Kevin Windham Points Penalty Overturned

[Okiewan]

Kevin Windham Points Penalty Overturned

02/10/2004

A three-person appeal board organized by AMA Pro Racing has decided to overturn the points deduction penalty assessed to Kevin Windham. Windham had been docked 10 points by AMA Pro Racing MX/SX Series Manager Steve Whitelock for an incident involving fellow rider David Vuillemin at Round 2 of the AMA Supercross Series. In the opinion of Whitelock, Windham engaged in unsafe and unsportsmanlike riding by intentionally making contact with Vuillemin on lap one of the main event. The contact resulted in Vuillemin being pushed off the track nearly colliding with a photographer standing nearby. Vuillemin, who had the early lead in the race, remounted and worked his way back through the pack for a eventual seventh place finish.

The appeal board found that while points penalties are with merit and necessary, Windham’s actions in this case did not violate the AMA Supercross/Motocross Rulebook.

The appeal board voted 2-1 in favor of Windham.

 

[WaltCMoto]

Justice prevails. Now send these guys after OJ

 

[CaptainObvious]

Well at least everyone at the AMA isn't brain dead. Lets hope they apply the same logic to the Langston issue becuase he lost a few point due to the 5 second deduction.

 

[RAH RAH]

chalk up one for the ama. I hope we can do this many more times in our future.
way to go Kevin Windham... ohh yeah this is a contact sport and it gets very physical. when you get to the top of the sport youve got to do whatever you can to gain an advantage over the rest of yur competition. whats sorry is that it took a few races before the ama realized that KW really is in control even if he is on the leading edge.
Once again congratulations Kevin

 

[fender92883]

Here's another thread --> http://dirtrider.net/forums3/showthread.php?t=92447

Congrats to KW...let's hope that he turns it up and gives us some more AWESOME races with Reed! :aj:

 

[nikki]

I'm soooo happy to read this post. Many thought there was no way the AMA would go back and reverse their bonehead move. Way to go K-Dub (and the AMA)! :thumb:

 

[Jon K.]

Many thought there was no way the AMA would go back and reverse their bonehead move.

Me for sure! :ohmy:

There was this other time that I thought I was wrong . . . but actually I was mistaken.

 

[Okiewan]

Jon K. Eats it! :p

 

[blackhawk468]

SWEEEEEEEEEEET!! At least someone in the AMA has a brain.

 

[Senior KX Rider]

:thumb:

 

[nephron]

Notice the most important word in that statement: "Rulebook". This is exactly what Bob Hannah was saying on DMXS. You can yell and scream in a riders meeting all you want. But if it ain't in the rulebook, you are mistook. :uh:

 

[Jon K.]

Jon K. Eats it! :p

Ouch! That is a little harsh!

Still haven't changed my opinion on the original ruling though.

Hmmm . . . . does DV have to break KW's leg now?

So right now Clearchannel is wondering what good is Whitelock and the AMA anyhoo? Any idiot could have handled the whole issue as well or better.

 

[jcastelh]

Now it is Grant's!

 

[dirtbabe]

I think Whitelock needs to change back out of his frilly little panties and put his pants back on or take a walk, skip, whatever. This is racin', Lead, Follow, or get the HELL out of the way! :flame:
I like both riders and I'm glad that KW got his points back. This is starting to be a great season and hopefully that ying-yang won't ruin it. :aj:

 

[slideways11]

It is always good to see common sense prevail.

 

[Jon K.]

Notice the most important word in that statement: "Rulebook". This is exactly what Bob Hannah was saying on DMXS. You can yell and scream in a riders meeting all you want. But if it ain't in the rulebook, you are mistook. :uh:

Nephron;

We went through this one thoroughly. The rulebook covered it quite well.

 

[Okiewan]

Is it possible that your interpretation of the rule book is not the same as others?

 

[Jon K.]

Is it possible that your interpretation of the rule book is not the same as others?

Cut from the rulebook.

http://www.amaproracing.com/rulebook/04mxrules.pdf

In addition, the AMA is
empowered to levy fines, points deductions and lap deductions.

Cut from the AMA rulebook.

Or are you refering to the foul itself?

Page 40;

"3. The following offenses will be subject to disciplinary action by the
Race Manager and/or the AMA.

q. Riding at any time in such a manner as to endanger the life or limb of other riders, officials or the public."

Okie; how would you interpret it?

Nah, nevermind, the horse is dead. 90% of the people can't be wrong.

 

[Okiewan]

q. Riding at any time in such a manner as to endanger the life or limb of other riders, officials or the public."

That is exactly my point. Way too vague and open for inturpretation.

 

[nephron]

Hannah was arguing the rulebook's authority regarding the incident, not the punishment.

 

[muddy226]

If the original decision was suspect ( and I don't think it was ) then this latest is just plain daft and makes the whole thing look like a farce. The AMA should not cave in to pressure of this kind, a decision made on the night should stick no matter what, the big money teams and other pressure groups will now be encouraged to believe that races and championships can be decided in back rooms and act accordingly, which will only be to the detriment of the sport. I think that if it seemed that KW could not beat Reed then the decision would have stood, and this reversal has only been made because it now appears there is a real chance of KW winning the championship, and the AMA was not prepared to take the risk of him losing it by a decision made by their responsible official, but would rather compromise their principles on the altar of public support and money. Hopefully though the message has got through and we can look forward to more of the great racing we have had since the original incident, with the outcome of races decided by the skill of the rider in going fast rather than the ability to take out others whilst remaining upright themselves.

 

[Okiewan]

This could be and probably will be argued for years.
Fact is, the employee of the AMA made a bonehead call, the AMA corrected it. If you are suggesting the AMA should let a bad call go for the sake of appearing to know what they are doing, I disagree.

 

[JuliusPleaser]

the big money teams and other pressure groups will now be encouraged to believe that races and championships can be decided in back rooms and act accordingly, which will only be to the detriment of the sport.

You are aware that back room pressure from a big money team started this fiasco?

 

[muddy226]

No, I must admit that I am not aware of that, clearly I am making assumptions, and did not limit my assumptions to big money teams but included other pressure groups as well, the biggest of which is probably the public. I think it highly unlikely that the AMA would have back tracked if they had not felt pressure of some sort. What actually started all this was an incident on the track on the night which an appointed official or officials made a judgement call on, and that call should stand, good or bad. IMO the call was correct, but the point is that that is my opinion, and I nor any other member of the public was the appointed official on the night. The back rooms was a reference not to meetings of teams but to meetings of AMA officials. I would never suggest that there is collusion between individual teams and the AMA.

I am not suggesting the AMA should let a bad call go for the sake of appearing to know what they are doing, I am suggesting that decisions made at the time are best left as is, and then everyone will have to accept them and not be involving themselves in appeals, counter appeals etc., and its up to the AMA to show that they have faith in their officials, and to send a clear message that they will not cave in whenever decisions are questioned. As for the original decision that has been discussed at length before, and there is obviously not general agreement that it was wrong. I for one am quite sure that given the facts about rider briefing etc., the decision was absolutely correct, and the fact that it involved KW made it unpopular. I wonder if the decision would have been reversed if the rider had been Roncada ( for example ). The point being that unless its near to 100% certain that a mistake has been made then the decision of the referee should be final.

 

[Okiewan]

I am not suggesting the AMA should let a bad call go for the sake of appearing to know what they are doing, I am suggesting that decisions made at the time are best left as is,

I really am sorry to bag on this point, but that statement means what exactly? You said yes and no in one breath.

If an organization does not have the ability (or the balls) to correct one of it's "officals" we've got a SERIOUS problem that goes far beyond one season of SX.