Nick Micale
08-18-2005, 01:35 AM
Below I have copied a post from the GSCA board as I no longer can post there. But thought I should at least address their blatent lies which seem to never end in the cover up of their ineptness in which they always lay the blame on someone else, not themselves.
In 2003 I took over the race director "position" as the then current one walked off the job on Wednesday with 3 more days of qualifying and eliminations. He did have enough class to guide me through the procedings, even though his leaving was a result of being over ruled on his decisions. This is their logic that the race director's "responsibilities were never to concern himself with the race rules". I am far from the smartest person on the planet, but I do have enough smarts that if this WAS true, and relayed to me in 2003, I would have NEVER asked for the position. :rant:
If you look at the "statement" below made by the GSCA, you can plainly see the 2003 and 2004 incidents are very similar? This is because it only happened in 2004. When this issue was brought to me, both John and I reviewed the situation and decided in favor of the racer. The reason for this was a flaw in the rules describing the turbo in question.
As a side note, anyone remember who was the illegal car in 2003 that I allowed to run that won his class? Neither do I since it never happened. :add_shit:
The statement that I "ignored this racer oriented system" is actually laughable! :add_wegbr It is racer oriented, but just to specific racers.
The TSO car that was "clearly illegal by every racer in the class" is again a total lie. This has already been disputed by a racer who was actually there.
Speaking of being there, at none of these awful "trials" where I was judge, jury and executioner was Richard, Ron or Red there to see what actually happened. :shock:
I would certainly welcome the V-8 guys that I "tried to influence" to step forward as this also never happened.
It is really sad that I had to even do this post because the administration feels like they had to publish a reason why I no longer wanted to be part of their organization. It was clear in my leaving I did not agree with their policies and procedures or their attitude towards most of the racers.
Upon leaving I told no lies about them, made untrue statements or tried to make anyone look stupid or incompetent. They are very capable of doing that themselves. :haha:
Last week in Salem Ohio at the BPG Buick event, organizers and directors were gathered in a meeting with a purpose of unity within and among the Buick community. The GSCA elected not to join us in this effort as was stated they would. So can we assume they must feel their agenda is the dominant one, not that of the majority? :fragez: :fragez: :fragez:
***********************************************
2005 GS Nats. administration statement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject - Race rules enforcement
Problems began to arise within our turbo heads-up race classes during our 2003 GS Nats. These problems were in the race rule and enforcement areas. Nick’s responsibilities were never to concern himself with the race rules. However, during the 2003, 2004, and 2005 events, this procedure was not adhered to or followed by Nick. A full recap of the incidents for those three years will follow as noted below.
During the last three years, Nick kept ignoring the established rules and allowed illegal cars to run enabling a RUN WHAT YOU BRUNG policy. He wanted to write the rules, enforce the rules, and decide who was and wasn’t going to race. In other words, he decided to be JUDGE, JURY, AND EXECUTIONER when it came to the rules. Already in effect was a successful approved rules and enforcement policy and procedure in place. Nick completely ignored and overran this racer oriented system without any authority to do so.
Please note that Nick had been doing a superb job of running the race program in the areas within his jurisdiction and authority. But he chose to exceed his authority in other Nats. areas.
During our 2003, 2004, and 2005 Nats., a turbo car was found to be clearly illegal through peer teching, yet was allowed to race by Nick. He disregarded the class racers with his decisions. Detailed explanations, each supported by those directly involved, follow below:
In 2003, a TSE car from FL, during tech, was clearly determined to be illegal in two areas. This determination was made and confirmed by our then very highly qualified race rules coordinator (RRC) James West. James had the "assigned full and sole authority" to declare a car legal or illegal to race. When this situation would arise, James would grant the car's owner a reasonable amount time to make the required corrections and adjustments and return to be re-teched. However, right after this car was clearly determined to be illegal, Nick, overran his authority, stepped in, overruled James, and allowed the car to race. Furthermore, that particular car, won the class.
In 2004, a TSM car from FL, was clearly found to have an illegal turbo as had been attested to by Scott Simpson and James West. Once again, Nick, still without the authority to do so, overruled James and Scott and allowed that car to race. After this second instance of being overruled by Nick, , James, who was very competent and highly regarded and respected by the racers, understandably resigned.
Again, in 2005, a TSO car from MD was found to be clearly illegal in several areas. It’s illegality was confirmed by Cal Hartline and agreed to be illegal by every racer he spoke to in that class. And again, Nick overruled it's illegality and allowed the car to race. This was the proverbial “last straw”!
So, we ask you, what message was being sent to the other racers who bring their car to the Nats. in approved legal trim? That we have established and approved rules in place that will be adhered to and enforced? Or, as it has been the last three events, YOU CAN JUST RUN WHAT YOU BRUNG !
Obviously, in all fairness, things needed to corrected and fixed. So what was done by Richard Lasseter, was to extend and expand what already was being done, i.e., a successful and fair system of rules control, implementation and enforcement, similar to what was already in effect by the BB / V8 and TSM guys. It’s a simple “racers of the class” make the final decision policy.
Incidentally, Nick twice approached one of the V8 / BB rules guys in attempt to influence what they were doing regarding rules and etc. After Nick’s second approach, he was told to stay out of it. Note that there has been no dialog whatsoever appearing anywhere regarding changing anything within the current existing rules enforcement system in the BB / V8 area. So, it must be working. That’s how it should be.
Allowing the racers who actually race the class to make up their own rules was designed to be a policy in TSO, TSE, TSM, and TSS classes. The overall goal was to completely eliminate the image of the rules being by the GSCA or any special interests. We placed the rules making policy into the hands of those who run the class. What could be simpler and more fair ?
We understand that there is group of turbo guys who are working on creating an additional H/U class for next year. To quote one of those involved who posted on another BB, “this will be a racers class, with rules by the racers”. Sound familiar ? This is how all of our heads-up race classes are designed to be. It’s been reported that Nick was also told to stay out of this potential classes formation process.
What has been done and approved is already posted in our Nats. Race Forum. If anyone has a better way to do this, feel free to post here with your suggestions and proposals.
Unfortunately, Nick would not agree and cooperate with this very fair and just system updating. This updating by Richard Lasseter was verbally agreed upon to him by John Chamberlain as being a good idea. When Nick realized that our better and fairer system was to be implemented, he quit. He was not fired or asked to leave the position.
It appeared that Nick wanted to write all the rules, run everything, and not have to answer to anyone. No-one but Nick thought he should have this total authority.
Because of the above situation, James West, with more than 10 years of Nats. rules background and experience, is returning to our administration in a capacity yet to be determined. Also, there are four individuals already under consideration to be installed as our new Race Director.
Nick subsequently went onto the internet in an attempt to place the blame elsewhere when the real problem should be attributed to his demanding of total authority. He spewed half truths laced with unwarranted malicious verbal attacks and accusations against Richard Lasseter, the Nats., it’s administration members, and long time Nats. racers and loyal supporters.
Numerous times, Nick was told that his duties were to run the race program and leave the established method of race rules and enforcement alone. He simply would not do this.
Regardless of the above, we wish Nick good luck.
GS Nats. Administration
In 2003 I took over the race director "position" as the then current one walked off the job on Wednesday with 3 more days of qualifying and eliminations. He did have enough class to guide me through the procedings, even though his leaving was a result of being over ruled on his decisions. This is their logic that the race director's "responsibilities were never to concern himself with the race rules". I am far from the smartest person on the planet, but I do have enough smarts that if this WAS true, and relayed to me in 2003, I would have NEVER asked for the position. :rant:
If you look at the "statement" below made by the GSCA, you can plainly see the 2003 and 2004 incidents are very similar? This is because it only happened in 2004. When this issue was brought to me, both John and I reviewed the situation and decided in favor of the racer. The reason for this was a flaw in the rules describing the turbo in question.
As a side note, anyone remember who was the illegal car in 2003 that I allowed to run that won his class? Neither do I since it never happened. :add_shit:
The statement that I "ignored this racer oriented system" is actually laughable! :add_wegbr It is racer oriented, but just to specific racers.
The TSO car that was "clearly illegal by every racer in the class" is again a total lie. This has already been disputed by a racer who was actually there.
Speaking of being there, at none of these awful "trials" where I was judge, jury and executioner was Richard, Ron or Red there to see what actually happened. :shock:
I would certainly welcome the V-8 guys that I "tried to influence" to step forward as this also never happened.
It is really sad that I had to even do this post because the administration feels like they had to publish a reason why I no longer wanted to be part of their organization. It was clear in my leaving I did not agree with their policies and procedures or their attitude towards most of the racers.
Upon leaving I told no lies about them, made untrue statements or tried to make anyone look stupid or incompetent. They are very capable of doing that themselves. :haha:
Last week in Salem Ohio at the BPG Buick event, organizers and directors were gathered in a meeting with a purpose of unity within and among the Buick community. The GSCA elected not to join us in this effort as was stated they would. So can we assume they must feel their agenda is the dominant one, not that of the majority? :fragez: :fragez: :fragez:
***********************************************
2005 GS Nats. administration statement
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject - Race rules enforcement
Problems began to arise within our turbo heads-up race classes during our 2003 GS Nats. These problems were in the race rule and enforcement areas. Nick’s responsibilities were never to concern himself with the race rules. However, during the 2003, 2004, and 2005 events, this procedure was not adhered to or followed by Nick. A full recap of the incidents for those three years will follow as noted below.
During the last three years, Nick kept ignoring the established rules and allowed illegal cars to run enabling a RUN WHAT YOU BRUNG policy. He wanted to write the rules, enforce the rules, and decide who was and wasn’t going to race. In other words, he decided to be JUDGE, JURY, AND EXECUTIONER when it came to the rules. Already in effect was a successful approved rules and enforcement policy and procedure in place. Nick completely ignored and overran this racer oriented system without any authority to do so.
Please note that Nick had been doing a superb job of running the race program in the areas within his jurisdiction and authority. But he chose to exceed his authority in other Nats. areas.
During our 2003, 2004, and 2005 Nats., a turbo car was found to be clearly illegal through peer teching, yet was allowed to race by Nick. He disregarded the class racers with his decisions. Detailed explanations, each supported by those directly involved, follow below:
In 2003, a TSE car from FL, during tech, was clearly determined to be illegal in two areas. This determination was made and confirmed by our then very highly qualified race rules coordinator (RRC) James West. James had the "assigned full and sole authority" to declare a car legal or illegal to race. When this situation would arise, James would grant the car's owner a reasonable amount time to make the required corrections and adjustments and return to be re-teched. However, right after this car was clearly determined to be illegal, Nick, overran his authority, stepped in, overruled James, and allowed the car to race. Furthermore, that particular car, won the class.
In 2004, a TSM car from FL, was clearly found to have an illegal turbo as had been attested to by Scott Simpson and James West. Once again, Nick, still without the authority to do so, overruled James and Scott and allowed that car to race. After this second instance of being overruled by Nick, , James, who was very competent and highly regarded and respected by the racers, understandably resigned.
Again, in 2005, a TSO car from MD was found to be clearly illegal in several areas. It’s illegality was confirmed by Cal Hartline and agreed to be illegal by every racer he spoke to in that class. And again, Nick overruled it's illegality and allowed the car to race. This was the proverbial “last straw”!
So, we ask you, what message was being sent to the other racers who bring their car to the Nats. in approved legal trim? That we have established and approved rules in place that will be adhered to and enforced? Or, as it has been the last three events, YOU CAN JUST RUN WHAT YOU BRUNG !
Obviously, in all fairness, things needed to corrected and fixed. So what was done by Richard Lasseter, was to extend and expand what already was being done, i.e., a successful and fair system of rules control, implementation and enforcement, similar to what was already in effect by the BB / V8 and TSM guys. It’s a simple “racers of the class” make the final decision policy.
Incidentally, Nick twice approached one of the V8 / BB rules guys in attempt to influence what they were doing regarding rules and etc. After Nick’s second approach, he was told to stay out of it. Note that there has been no dialog whatsoever appearing anywhere regarding changing anything within the current existing rules enforcement system in the BB / V8 area. So, it must be working. That’s how it should be.
Allowing the racers who actually race the class to make up their own rules was designed to be a policy in TSO, TSE, TSM, and TSS classes. The overall goal was to completely eliminate the image of the rules being by the GSCA or any special interests. We placed the rules making policy into the hands of those who run the class. What could be simpler and more fair ?
We understand that there is group of turbo guys who are working on creating an additional H/U class for next year. To quote one of those involved who posted on another BB, “this will be a racers class, with rules by the racers”. Sound familiar ? This is how all of our heads-up race classes are designed to be. It’s been reported that Nick was also told to stay out of this potential classes formation process.
What has been done and approved is already posted in our Nats. Race Forum. If anyone has a better way to do this, feel free to post here with your suggestions and proposals.
Unfortunately, Nick would not agree and cooperate with this very fair and just system updating. This updating by Richard Lasseter was verbally agreed upon to him by John Chamberlain as being a good idea. When Nick realized that our better and fairer system was to be implemented, he quit. He was not fired or asked to leave the position.
It appeared that Nick wanted to write all the rules, run everything, and not have to answer to anyone. No-one but Nick thought he should have this total authority.
Because of the above situation, James West, with more than 10 years of Nats. rules background and experience, is returning to our administration in a capacity yet to be determined. Also, there are four individuals already under consideration to be installed as our new Race Director.
Nick subsequently went onto the internet in an attempt to place the blame elsewhere when the real problem should be attributed to his demanding of total authority. He spewed half truths laced with unwarranted malicious verbal attacks and accusations against Richard Lasseter, the Nats., it’s administration members, and long time Nats. racers and loyal supporters.
Numerous times, Nick was told that his duties were to run the race program and leave the established method of race rules and enforcement alone. He simply would not do this.
Regardless of the above, we wish Nick good luck.
GS Nats. Administration