Martin who holds them accountable for the decisions they make in regards to the sport. I totally agree that has to people to run the sport. But in this instance Mr. Schumacher has to ante up 1500 to appeal a ruling that on its face is subjective at best, when is it that a complaint of one racer gets a rule chance base on I believe its a danger not a enhancement to safety. No testing or reports done by experts. So you're cool with investing money into your ride, get it approved then 19 races latter its illegal. When is it a man's word is his bond. Secondly, are you not suppose be confronted by your accusser. If you are man enough to complain be man enough to tell Mr. Schumacher to his face. There is alot wrong with this deal and NHRA cannot be objective about making a ruling. Any third party looking at this would say, "You got to be kidding, no joke, for real. If DSR is cheating then there should be penalities for cheating. NASCAR fined 3 crew chief's 50G a pop for windshields and suspended them for 3 races.
You, as the ticket buying public, hold them accountable, Bruce... But you have it wrong if you apply the rules of democracy ("confronted by your accusser")- you're barking up the wrong tree.. NHRA is a members-only club when it comes to the participants, and they buy the right to be considered part of that fraternity, fully knowing that the decisions that are made don't come from a voted agreement. The NHRA makes the rules to keep the playing field as even as they see fit, and if you choose not to abide by their decisions, you too can either put up your money to argue your case in front of council, or take your ball and go to another sandbox. Because this one is theirs, and they aren't taking any suggestions at the moment.
In regards to DSR cheating, they didn't, and I don't think that anyone has said they did. Where they made their mistake, in my opinion, is that they, by the rules, approached NHRA with a modification that they wished to apply to their cars exclusively.
Had they come saying that the modification would be enhancing the performance of the vehicles, NHRA- in their spec-oriented logic- would have told them to go pound sand or make the discovery available to every other competitor. If you plan to make something that is designed to BEAT your competition, the last thing you want to do is then have to turn it over to them, especially if you are the only one making the investment in its creation.
So, DSR went the JFR route and flew their new discovery under the "it will make the cars safer" banner- all well and good, and NHRA took the hook and swam hard. The only problem was-
It didn't do what they promised
And it wasn't just Antron's fire that raised eyebrows. Tony had one as well prior to Maple Grove, and the fire was such that, technically, the driver was no more safer than he would have been without the shroud, and possibly in more of harm's way BECAUSE of it. Had DSR not stood on the foundation that the device would make the driver's safer, and it did, they would have had a stronger leg to stand on. But the optical data didn't lie, and the NHRA had a valid (albeit, painfully slow responding) reason to investigate the claims from DSR and make their judgement against this
safety device that also
may have enhanced performance.
I wish it had worked. It is just one more thing that allows these wonders of technology to become one of the most amazing vehicles on the planet, and it would have been another step twords the next generation of Top Fuel. But it was sold with the wrong label, and if you buy a can of chicken soup, you don't want to open it up and get corned beef hash, no matter how good it tastes...