Conflict of interest among teams

By Jim Huber, Turner Sports Interactive
March 13, 2001
2:07 PM EST (1907 GMT)

The e-mail continues to flow, day after day, by the minute, it seems.

Everyone wants to share their emotions about the loss of Dale Earnhardt, even weeks after the tragedy. I remain new to this sport but learn daily of the attachment of its fans.

Jim Huber

And thus, because of the overwhelming deluge of sentiment regarding No. 3, we have had to push our "Fan of the Month" contest back a bit. (Indeed, everyone who has taken the time to send their sentiments should be strong contenders).

But in the process of wading through the flood of mail (literally thousands of e-mails), I came across one short thought that stopped me cold:

"The conflict of interest created by allowing drivers to own other cars in the same race is one that even my wife (who cares nothing about auto racing) could identify. It was obvious that during Sunday's race, Dale was concentrating more on keeping other drivers from reaching the two other front cars. Such tactics only created a growing frustration by the drivers behind him, all of which were taking the normal stance of trying to move up.

The death of this man lands mostly in the hands of NASCAR for placing money ahead of the true goal in racing by not allowing every driver an equal chance to win."

It is a point well taken, in my mind. I have never quite understood the concept of teams of two or three cars competing amongst themselves. Isn't that, on the basest of terms, a conflict of interest?

Forgetting Earnhardt's death (which is impossible but try for a moment), collusion leads to collision. Collusion, in it's original sense, is illegal. This is not, apparently. But to allow one man to own several cars, all racing against each other, but then teaming up in the end to the aid of just one, smacks of wrong.

And, bringing No.3 back into the picture, it sets up the potential for tragedy. Teams have been a part of NASCAR forever, it seems. It may be the only practical way of doing business these high-priced days. And the true definition of a team is a collection working for the common good of one. But while we search for answers to the loss of Dale Earnhardt (and indeed, every other driver gone far too early), perhaps this should be brought into the equation.

My thanks, again, to every thoughtful fan. Your responses have been, while clearly overwhelming, a true testament to the heart of your sport.

The opinions listed here are solely those of the writer.