|
|
 Up |
|
  |
|
Author: T3T3 Date: Sep 6, 2008 00:59
|
| |
|
| | 95 Comments |
|
|
Author: DaveDave Date: Sep 6, 2008 02:51
On Fri, 5 Sep 2008 18:59:10 -0400, T3 nowhere.net> wrote:
All the bullshit aside, I've never had any issue with Mat's DQ if his
crank really was non-compliant. My complaint from day one was the
idiotic decision to tear down only Mat's and not Ben's (or Tommy's).
I mean, how stupid can you get when you say "they're all from the same
team so we'll only tear down one of them"? Considering the points
battle, which they obviously didn't, it was a monumentally stupid
move.
|
| |
|
| | no comments |
|
|
Author: Mark NMark N Date: Sep 6, 2008 04:22
Dave wrote:
> T3 wrote:
>>Mat's toast and congrats to Spies for winning the title..
>
>
> All the bullshit aside, I've never had any issue with Mat's DQ if his
> crank really was non-compliant. My complaint from day one was the
> idiotic decision to tear down only Mat's and not Ben's (or Tommy's).
> I mean, how stupid can you get when you say "they're all from the same
> team so we'll only tear down one of them"? Considering the points
> battle, which they obviously didn't, it was a monumentally stupid
> move.
|
| Show full article (1.29Kb) |
| 1 Comment |
|
|
Author: T3T3 Date: Sep 6, 2008 06:13
On 2008-09-05 20:51:06 -0400, Dave home.com> said:
> On Fri, 5 Sep 2008 18:59:10 -0400, T3 nowhere.net> wrote:
> >
> All the bullshit aside, I've never had any issue with Mat's DQ if his
> crank really was non-compliant. My complaint from day one was the
> idiotic decision to tear down only Mat's and not Ben's (or Tommy's).
> I mean, how stupid can you get when you say "they're all from the same
> team so we'll only tear down one of them"? Considering the points
> battle, which they obviously didn't, it was a monumentally stupid
> move.
I wouldn't go as far as monumentally stupid, though for sure an
opportunity was lost. What deals like this do is to make crew chief's
introspective
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: T3T3 Date: Sep 6, 2008 06:49
On 2008-09-05 22:22:00 -0400, Mark N earthlink.net> said:
> Dave wrote:
>> T3 wrote:
>>> Mat's toast and congrats to Spies for winning the title..
>>
>>
>> All the bullshit aside, I've never had any...
|
| Show full article (2.02Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Julian BondJulian Bond Date: Sep 6, 2008 08:42
T3 nowhere.net> Sat, 6 Sep 2008 00:49:38>Apparently, and like I said earlier, finding a production bike with
>that particular crank in it was the appeal killer, because without it,
>or the promise of producing one damn quick all the paper records in the
>world don't matter.
>As far as the "slammed the door for good" goes, in most ALL racing
>series you must be ready and willing to prove yourself innocent, not so
>much be proven guilty and in a homologated series such as AMA SB they
>tend to go with what you can prove you sell when there's
>"disagreements" and in this case evidently Suzuki couldn't find
>one...(because none ever existed to begin with..)
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
Author: Mark NMark N Date: Sep 6, 2008 08:56
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: T3T3 Date: Sep 6, 2008 17:14
On 2008-09-06 02:56:27 -0400, Mark N NYETSPAMearthlink.net> said:
> T3 wrote:
>> Mark N said:
>
>>> Well, it was only stupid if it wasn't intentional, and that's the big
>>> unanswered question here. My guess is Mat's crank was strictly
>>> illegal, but the back story...
|
| Show full article (3.09Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
Author: Jerry HoustonJerry Houston Date: Sep 6, 2008 17:21
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Mark NMark N Date: Sep 6, 2008 17:52
T3 wrote:
> Mark N said:
>
>> T3 wrote:
>>> Mark N said:
>>
>>>> Well, it was only stupid if it wasn't intentional, and that's the big
>>>> unanswered question here. My guess is Mat's crank was strictly
>>>> illegal, but the back story on that is what we'll probably never know.
>>>> And at the end of the day, I have to believe DMG was quite
>>>> intentionally going after Mladin there, and really didn't have that
>>>> much interest in tagging Spies or Hayden. Hayden may have gotten
>>>> sucked in at RA just because they couldn't only pick on Mat a second
>>>> time, that would be too obvious.
>>>>
>>>> What is interesting on this move is how quickly they slammed the door
>>>> for good. One wonders if it's just that Suzuki's case was obviously
>>>> weak, or if there was never any intention at all to give it any
>>>> consideration.
>>> ...
|
| Show full article (4.21Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
