Currently: 78° | Complete forecast | Log in
Published Wednesday, July 1, 2009 | 4:09 p.m.
Updated Thursday, July 2, 2009 | 2:36 p.m.
According to published reports, U.S. District Judge Graham Mullen lifted NASCAR’s suspension of Jeremy Mayfield this afternoon. As you know, Mayfield had tested positive for methamphetamine. The judge’s ruling makes it possible for Mayfield to race this weekend at Daytona.
Here’s the full story at That’s Racing.
Comments are moderated by Las Vegas Sun editors. Our goal is not to limit the discussion, but rather to elevate it. Comments should be relevant and contain no abusive language. Comments that are off-topic, vulgar, profane or include personal attacks will be removed. Full comments policy. Additionally, we now display comments from trusted commenters by default. Those wishing to become a trusted commenter need to verify their identity or sign in with Facebook Connect to tie their Facebook account to their Las Vegas Sun account. For more on this change, read our story about how it works and why we did it.
Only trusted comments are displayed on this page. Untrusted comments have expired from this story.
7 Comments
Facebook
Fark
Digg
Reddit
Stumble
Mike, we both enjoy Na$car racing and we both appreciate the enormity of the business and its inherent risks, rewards and numerous vested interests. This is proving to be an especially tough year, one in which Na$car would be well advised to mend fences (literally and figuratively) and to seek every fan's support. But there is something bad in the water in Daytona, and the Na$car brass have drunk deep at the well.
In your three sentence report, you shade news of the US judges' ruling as "according to published reports", suggesting that some unspecified, sketchy external media sources have postulated this implausible idea; as if you, and by extension, your readers, should be skeptical, perhaps reluctant to believe that the judge could arrive at such a verdict. "As you know...", suggests that you and your readers have first hand knowledge of the truth of this assertion; that we have both knowledge of the content of a redacted report from a laboratory on the Na$car payroll and that we believe that they have scientifically demonstrated that their report is the only accurate and just conclusion of analysis on samples that may or may not have been properly handled. Finally, the simple statement that Mr. Mayfield, a five time winner in the Cup series, may now seek to re-establish his career while the litigation continues...yeah, good luck with that Jeremy.
Looking at a sampling of the various Na$car blog sites, it seems that those who are beholding to Na$car are still touting Mayfield as tried, convicted and waiting to be executed, while a large segment of the fans (and there are a lot of whom who have a well earned distrust of Na$car) think this racer, who has crossed the uber-Na$car powers before, is perhaps being shown just a small amount of due process.
And all this puffery about the drivers' and fans' safety can kiss my asphalt; until they fix the fences and move the stands at Taladega and other tracks, Na$car is full of it.
I don't have access to the court documents regarding today's ruling. As a result, I had to rely on reporting that was done by reputable news organizations that cover Sprint Cup racing. When I wrote "according to published reports" I was not suggesting that the reporting was sketchy. Rather, it was a way of communicating to my readers that this information was not based on news that was gathered by my own reporting. To claim that I was attempting to "shade" the news is false.
In addition, I frequently use the phrase "As you know..." when discussing news that I think my readers are already familiar with. I'm trying to give my readers, who I assume are knowledgeable about NASCAR, the credit they deserve. I'm not suggesting that my readers have firsthand knowledge of the "truth." I'm acknowledging that they are familiar with the news event that I am discussing.
I respect your opinions and those of your readers and do not wish to suggest that they are not knowledgeable. So often it seems Na$car is both the promoter and arbiter. In such a serious matter as Mr. Mayfield and the possibility of drug impairment, it is unusual that a higher authority, one sought by Na$car's lawyers, has taken this initial step to support the position of Mr. Mayfield. It is uncharted territory and it is important to the sport, to the business, that all sides are treated with respect as the case moves forward.
I'll have some of what Rocket_Car is having!
I haven't offered an opinion yet regarding the recent news about Mayfield. I was taking issue with the way you inaccurately characterized the language that I used.
Mike, I have the highest respect for your journalistic integrity and my comments were, I admit, over the top. I'm giving myself a two race suspension...
The very brief article does go beyond announcing the judges' decision by reminding readers of Na$car's primary position, that the results of a test on a sample from Mayfield indicated the presence of meth without balancing that with Mayfield's position that the results were due to an interaction between two legal drugs. I see it as being inadvertently imbalanced by omission.
I did not make this point clearly and succinctly in my previous posts. Hope we have a great race and a safe fourth of July! All the best.
Hey rocket-car, would you please leave the internet?