Nascar is back

BTW, a little backroom justice may be in order in the coming races if NASCAR doesn't get a handle on it.

Stewart's aggressive driving and lack of the "give and take" he demands of everyone else put two good drivers out of contention... though Gordon's come back was pretty impressive before his final stroke of bad "luck".

He ran over people all day... a little payback may be soon to come.

 

Seems rather hypocritcal of you to be complaining about Stewart and his actions (which were entirely wrong) and then calling for some one to do the same to him in coming races?

 

I agree. If the penalty is sitting out a race, it will stop.

 

What do you mean by backroom justice? Are you talking about somebody (re: Kenseth) taking Tony out on the track? </font>[/QUOTE]Yep.

NASCAR was founded by bootleggers. The "respect" that if you took a guy out that guy would escalate used to keep guys in line. If a couple of guys... say Kennseth and Gordon would agree with a "wink" to take Stewart out safely in a couple of races, he'd get his head straight realizing that he can't bully everyone and get away with it.

NASCAR will do nothing as long as no one gets seriously hurt and it promotes interest and passion about the sport.

Wrecks are part of it. Bumping and banging and aggressive driving are part of it. Occasionally, a guy's recklessness is part of it. But when a guy becomes a bully like Stewart has, someone will have to reign him in or else someone really will get killed like he hypocritcally warned. If NASCAR won't do it then it is left up to the drivers.

I came into yesterday being partly sold on Stewart's PR campaign... no more. He is still the bully he always was with no regard for anyone else's life or for the rules.

 

Seems rather hypocritcal of you to be complaining about Stewart and his actions (which were entirely wrong) and then calling for some one to do the same to him in coming races? </font>[/QUOTE]NASCAR has almost always been built on "Old West", eye for an eye justice.

Not hypocritical at all. If you give, you get. Stewart did way more than his share of giving yesterday.

One of the announcer's came dangerously close to fairness when he said that if Stewart had lifted the way he should have the wreck with Gordon wouldn't have occurred. Gordon showed alot of decency by accepting part of the blame himself. Stewart cursed over the radio and blamed everything on Gordon... then came back later and blamed his flagrant endangerment of 17 on the 17.

 

As far as Knauss is concerned, I am pretty sure I remember a similar infraction by 8 a few years ago... they were allowed to fix it and go to the back- no suspensions or fines.

 

You cannot have it both ways. If it is wrong for Stewart to do that, it is wrong for all of them.

Stewart was completely wrong. He should have been penalized more.

 

That's not the way vigilante justice works... and vigilante justice has always been the code of discipline for NASCAR.

I'm not suggesting that I should have it both ways... Stewart has committed an offense against two guys by his recklessly aggressive driving. He has violated the code by a) not giving and taking and b) by risking a guys life by intentionally wrecking him at 180 mph.

NASCAR hasn't, can't, and won't discipline him effectively. In spite of his PR, he doesn't respect them and won't unless they seriously suspend him for races.

A wreck or two that cost him money and points will either escalate the battle further or make him realize that he can't bully everyone.

 

I don't think that Stewart was OBLIGATED to cut Gordon any slack, but he would have been WISE to, since it seriously hurt his chances to win the race.

I don't think that Kenseth came down on Stewart. I think they got close and Stewart got the air taken off his car and almost spun. Stewart would have been wise to leave Kenseth alone and not wreck him. Wrecking him put him in a position where penalties hurt his chances of winning the race.

Stewart is a VERY skilled driver. However, at key moments he loses him temper, clouding his judgement and hurting his own chances of winning.

 

Scott, you and I will just have to disagree. That may be the way they have handled things in the past. But that does not make it the right way to handle things. All it does it put more people's lives at risk and cause more accidents and more aggression.

I agree. I do not think he was obligated to cut him any slack. And as ccr pointed out I do not think this was one of the situations of Tony's agressive driving. There were plenty of others though.

As a big fan of Stewart, I agree with you. It is frustrating to see a driver with so much talent resort to such things. He does not need to do those things to win and be successful. I hope he gets his head straight for the rest of the year.

OTOH, it is amazing to me that we do not see more of that stuff. Goodness, you put all of those guys with all of that testosterone in that close of space for that length of time and tell them to race after the pot of gold and what do you expect? And then to top it all off after they have went through all of that for a few hours they get a microphone stuffed in their face and asked to respond

I guess that is part of the reason why I love it so much. Looking forward to next week in California!

 

Just a question. How many races did Dale Earnhardt win and didn't put his right front fender into the left rear quarter panel?
Now onto the Stewart deal Gordon went into him. On the other deal with Kenseth, Kenseth said he might have hit Stewart but he didn't mean to and if Stewart came from as high as he was down to hit Kenseth he was wrong. However I heard in SC yesterday with an interview with Cale Yarborough and he said Tony was hit. He said to come down that far something was wrong. I don't know if he saw him get hit or was going by how he came across and down. I didn't see him get hit, I had it on the radio. They said he was pushed and then came down. My wife saw it on TV and she said she didn't think he was hit but wasn't for sure.
I think Matt wouldn't want to mess with Tony off the track, Tony is to much like his hero(A.J., don't mind a good fight.
I bet Joe is talking to Tony now.

 

OK by me so long as he doesn't whine next time someone like Kennseth doesn't give him racing room... or worse endangers their life by intentionally wrecking them at 180 mph.

I don't like his attitude but Stewart is probably the most talented driver in NASCAR with or without his temper.

 

Not really. When the disrespect and feeling of immortality gets out of hand is when the real risks occur. Stewart respects no one... not the drivers, not NASCAR. NASCAR isn't going to use meaningful discipline on the guy. Surprisingly, Gibbs hasn't.

It is left up to the drivers before he really does kill somebody.

NASCAR was built on two things that still dominate the sport. One is commercialism. They've never pretended it wasn't part of it. Second was that Old West, bar room redneck, bootlegger style of justice.

Short of NASCAR pulling cars off the track or suspending drivers for races for doing what Stewart did... there is no other source for disciplining the guy than driver payback... and I suspect that its coming.

I agree. I do not think he was obligated to cut him any slack. And as ccr pointed out I do not think this was one of the situations of Tony's agressive driving. There were plenty of others though.</font>[/QUOTE] The next time your driver has his rear corner panel on a guys front bumper and the guy fails to respect the pass and give him room but instead wrecks him... sing the same tune.

 

Again, we just have to disagree here. By other drivers agreeing to take out Stewart they are not only putting Stewarts life at risk, but they are putting their own and other drivers lives at risk. It would be better handled for NASCAR and Gibbs to sit down with Tony and anyone else that needs it and say "This is going to stop, you do it again and you sit out 3 races." Just because NASCAR has always done it one way does not make it right.

Sounds you like you are just crying over spilled milk here because pretty boy Gordon did not get a chance to win the race.

If the roles were reveresed I would be saying the same thing.

Oh well, on to California!

 

Hey, we finally agree on something

 

Again, we just have to disagree here. By other drivers agreeing to take out Stewart they are not only putting Stewarts life at risk, but they are putting their own and other drivers lives at risk.</font>[/QUOTE] Pure mathematics/probability. "Is my life and fortune more endangered by a guy who is completely selfish, inconsiderate, and reckless... or by taking that guy out a few times to humble him?" If the drivers don't get Stewart back in line then we know NASCAR won't until someone gets hurt or killed. Fan hatred for drivers sells the series every bit as much as love for them so NASCAR has no vested interest in putting him on the side lines.

Maybe... but that just isn't realistic. The secret not talked about is that it would be sell more to have a feud that took Stewart out of a races than the kind of discipline you describe.

"Right" in this case is in the eye of the beholder. The old NASCAR had redneck chivalry- almost an honor code amongst rogues. It worked... what they are doing now isn't working.

Sounds you like you are just crying over spilled milk here because pretty boy Gordon did not get a chance to win the race. </font>[/QUOTE] Not really. I pull for Gordon but up until the last wreck that took him out at the end- the wreck with Stewart and Gordon's subsequent come back had given me a good feeling about his team. It looked more like the Gordon of Evernham days.

Gordon had taken an aero-broken car that couldn't restart due to no 3rd gear and driven it into the top 10... Stewart might ought to make a habit out of taking Gordon out if he can't stand the competition.

Seldom are the roles reversed though. Alot of people don't like Gordon... but you can hardly claim that he is a particularly dirty driver. He isn't.