NOTE: In response to the recent suspensions of certain team members found in violation of Nascar's substance abuse policy, and the outcries of displeasure from fans and others who feel that such behavior casts a black eye on the sport, I am publishing a "reprisal" of a piece I wrote in 2010 in response to Nascar's adoption of the policy currently in place. All information contained herein was correct as of the original writing, and no attempt is made to defame or dishonor the personal character of any individuals named.
********************
Nascar
has made its position on the issue of substance abuse within its ranks
abundantly clear: enough is enough--you play, you pay, and they aren't backing down. And the adoption of their widely publicized substance abuse
policy (effective beginning with the 2009 season) served to unmistakably
cement their side of the issue into the annals of the sport's history.
But while the official implementation of said policy may have been
recent, the problems necessitating such are nothing new.
In fact, far from it.
While
the most widely publicized and media-scrutinized violation was that
involving Sprint Cup owner/driver Jeremy Mayfield (early 2009 for
alleged use of methamphetamines), Mayfield's case merely served through
the amount of coverage extended by the mass media, as the sport's first
"real" wakeup call relative to the issue of drug abuse within Nascar's
rank and file. Your writer’s research has uncovered numerous instances
across the board of each of its three major racing series, dating as far
back as 2002 to driver Sammy Potashnick of both the Nationwide (then
Busch) and Camping World (then Craftsman) Truck Series; to Truck Series
driver Brian Rose in 2003, to multiple suspensions for Nationwide
drivers Shane Hmiel (now banned for life) and Kevin Grubb (deceased in
2009), the 2007 suspension and subsequent reinstatement of Truck Series
driver Tyler Walker and the 2007 incident involving Truck Series driver
Aaron Fike (who tested positive for use of heroin on race day.) Among
the more current listings of those found to be “in violation” are crew
members Matthew Huffstetler, William Keith, William Hileman, Kenneth
Luna and William Wheeler, with probably the most shocking individual to
test positive being J.C. France, grandson of Nascar founder Bill France,
Sr.
And these occurrences serve only to
scratch the surface of an issue that goes much deeper--leading one to
ponder the most obvious questions:
What took them so long? And
why, in the wake of the increasing number of drug busts within the
sport's rank and file, are drivers and team members alike continuing to
ignore the warnings that the sport's governing body means business--and
in so doing, place both their own and their organizations' reputations
and credibility on the line? And delving even further, what does Nascar
specifically consider "over the line" in terms of substance abuse, what
drugs meet the criteria for mandatory testing, and what responsibilities
fall personally upon the shoulders of the drivers, team members and
other personnel respective to compliance with a policy considered “too
broad” or “otherwise intrusive” by a vast majority of the sport’s “inner
circle”?
NASCAR AND DRUG TESTING: THE “WHO, WHAT AND WHY”
It
isn’t solely the drivers who fall under the watchful umbrella of
Nascar’s new drug testing policy. Quite to the contrary, it extends
“across the board” to encompass the entire crew, including
“over-the-wall” members, crew chiefs, car chiefs, tire, fuel and pit
crew members, spotters and race-day support personnel consisting of
engineers, engine tuners, shock specialists, chassis specialists and
tire specialists. Specific substance lists and categories exist for
these persons, including seven classes of amphetamines, three classes of
ephedrines, ten specific benzodiazepines and barbiturates, marijuana,
cocaine, zolopidem, chromates and any substance proven to increase
“specific gravity.” No such list, it should be noted, was adopted for
the drivers themselves at the time of the policy’s implementation.
(SOURCE: JAYSKI’S SILLY SEASON SITE)
In specific regard to the drivers, the
policy specifies that all competitors are asked to take a drug test
should there be “reasonable suspicion” of use and/or abuse, and further,
that any person obtaining a Nascar license of any sort is required to
sign an authorization for testing and release waiver each season. Once
suspicion of drug use has been sufficiently established, Nascar reserves
the right to request samples of urine, blood, saliva, hair or breath in
order to confirm or deny said suspicions. The right is also reserved to
suspend competitors based upon driving/operating a passenger vehicle
while under the influence of alcohol or drugs, and further, competitors
and officials are prohibited from consuming alcohol prior to or during
the course of a race. If an individual fails a drug test, he still has
the right to resume racing provided that he is willing to submit to
“spot testing” as requested by Nascar and paid for at his own expense.
Once an individual is reinstated, the right to randomly retest that
individual is left in the hands of Nascar. And while no specific
rehabilitation programs are recommended or otherwise endorsed by the
sport’s governing body, self-help and participation in voluntary
treatment programs are strongly encouraged for individuals determined to
have a serious problem. (SOURCE: JAYSKI’S SILLY SEASON SITE)
"SETTING THE EXAMPLE"
In
the most widely publicized and longest drawn-out case (last season’s
alleged use of methamphetamines by owner/driver Jeremy Mayfield, about
which the driver continues to maintain his innocence), the argument was
that no specific list of substances existed for the drivers in the same
manner as one was clearly spelled out for the crews and other team
members, and further, Mayfield continually insisted that his positive
result was due to a combination of doctor-prescribed Adderall and
over-the-counter Claritin, despite several documentations to the
contrary, including three positive tests for methamphetamines in his
system. It should be noted at this point that only “after” Mayfield’s
suspension did Nascar compile a list of banned substances applicable to
the drivers. However, in response to arguments to that effect by
Mayfield and his attorneys, Nascar spokesman Ramsey Poston stated the
following: “The policy remains the same. The misuse or abuse of any drug
is a violation. That remains today. That’s still the policy. What we
sent to the teams was a sample of what those substances are.” (SOURCE:
ESPN, 1-22-10)
Within a week of Mr. Poston’s remarks,
Nascar made the addition of an extensive and “non-exhaustive” list of
banned substances into its official rule book, to include specific
stimulants, narcotic analgesics, ephedrine, benzodiazepines,
barbiturates, performance enhancing drugs such as steroids, muscle
relaxers, sleep aids, beta blockers, alcohol, certain dietary
supplements and any specific agents known to “mask” the presence of the
above substances for the purpose of “cheating” a test. And one further
note of interest: there are a number of Nascar officials and other
personnel specifically trained to take, seal and further analyze any and
all test samples submitted by a driver or other team member, and
“whistle-blowing” among fellow competitors has also been encouraged in
order to help the sport enforce and further police the policy as deemed
necessary. (SOURCE: JAYSKI’S SILLY SEASON SITE)
So--Nascar’s governing body has clearly
spoken and the lines of battle have therein been drawn, leaving one to
wonder in the aftermath of it all, just why the list of those found in
violation appears to be on the rise rather than the decline. In this
regard, one is left only to speculate, but it is the opinion of your
writer that it is at such a point that the issues of personal choice and
invasion of privacy come into play. What, some may wonder, is wrong
with a driver who, on his own time away from all things racing, wishes
to innocently enjoy “a few beers with the guys?” Or in an instance such
as that of truck series driver Ron Hornaday, who suffers from Graves
Disease and legitimately requires physician-subscribed steroids as a
means of controlling the devastating effects of his condition, was
Nascar right to “exempt” him from any penalties and/or sanctions
relative to the circumstances surrounding his medical need? What about
certain drugs, both over-the-counter and prescription, which carry with
them the potential to produce a false-positive for a “banned”
substance--such being the background for the numerous lawsuits and
arguments for reinstatement in the “signature case” involving Jeremy
Mayfield? And viewing Mayfield’s case from another perspective, was
Nascar too quick to assume guilt and therefore use his circumstances to
“send a message“ to the entire field, considering that his situation was
the first real “test” of their newly-adopted policy?
While no clear answers are readily
evident for the continued ignorance of certain individuals with regard
to compliance with the policy and the recognition of the potential
dangers of “driving under the influence,” and while Nascar may find it
necessary from time to time to step back and take a fresh look at their
policy, potentially redefining its specifics and clarifying the
ambiguities, your writer is of the opinion that the mere “adoption” of
such is nonetheless a step in the right direction, placing Nascar on the
same or at least a comparable playing field with that of other
professional sports. And it is my further opinion that the “privacy”
line ceases to exist, if not fully and completely, at least at “some
point,” when an individual or group of individuals is thrust into the
public eye and thus placed on a pedestal by fans and foes alike.
In short, fair or unfair, it’s called
taking responsibility for one’s personal choices, and it’s all part and
parcel of the price of fame.
No comments:
Post a Comment