NASCAR Puts Itself in a Box, Alli Owens Explains

After NASCAR issued its "have at it, boys" edict, it would be tough to fine someone for, well, having at it. So Carl Edwards got a three-race not-so-double-secret probation for rolling Brad Keselowski at Atlanta.

It seems that few people in the NASCAR paddock were weeping for Keselowski, who apparently is viewed as a kind of Eddie Haskell.

(Note to the youngsters: Eddie was a fictional character on the 1950s TV show Leave it to Beaver who was mischievous and two-faced and often got others into trouble yet always maintained his "Who? Me?" cover.)

Take a look at ARCA's Alli Owens' view on the whole deal, which pretty much matches mine.

If NASCAR wants to stop the goofy crap, they can't just fine people when cars get airborne. If you're in a basketball game and the refs don't call the subtle elbows (which nobody ever admits throwing), pretty soon -- SHOCKER -- you got a fight on the floor. Which is why basketball refs try to call the subtle elbows.

If they don't start calling the subtle, plausibly deniable intentional wrecks, you'll continue to get cars flipping down the track like freshly beheaded chickens. NASCAR needs to decide which it will be.

Comments

[The Speedgeek]

I think it's obvious that NASCAR's already made that decision. They had a prime chance yesterday, a freaking lay-up, to say "this is where the line is with rough driving; don't cross it". This was no subtle elbow, this was a tackling from behind while on a 1-on-zero fast break. Most leagues would have called the flagrant foul, and possibly follwed up with an ejection (parking Carl for the rest of the race doesn't count, because it cost him exactly one place in the final standings, a grand total of 3 points), but NASCAR basically said, "Eh, Brad's not bleeding. No harm, no foul." Now, there's still a question to where that line is, or if it even exists at all.

As far as I (and probably many of the drivers) are concerned, anything short of assaulting somebody with a catch can or stabbing somebody in victory lane is on the table, fully legal, and complicitly endorsed by the sanctioning body. Yeah, there's no way this could ever end badly...

[Mike M]

NASCAR has a way of wanting to control the race outcome. Just like last years Brickyard 400, Juan Montoya was on his way to victory as he was sure to pass for the lead had the race stayed under green. That was more than taken care of by Edwards and NASCAR also got some more promo footage to use with their Talladega shots.

Behind closed doors, Carl most likely got a pat on the back and 'at aboy' for following orders.

[Sean]

Mike, are you suggesting NASCAR ordered Edwards to do that so Montoya wouldn't win? Yes, they're corrupt, but I find that quite ridiculous.

1. I don't think Montoya was going to win anyway. He was about .5 seconds behind, was gaining .1-.2 seconds per lap and there were three laps to go. It would have been close, but catching is not passing, and he would have needed another couple laps for that.

2. I think NASCAR probably wants Montoya to win due to "Drive for Diversity" and stuff. He wasn't the first driver to get penalized for speeding while in contention for the win.

Very, very bad precedent, but I'm not surprised. When I first heard that awful expression "Have at it boys" I knew nothing good would result...

I don't get why minor things in the pits get penalized so severely while much, much more significant on the track are NEVER penalized. Or why say Ricky Rudd was stripped of the win after a relatively minor bump on Davey Allison but wasn't penalized at all for punting Jeff Gordon hard into the wall clearly intentionally in the '94 fall Charlotte race.

Pressdog, Edwards is the one who is usually called the Eddie Haskell of NASCAR. Keselowski is popular among a lot of old-time fans (especially Earnhardt fans sick of his son) for having a take-no-prisoners style or whatever, but I don't like him at all. Most people thought Edwards was a phony before this. So it's not Edwards's popularity that got him off the hook. His sponsors, more likely. Aflac is I believe the official insurance company, and sadly, that matters, given Tony Stewart's history of no-calls.

Probably one part of it is that they actually want to hype this stuff at Bristol waiting for the retaliation (like Brad will retaliate on a short track? He'll probably wait until freaking Talladega). I'm going to try my hardest not to watch Bristol, because it's a track I've always hated, considering punting has historically the only way to pass...at least in the concrete era.

[The Speedgeek]

I'd agree with Sean. There's no conspiracy against Montoya. I'm thinking they proabbly WANT him to win, in order to attract a huge new target demographic. (Ooh! "Target" demo! I made a pun!) He got caught speeding at Indy last year, OVER the grace 5 mph that they put on top of the limit. That's just a simple rules infraction that Ganassi could have avoided by having Juan drive 100 RPM slower (or do the cars have speed limiters? I can't remember). I'm generally a NASCAR conspiracy theorist (like Ricky Craven taking the pole at his home track after returning from a head injury, and then fading directly to the back of the field at the start...come on) but there is no way that NASCAR sent Edwards out there to take out Keselowski to prevent Montoya from winning. There were too many moving parts (track positions of all cars, just getting Carl's car fixed enough to go back out, about 15 other factors) for that to have been the case. This was one lone gunman, working alone in his blind stupidity.

As Sean put it, they're a corrupt organization, but that's a bridge too far for me. I'm with Sean, too, in that I'm going to limit my NASCAR exposure for the rest of the year to about a dozen or two laps per month. At least F1 and IndyCar are back now to fill my time.

[Mike M]

Sean, I am thowing the Montoya thing out there. It's only my opinion; far from truth most likely.

It's just that sometimes I wonder.

[rj]

My take on this is pretty simple, true for NASCAR as true as it is for midgets or Indycars or F1 or sportscars:

Rule #1 of Auto Racing: Never turn a guy on a straightaway.

Edwards was obviously tiffed from the incident early in the race and the fact Keselowski was the guy that flipped him over into the crash fence at Talladega obviously played a part in it. Edwards' reaction pretty much told it all: "well, I didn't mean for him to flip over". :D

Edwards being Ford's #1 driver was going to be looked at more leniently than...David Reutimann. He should've turned Keselowski in a corner and "gotten loose".

"I'm generally a NASCAR conspiracy theorist (like Ricky Craven taking the pole at his home track after returning from a head injury, and then fading directly to the back of the field at the start...come on)"

Come on, there've been far more blatant examples than that. In Craven's case it didn't affect the end result any, and if I remember correctly he was in a Hendrick car at the time.

[rj]

"Keselowski is popular among a lot of old-time fans (especially Earnhardt fans sick of his son) for having a take-no-prisoners style or whatever..."

WHAT?

The guy's done nothing in Cup except win a clusterf*ck at Talladega where he flipped over a guy and pretty much threw NASCAR's restrictor plate rules in their face saying "I'm not allowed to go below the double yellow line". How many fans does he seriously have? Any fans he does have are similar to Truex, a glorified midfielder that the NASCAR fanbase thinks more of because "he's Junior's buddy!". In Keselowski's case, it's because he drove for Junior in Nationwide.

[Sean]

Okay, read the discussions on racing-reference.info here:

http://racing-reference.info/comments?id=2009-36&s=W

97. Eric wrote:

"I am a Matt Kenseth fan, not a Dale Jr. fan. I am fan of Brad Keselowski though. Brad has some the same characteristics as Dale Earnhardt Sr did as a driver. Kevin Harvick, Denny Hamlin, and Kyle Busch don't have the calmness about them when they wrecked someone like Dale Sr. did. Brad has that calmness about him that the drivers I mentioned don't."

99. DaleSrFanForever wrote:

"Bingo. Those three have to make a big commotion about it and TRY to act like badasses. Brad just brushes it off like its nothing. He isn't trying to be anything other than who he is. Harvick and Kyle try to act like they are the successors to Dale Sr's throne of the King of Badassness (or at least Harvick did before he fell off the face of the Earth), but they are so pathetic it isn't even funny. And hell, look at Diva Hamlin. He just had a career year in the CUP Series and he's more worried about a full time Nationwide driver. That shows you how easily he can be rattled. He made a joke at the awards banquet about always having to congratulate JJ on winning the championship, but there is a reason for that. Do you ever see JJ getting into it with people that don't ultimately matter at the time for the championship? Nope."

There are QUITE A FEW glowing comments about Brad there and on other pages on that site. I don't agree with them. I don't like him at all, but this thread I have linked especially indicates that he is popular with a lot of old-school fans. Probably not with the kind of people who would be posting on IndyCar blogs though...

And the most blatant NASCAR fix was clearly Junior's win in the 2001 Pepsi 400 when he was passing long drafts by himself supposedly on three-quarters throttle after a series of wicker-bill races where there were 40+ lead changes because there was no separation in the pack. Mm hmm.