Turn 2

If you've been following the Mauricia Grant lawsuit against NASCAR alleging racial and sexual harrassment, you were probably not surprised Friday to hear that NASCAR has responded with a lengthy document denying all the charges.

But, as defendants in such cases do, NASCAR then went too far by attempting to discredit Grant in the media by suggesting she's done some pretty bad things herself.

Specifically, NASCAR said one of Grant's past boyfriends had filed a temporary restraining order against her. That complaint claimed Grant, now 32, had made death threats and harassing calls to his home and work.

NASCAR's attorneys also unearthed a DUI charge, to which Grant had pleaded no contest (she served two days in jail) and found that, later that same year, she was charged with driving with a suspended license while in Atlanta to work a NASCAR event.

Grant's attorney said she does not deny those allegations, but that they are "totally irrelevant" to the lawsuit.

NASCAR's actions immediately after Grant's lawsuit was fired were to suspend two officials working in the Nationwide Series who were named in her $225 million action against the racing giant, and fire a third, which suggests that NASCAR believed at least some of the allegations Grant made were true. NASCAR, however, has said the actions were unrelated to Grant's claims.

The response filed with the court also directly contradicts Grant's claims that she filed complaints about the way she was treated by co-workers, saying she made no complaints at all before her termination, which NASCAR said was not an act of retaliation for complaining about harrassment. The organization will not specifically say what lead to her firing, but said she was frequently late for work and was involved in an altercation with a security guard at Michigan International Speedway.

NASCAR has clearly decided to get down in the mud on this one. Bringing up Grant's past legal problems, while not unexpected, demonstrates a kind of panic on the part of the organization. It is nothing more than the legal equivalent of the third-grader's, "Well, she did bad stuff, too!" defense.

(Remember when Florida cops believed NASCAR CEO Brian France had been driving drunk in 2006, but couldn't prove it? What if they could have? Would that have had one ounce of bearing on this case? No.)

If NASCAR and its personnel did nothing wrong, then it doesn't need to worry about this lawsuit. But trashing Mauricia Grant on unrelated issues does nothing to support the defendant's case in court. NASCAR's legal team is apparently counting on a jury trial, because a competent judge wouldn't see the claims as any kind of legitimate defense, and, of course, none of this can be found in the legal response filed Friday.

The smear campaign could become a factor that might cast doubt about Grant's credibility in jurors' minds, however, despite that fact that she could have served time for a DUI and have had a restraining order filed against her, and NASCAR could still have acted illegally in terninating Grant's employment and could still be guilty of failing to act on her complaints of racism and sexism from its employees.

NASCAR doesn't need to stoop to this kind of behavior. Personal attacks like these just make the organization look desperate. The tactic could well backfire.

For the third week in a row, a competitive Dale Earnhardt, Jr was denied a Cup win by a poor pit strategy.

This time, at Watkins Glen, Junior, running in first, stayed out long after just about everyone else had pitted. After he finally went in, he emerged from the pits in sixth place.

Later, his fate was sealed when he once again stayed on the track too long, and was caught by a caution. This time he ended up much further back and finished 22nd.

The calls, despite Dale Junior's magnanimous gesture to take the blame, were those of the Crew Chief, Tony Eury, Jr. He held the #88 on the track too long, twice, and then, the second time, tried to shift the blame to NASCAR in a TV interview when he complained about a "cup of dirt on the track" bringing out the caution.

Problem is, the debris was was lot more than just a "cup of dirt." The 78 car went into the gravel pit and drove back onto the track, with the COT's shovel-like splitter carrying a bucketload of gravel with him. It was, in other words, a legit caution.

So Junior finished poorly in a car that had lead a bunch of laps.

Last week, at Pocono, Junior ran out of gas, something that took Eury, Jr by surprise. "We should have been a lap and a half to the good," he said. The decision not to pit for fuel resulted in a lively radio exchange between the cousins. Finish: 12th place.

Two weeks ago, at Indianapolis, Eury made the baffling decision to pit the 88 car on lap 7, all the while knowing NASCAR had mandated a competition caution on lap 15. Junior stayed on the track, led for a while, then had to pit under green when a tire went down. He fell to 38th, a lap down. Junior nearly saved the day, by fighting back to finish in 12th place, but he wouldn't have had to do that if it weren't for the bad decision early on.

I point all this out because it is evidence of the fact that Tony Eury, Junior was a great Car Chief for Earnhardt Junior and may be a great cousin, but his decisions show he's not a great Crew Chief.

Junior is fiercely loyal to his cousin, bringing him from DEI to his new home at Hendrick Motorsports. That's an admirable trait these days, but if Earnhardt made his move to win a championship, then he ought to take a long, hard look at what's holding him up this season. Rick Hendrick has given him a solid car week in and week out, and he's run up front frequently. The boy can still drive. (And yes, he does a have win this year, although, to be frank, luck played a major role in that victory, probably as much as Eury's strategy.)

But, thanks to decisions like we've seen for the past three weeks, Junior's not up front at the end of the race.

I can't help but feel that, were this anybody other than Junior's cousin, there would be changes made, maybe before the Chase starts.

So now they're going to swap around three dates to move California's fall race from September to October, when it will fall during the Chase.

According to Auto Club Speedway President Gillian Zucker, Auto Club Speedway (formerly California Speedway) would get Talladega Superspeedway's date in early to mid-October, Atlanta Motor Speedway would get the Labor Day weekend race and Talladega would receive Atlanta's fall date later in October.

Got all that?

There's only one flaw in all this: it won't fix California's problem, which is that they can't sell tickets to their races.

Zucker says it's because the September date is too hot for the fans. That, of course, doesn't explain why she also can't sell-out the 92,000-seat facility for the February race. (Is it too cold then, Ms. Zucker? Perhaps you could build an indoor track if California race fans are that picky.)

Actually, the Auto Club Speedway hasn't sold out since 2004, when NASCAR took the Southern 500 date away from Darlington, and gave it to California. (Apparently, no one thought to ask about the weather in Fontana on that date before the decision was made.) Not many long-time race fans were pleased with that move, and nowadays, it's looking like it was a really dumb idea.

And then there's the track itself. Fans complain it provides boring racing. This February, of course, the excitement it generated came from watching crews try to fix the "weeping" problem, as water seeped from under the asphalt onto the racing surface, causing officials to postpone the race until the next day...after several cars had already wrecked.

Californians don't much seem to care about stock car racing, which makes it even more frustrating that tracks in the south, the home of the sport, lost their dates to the state in a misguided attempt to expand NASCAR's footprint. But you can't force people to come see an event in which they have no interest, and that's the root of the problem here.

This whole thing is even sadder when you realize that NASCAR has made the same mistake twice now. Ontario Motor Speedway, not far from Fontana, was built in 1970 and drew over 78,000 fans for its inaugural NASCAR race in 1971, but by 1980, the NASCAR race was drawing just 15,000. NASCAR dumped the race and the track was demolished, but NASCAR didn't learn from its mistake.

Well, if they don't want NASCAR in California, I can think of a track in North Carolina that's all shined up and ready to go. Just give Andy Hillenburg a call.