Despite concerns, testing still has drivers' support (cont'd)

Greg Biffle agreed. "I've been tested once this season randomly, and I feel like the test policy was good ... to have to where it made it more fair to just pull a guy out of the crowd randomly, instead of suspicion," he said. "For the test to be altered or not come back correctly or any of that, I don't really feel like that's possible. And I'm pretty confident that NASCAR has really done their due diligence. They've already told us clearly that if we have a prescription or we have whatever, that we need to disclose that, and if there are any issues, they're going to work through those issues whatever they might be. So I think it's pretty cut-and-dry at that point with how it works."

Gordon vouches for the system as well, but like some drivers, he has a few concerns. Primarily, he wonders about whether NASCAR should use a second lab to confirm any positive result. That's a central issue in the Mayfield case, where the driver himself claims to have taken part in several independent tests that have all come back clean. Of course, those outside tests do not adhere to some of the same standards of the NASCAR tests, primarily in that they are not randomized. Mayfield also was not observed taking his most recent independent test, as he was in a second NASCAR test that officials say returned a positive result.

“

The drug testing policy, I think, is a great thing. Aside from all the turmoil and situations that Jeremy [Mayfield] is in, whatever you want to describe it as, it's still a good thing for the safety of the sport, and that includes the drivers as well as the fans.

”

-- RYAN NEWMAN

"I still think it is a good policy. It is new, so, obviously there are going to be some things that come out of that we are all going to learn from. But, I think it is a positive thing for the sport that we need to be doing this type of testing.

"Do we need a second outside lab to maybe test to also have a B sample, or something like that for the court case, maybe? But I still feel confident in what I am doing and when I go in to get tested what they are doing in their process. I mean, they are thorough. It is kind of scary thorough, like you feel like you are under investigation and you haven't even done anything. They are very, very thorough. I'm glad. That is the way I want it to be done," Gordon said.

"The only thing that I have seen come out of this is that we have one lab that has the A and the B sample, and some of that has been in question. So I just wonder to alleviate some of those questions if you somehow had a sample that a qualified second lab could test. But again, I think the real story is going to come out in the long run, and when it does, I think that we will have the answers and we will find out really where our system, this system that has been implemented, where it really stands. Right now, I stand by it and the testing and the policies they have in place."

Then there's the lack of an appeals process. After Mayfield first tested positive back in May, NASCAR said the offense was not able to be appealed, and that the driver would be suspended indefinitely until he completed a rehabilitation program. Although Mayfield claims the positive results stemmed from a combination of prescription and over-the-counter drugs, NASCAR's system provided him no avenue for appeal. So he sued the sanctioning body in an attempt to clear his name and get back on the race track.

Even drivers who fully support NASCAR's random drug-testing policy would like to see some kind of appeals process in place -- because, as Biffle points out, the low tolerances and wide array of drugs that drivers are tested for could mean a positive result for something completely legal, and the very perception of a positive test could have damaging effects not only for the driver, but his sponsor as well.

"That should be something that is really looked at," he said of an appeal, "because, for instance, [if] something came back inaccurate or whatever, how do they verify a new test or a B sample, or do they take the guy off the track immediately? ... I would say if there was a false test come back or something, that you would need some sort of way because, let's face it, we need to err on the side of safety.

"If somebody has tested positive with both the A and B sample ... you kind of need to err on the side of safety. Even if it's a prescription drug, you can't compete on the race track with that in your system. Even if it's a prescription.

"I don't know all the answers, but I would have to say that if two tests come back positive, yes, there needs to be an appeals process to verify whatever there is, but there's also a safety issue involved whether it's prescription or not."

And yet, that concern does not shake Biffle's faith in the system, or the need for randomized drug testing in NASCAR. Even as Mayfield fights the sanctioning body in the courtroom, active competitors in the garage area appear unwavering in their support.

"The drug testing policy, I think, is a great thing," Ryan Newman said. "Aside from all the turmoil and situations that Jeremy is in, whatever you want to describe it as, it's still a good thing for the safety of the sport, and that includes the drivers as well as the fans. Outside of that, it's had its hiccups, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's NASCAR's fault."