As we head towards the weekend, I’ve got a couple of topics I wanted to cover regarding the recent goings on surrounding pit road.
New Gas Man Rule NASCAR announced a few weeks back that gas men are no longer allowed to attempt extra work while fueling the car during pit stops. What the rule was intended to do was put an end to gas men doing chassis adjustments or assisting with chassis adjustments while fueling the car. There were a few gas guys on pit road that were either doing adjustments themselves, or setting the wrench for their rear tire carrier. But if you’ve watched pit stops since the rule was implemented, you haven’t noticed a difference. And the reason you haven’t noticed a difference is because the rule really only affected a few teams. Teams are continuing to experiment with ways to speed up pit stops with the new fueling rules, and this was one method that NASCAR decided they weren’t okay with. But for most teams, it was no harm, no foul.
RCR’s New Pit Crew Coach Following a rough outing for Kevin Harvick’s pit crew on Sunday at Michigan, SPEEDTV.com’s Tom Jensen reported Monday that RCR had released it’s pit crew coach, Matt Clark. Clark had been with the team since 2008. RCR has since replaced Clark with Eric Wilson. Wilson is currently the jackman for Harvick’s #29 pit crew and was a jackman and coach for Richard Petty Motorsports last season.
Not Every Crew Change Gets A Press Release Within the last two seasons, we’ve seen some very notable changes happen within individual pit crews. The ongoing saga of the #48′s pit crew is the best example. The whole team was replaced mid race last year at Texas, and the crew is on it’s third front changer of the 2011 season. But I wanted to point out that there have been plenty of other changes this season to crews that didn’t get covered by the media. Pitting race cars is a tough business, and guys are going to lose their spots from time to time. It only becomes news when it happens to the five time defending champion or someone similar. If you are ever curious who is pitting for your favorite driver, check out Jayski’s pit crew pages. He does a solid job keeping track of who is where and updates when changes happen.
TheNASCARInsiders.com Follow the Insiders on Twitter or be a fan on Facebook!
Why is it when a driver cries foul they’re always correct (drivers are of course the pinnacle of impartiality and infallibility)? And why is it so many people think NASCAR has an agenda with every call they make (after all this is the WWE right)?
Take Saturday night. Kyle Busch wins in the closest finish in Truck Series history and what’s everybody talking about? Him having a tire, or two, below the yellow line as he crossed the start-finish line. That of course means he should lose the win (or maybe not).
NASCAR’s position was that Kyle was forced sideways due to contact, which was why he went below the yellow-line, and why they wouldn’t penalize him.
“He wasn’t forced down there because of a lack of room,” NASCAR Vice-President of Competition Robin Pemberton said. “He got down there because of the door-to-door contact…We looked at it two or three times. We had three or four camera angles and there was absolutely no question whatsoever.”
After watching the video of the final laps over and over and over (and over) again, Kyle was in fact a bit out of control as he went below the yellow line. On top of that, it appears to me Kyle may have had the lead before he crossed below the yellow line (here is the video).
Did Almirola get ‘hosed’? I don’t think so – and I think the video backs that up.
I have to wonder though if the situation were reversed, would people be screaming as loudly about Almirola winning? Or is this just a side effect of Kyle-fatigue? I tend to think no in the former and yes for the latter.
You are of course free to disagree, but the fact is, no matter what you feel, the sanctioning body had to make a ruling on the matter. And as with a lot of on track rules, there has to be discretion. From the beginning, the yellow line rule has not been (and can’t be) a black-and-white rule. There are absolutely incidents where a driver shouldn’t be penalized for crossing below the yellow line.
Now before you jump on me for being a NASCAR homer I will say I haven’t always agreed with NASCAR’s yellow line rulings. Case in point, Regan Smith. I thought he was forced below the yellow line, NASCAR didn’t. To be fair though to the call in the Regan Smith incident, he crossed below the yellow line (why that happened is of course under debate) and continued under the line to pass Tony Stewart. That didn’t happen here.
Just like in any other sport, there are going to be rulings you agree with and rulings you don’t. That doesn’t mean they’re wrong or there is some vast conspiracy to put away a driver, or to let a driver win.
As I said here a couple of weeks ago, you can please some of the people some of the time, but you can’t please all the people all the time. This is definitely one of those situations.
*COMMENT DISCLAIMER: As usual, no name calling, vulgarities, personal attacks, or offensive speech. If we decide your comment contains one of those it will be deleted. If you intend to comment, we ask that you be respectful of your fellow posters and positively contribute to the discussion.*
When NASCAR announced today that they were dropping the hammer on Clint Bowyer and his team for violations following his win at Loudon, they showed the teams and fans that nobody is above the law. Big team, small team, in the Chase, or just trying to qualify, the rules apply to everyone.
Both myself and Journo have not been afraid in the two-plus year existence of this blog to both criticize and defend NASCAR. If we’ve thought one way or the other, we’ve said so. And in the process, we’ve often been called homers, kool aid drinkers, and worse. One very glaring example of such a case where we were accused of being homers was the infamous Carl Long incident. Over and over we had commenters who claimed that NASCAR was trying to hold the little guy back, and that they never came down hard on big teams (search Carl Long in the search box to the right to see the many posts and comments). We gave example after example that proved otherwise, but it didn’t matter. “If the same would have happened to Jimmie Johnson, the penalty would have been less severe.” So I have one question haters, where are you today?
In a statement from the team, Richard Childress said the measurement in question was off by 60 thousandths of an inch. So in effect, NASCAR just poured gasoline on Bowyer’s Chase chances (with the 150 point penalty) over the thickness of 15 sheets of paper (Thanks Dr. Diandra). Still think NASCAR only bullies the little guys?
It was very interesting today to follow this story as it developed and all the discussion via Twitter. We had everyone from drivers, to the media and the fans reacting as this story happened. For those upset by the penalty, it appears that the overwhelming reason is that NASCAR wouldn’t give exact details about what was illegal. I did see too the theory that NASCAR was doing this to Bowyer just to help out Jimmie, which I think is great, because dropping Bowyer from second to twelfth in the standings doesn’t benefit Johnson in any way. He’s still 92 points out of the lead regardless. What I didn’t see were any comments about the fairness of the penalty based on the status of RCR as a team in the sport.
I also want to point out that this penalty was announced on the same day as a penalty levied against little Whitney Motorsports for engine valves that did not meet weight requirements. They were fined $50,000, lost their crew chief for six races, and lost 50 driver and owner points. I sure didn’t see anyone piling on NASCAR for penalizing this small team. And they claim that it wasn’t their fault because the engine was worked on by Arrington Engines, which sounds awfully familiar to the story Carl Long gave about his illegal engine. Yet still no comments. Why? Because it’s tough to hate on NASCAR for being unfair on a day when they showed that it doesn’t matter who breaks the rules.
Over the last few years we’ve been fed all types of reasons why something was illegal on a race car. We’ve heard rogue crew chiefs, rogue engine shops, and rogue crew members were to blame. But a rogue tow truck driver? Now that takes the cake.
After yesterday’s story about Front Row’s possible infraction at Pocono, we are hearing today that the penalty from NASCAR could be the biggest ever handed down.
When NASCAR makes the announcement later today or tomorrow, expect the penalty to include a $250,000 fine and 300 driver and owner points for Travis Kvapil and owner Bob Jenkins. A suspension for crew chief Steven Lane will also be included.
This penalty tops the sanctions handed down last season to Carl Long’s team after his engine was discovered to be too large at Charlotte.
Like we’ve said here before, NASCAR will always be harshest about infractions dealing with engines, tires, and fuel, and they are obviously using this situation to reinforce that notion.
No word yet on how this will affect the team’s status moving forward. Expect the team to appeal the decision.
I’ve been following the Carl Edwards/Brad Keselowski reaction all week, because I was curious how everyone would respond to the incident. Between Twitter, forums, blog comments, and the writers, I’ve read a lot. Journo weighed in on the topic here on Monday. Some folks have made some really great points, and I can understand most sides of the controversy. What I don’t understand, is those that think this decision by NASCAR is going to somehow turn the drivers into wreck ‘em derby maniacs who now won’t fear the consequences.
This idea that somehow some horrible precedent has now been set in terms of how NASCAR will govern the on track action just isn’t true. The sport’s leadership handles these special situations on a case-by-case basis, and will dole out penalties accordingly. They actually handled this specific incident very similarly to how they’ve handled other recent retaliation situations.
In this country, many courts of law decide cases by precedent. Past decisions do affect how future cases are decided. But guess what? NASCAR isn’t a court of law. They don’t need to take past decisions into account when they are trying to figure out penalties for a special situation. Why? Because absolute consistency isn’t necessarily needed. When Denny Hamlin wrecked Keselowski at Homestead, a one lap penalty was sufficient because Hamlin did what he came to do and NASCAR couldn’t let him get away with it. At Atlanta, Edwards was obviously furious, and he needed to be parked for his own good.
I understand that before the season started, they basically told the drivers to “have at it.” And while this may have played a role in their decision making, they actually went harder on Edwards then they did on Hamlin and Juan Pablo Montoya at Homestead last season; and those wrecks happened before they changed their stance. So trying to say that NASCAR went easy on Edwards because of this new philosophy just doesn’t hold water.
When issues like this arise, it always seems like we hear somebody say that NASCAR needs to lay out a penalty schedule so that every infraction is dealt the same penalty. Well guess what? Just like every other sport, NASCAR penalizes the regular infractions the same all the time. Unapproved adjustments, engine changes, pit road speeding, and a ton of other infractions are dealt with the same way.
But in special situations, like the one we saw in Atlanta, NASCAR must decide penalties on a case-by-case basis. Why? Because there are too many factors that go into what went down, and there is no way for the sanctioning body to be prepared for every possible dust-up. We’ve seen NFL commissioner Roger Goodell handle many different player incidents all separately, and I don’t see anyone calling for his job.
Moving forward, you aren’t going to see drivers wrecking each other and going crazy because Carl Edwards wasn’t suspended for life. There will be no “vigilante justice,” as one writer suggested. Drivers know NASCAR is in charge and that they will rule on events as they see fit. The powers that be have shown plenty of times in the past that if they feel a situation has become out of control, they will step in with harsh penalties to send a message.
As I’ve said before, if Keselowski spins harmlessly through the tri-oval grass, we are never having these discussions. There would be talk about how Keselowski got what was coming to him, and how Edwards overreacted to a racing incident. Endless discussions of precedents and rules and governance would have never entered anyone’s minds.
NASCAR policies often ebb and flow in their enforcement. In the past we’ve seen a sanctioning body that really likes to loosen things up when people start complaining; but when that inevitable watershed event occurs enforcement gets ramped up again.
In true NASCAR form, this season brought us one of those promises of lighter enforcement. They wanted to foster an atmosphere of self-policing (within moderation of course). In response to that just more than a month ago Robin Pemberton looked at the gathered media and said, “Boys, have at it.”
Well Sunday in Atlanta, NASCAR got their wish; the boys had at it. After getting wrecked early in the race, Carl Edwards returned to the track 153 laps down and quite clearly took out the guy who helped him into the wall earlier.
That guy, Brad Keselowski, has made a name for himself in his very short career of getting involved in incidents like this one. Remember the Brad K. v. Denny Hamlin feud just a few months ago? Right or wrong, being aggressive and unapologetic about it is his style.
So with that, it was only a matter of time before an incident like this one occurred and it came as no surprise (to me at least) that Brad K. was involved.
I applauded NASCAR’s move before the season began and I still believe it was a good call. I think this incident though should be a wake up call to everyone in the garage. There’s self-policing and then there’s self-policing. Everyone needs to agree this sort of thing can’t be tolerated. Obviously Carl didn’t mean for Keselowski to get airborne, or expect that happen, but the possibility always exists at 200 mph.
That said though, I have a hard time justifying a suspension, and I’d be surprised if NASCAR issued one (famous last words). Even more, of all people to be calling for someone to get suspended for aggressive driving, it’s almost laughable that person is Brad Keselowski. By all means he deserves to be angry for what resulted from the payback; he could have been seriously injured (thankfully he wasn’t). But if ever there was a situation where that old idiom ‘the pot calling the kettle black’ applies, this is it.
No question, it’s unfortunate this happened. Frankly drivers should know better than to do things like this. While I can’t say what the proper punishment should be here, Robin Pemberton has said NASCAR will evaluate the incident further. If there are additional penalties, we’ll likely hear about them by Tuesday.
So what do you think? Was the retaliation justified? What, if any, should the punishment be for retaliating on track?
I have to commend NASCAR, they really have been listening to all of the sport’s stakeholders and then taking proactive steps to correct things they have identified as problems. Through individual feedback, town hall meetings, and the fan council, the once infallible sanctioning body is realizing that maybe they are capable of making mistakes. We’re getting a spoiler soon and steps have been taken to improve the racing at the Superspeedways (they seem to be working out).
All this is great and I’m happy to see a much more open sanctioning body; in fact I’m excited to see how all these changes pan out. That said I’m beginning to wonder if they’re taking this new found openness a little too far.
Let me step back for a moment. Last week the Bud Shootout ended rather unceremoniously under caution; the result of a green-white-checkered attempt. After this there was the usual grumbling from everybody (but the winner) about the race finishing under caution. Cooler heads tell us the rule is in place because without it, or with more attempts at G-W-C, we end up with a bunch of wrecked racecars and the same result – a race ending under caution.
Obviously though NASCAR felt the need to bend to the pressure and make a change to the “green-white-checkered race procedure” – quickly. So between last Saturday and yesterday NASCAR decided it is now “allowing a maximum of three restart attempts prior to the White Flag under NASCAR’s Green-White-Checkered flag finish. If the leader has taken the White Flag and the caution flag is displayed, the field is frozen and the race will not be restarted.”
While I could be completely off-base here, I think NASCAR is being far too reactionary on something we’ve seen in the past probably won’t work. I’m not alone on both counts. Jeff Gordon said:
“They could do ten green-white-checkereds and we’re still not going to make it to the checkered.”
Mark Martin questioned the rationale behind yet another rule change.
Putting aside the change at hand I think the larger issue is them making changes to established and logical rules depending upon the direction the wind is blowing. I’m a little worried this might become the norm. It’s great they’re listening and making positive changes, but they could stand to give some time to make sure important changes are thoroughly vetted.