driver to once again win the Sprint Cup championship.

Well, of course they do. A Richard Childress/Clint Bowyer championship would be devastating for NASCAR, right?

Bowyer made it into the Chase in the final race of the regular season. In most pre-Chase predictions I’ve seen, he is considered the driver least likely to win the 2010 Sprint Cup Series title. Shoot, he’s only won two Cup races in his entire career.

Bowyer’s image is that of a ‘regular guy,’ the type you could have a beer and some nachos with and actually relate to. He is potentially a real-life Cinderella story. Everybody hates those.

And then there’s that dreadful Richard Childress, respected team owner and dear friend of probably the most popular driver who ever lived. For nearly a decade now, we have seen Mr. Childress struggling to deal with personal loss and professional frustration. We’re definitely not tired of that yet, because it’s been a real treat to watch, right?

I will now remove my tongue from my cheek and assume this all sounds as ridiculous to you as it does to me. One thing I have noticed is that not one person on my Facebook page has commented on the fact that actual rules have been broken. Instead, those affected are saying that it honestly was accidental. I use that one on the cops all the time when they pull me over for speeding. Sometimes it’s even true.

It may be true in this case, too. Who knows? But isn’t it NASCAR’s job to enforce the rules especially closely during the Chase? Isn’t that exactly the right thing to do? A championship is at stake, after all.

If a team incurs a late-game penalty during the NFL playoffs and loses the game as a result, that’s it. Season over. See ya. But in NASCAR, you can go back and try again.

Unfortunately, we are often best remembered for the rules we break. Bowyer is not in the greatest shape right now, but he has time to make up lost ground. He did, after all, say the best way to deal with the penalty situation was to just go out and win some more races.

My favorite line from the movie “Seabiscuit” came from the Tick Tock McGlaughlin character, who said “One comeback I can take, but two? Who’s next? Lazarus?”

Lazarus is a long shot … but Clint Bowyer is still in the running.

The opinions expressed in this articles are solely those of the author and not this website.