Once again, Sterling Marlin found himself is in the middle of a rules controversy, albeit a much smaller one. This didn't have to do with late-race red and yellow flags, but rather a much more common issue -- speeding down pit road.

While leading Sunday's UAW-DaimlerChrysler 400 at Las Vegas, Marlin was tapped by Jerry Nadeau and spun while trying to negotiate the tricky pit road entrance. It wasn't necessarily either driver's fault, but rather it seemed to be more of a function of the difficult, Turn 4 placement of the pit road entrance. Marlin did save the car mid-spin and managed to find his way onto pit road, but he gained too much speed in the process of accelerating out of the spin.

	Marlin escaped penalty in pit road for speeding.

NASCAR decided to penalize him for speeding down pit road but the official at the No. 40 pit wasn't notified quickly enough to enforce the penalty on that pit. Therefore, because Marlin left the pit before the penalty could be enforced, Marlin wasn't penalized at all.

Considering Marlin was spun by Nadeau and had to save the car to even make it onto pit road, all seemed to turn out fair in some yin and yang sort of way. But the spin causing Marlin's infraction wasn't the reason given for the lack of enforcement on the penalty.

FOX reported that NASCAR president Mike Helton said the league wants to enforce those penalties right away. Because they were not able to, they let him go. The reasoning is that making Marlin come back in to serve the penalty, and therefore force him to essentially drop from the lead to the end of the lead lap, would be too harsh a punishment -- and that reasoning, though Joe Gibbs didn't seem to concur when FOX got his reaction on air, holds water.

But here's what doesn't: Marlin was in the pits a few laps later when a caution was thrown. Why not penalize him then? What, is there some sort of statute of limitations on enforcing pit road penalties?

What makes it even more of a questionable decision is the fact that it was Marlin. Did NASCAR let him off the hook because he ended up on the short end of the stick the previous two weeks at Daytona and Rockingham? No -- only the most cynical would really believe that.

But even a perceived appearance of impropriety should have been enough for NASCAR to enforce the penalty on the next stop. And if there's some rarely-enforced rule specifying that such a penalty must be enforced on the pit stop during which an infraction was committed, well, the rule needs to go.

When it comes to safety, to costs, to rules enforcement, NASCAR has been taking it on the chin virtually non-stop over the past couple of seasons. It gets to the point where many are looking -- waiting -- for NASCAR to blow a call. So it seems even more relevant for NASCAR to remedy a situation when it can.

That's what the league did at Daytona by throwing the red flag. The league took some flack for not throwing the red flag the next weekend at Rockingham. It was a situation that should have been rectified but wasn't. OK, you can't win them all.

But combine that with the penalty/no penalty on Marlin, and one must wonder where NASCAR's priorities lie -- in enforcing the rules or promoting fairness.

Would a penalty on Marlin have been fair? Maybe not. Did he break a rule? Yes.

But Marlin went on to win the race after not being penalized. Is that fair? Was it fair that he was "robbed" at Daytona and Rockingham, if you dispute NASCAR's in those cases?

Before the race, Helton was peppered with questions regarding the penalty to No. 17 crew chief Robbie Reiser following Matt Kenseth's win last weekend at The Rock. The infraction involved the No. 17 car being found to be below minimum height during post-race inspection despite the car passing during pre-race inspection.

Could the infraction been due to an innocent action, such as celebrating, or an in-car issue, such as some broken part? Sure. Did the height change likely give Kenseth an on-track advantage? Probably not, if you ask the experts.

So Kenseth kept his win and his points but Reiser was fined $30,000 because, as Helton put it, the league has to police the teams and every team knows that the car must meet the minimum height requirement during post-race inspection.

Seems like a fair remedy. Point NASCAR.

In that case and at Daytona, NASCAR used the rules and its discretion in enforcing them to promote fairness, when possible. At Rockingham and in the case of Marlin's pit road infraction, it did not.

NASCAR Winston Cup racing benefits from the unique situation in that its top league officials attend every event and therefore are on hand to make these calls. But the rule book and the rule makers need to maintain the flexibility to ensure fairness on the track, and having the top officials at the race should allow the league to do just that.

Sometimes they do and sometimes they don't. And as for Sunday at Vegas, the decision to not penalize Marlin during a subsequent pit stop was wrong.

But it was a decision made in the name of fairness.

Those ill-timed yellow flags
It's all too common to see cars drop a lap because they happen to pit just before a yellow is thrown -- and often these cars are running in the top-10 or 15.

It's not like it's their fault. When a normal cycle of planned, green-flag stops being, how can anyone predict when a car on the track is suddenly going to blow a tire or engine?

So then what's left is a race in which strong cars are forced to hope for more cautions and fight their way back onto the lead lap, often leading to a mad dash to the start-finish line. Then those cars have to make their way back through the field, while the cars that didn't regain their laps end up fighting the leaders for the rest of the day, often causing all sorts of problems up front.

Yes, it just racing. And watching a car which had been caught a lap down by an ill-timed yellow flag get back on the lead lap and compete for a win is pretty exciting.

But it can also take a good car and essentially knock it out of contention -- and that isn't just racing. It's just not right.

Here's a possible solution:

If a car does lose a lap because a yellow flag is thrown during a normal cycle of green flag pit stops, why not send the car to the back of the pack of cars on the lap it was previously on?

For instance, if the No. 04 car is running eighth when it decides to pit, it will fall a lap behind (or just fall way off the pace, depending on the track), as is normal with green flag stops. But if a yellow is throw, why not just give the No. 04 the lap back and start it at the back of the lead lap?

Then, any which did not yet pit can come in during the yellow and not lose their spots to the 04, provided that the car does not spend more than an entire lap in the pits.

So if the No. 101 car pits during the yellow but no other car does, the 101 would lose spots to each of the other cars that were on the lead lap before the pit stops but not to the No. 04, which would start just behind the 101.

Possible issues with this? Determining what constitutes a scheduled green-flag pit stop. And similarly, if a car pits early and gets caught by a yellow, does the rule still apply?

Right now, pit stop strategy and/or luck sometimes plays too large a role in determining who wins a race. A new rule such as the one proposed above alleviates that to some extent, but could actually encourage cars to gamble more by pitting early.

But overall, the rule would seem to put more emphasis on driver ability, strength of car, and the quickness and effectiveness of pit stops and the chassis and tire adjustments made therein. And that's what it should be about.

That, and of course, fairness.