Carl Edwards vs Brad Keselowski: The Poll
#1
Posted 08 March 2010 - 16:59
Feel free to argue with the format of the poll, the lack of choices, etc. But I just want to see a simple tally of what side of the fence people fall on. Use the text of your post to express grey areas, reservations, shades of meaning, etc. But as far as the poll, vote honestly.
I'll go first: no blood, no foul. Sure, coulda done it a bit more gracefully, and a bit less dangerously but in the end, no one got hurt. I'm with Carl on this one. Not advocating what he did, I think he did it in too heavy handed a manner, but what happened happened. Hope Brad learned his lesson.
Advertisement
#2
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:04
I'm going to keep this simple. I'd like to see a simple breakdown--whose side are you on? Keselowski got what he deserved (it's OK to have reservations that maybe Carl was a little too eager to punt him at too high of a speed), or Carl was totally out of line.
Feel free to argue with the format of the poll, the lack of choices, etc. But I just want to see a simple tally of what side of the fence people fall on. Use the text of your post to express grey areas, reservations, shades of meaning, etc. But as far as the poll, vote honestly.
I'll go first: no blood, no foul. Sure, coulda done it a bit more gracefully, and a bit less dangerously but in the end, no one got hurt. I'm with Carl on this one. Not advocating what he did, I think he did it in too heavy handed a manner, but what happened happened. Hope Brad learned his lesson.
Polls never work.
#3
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:07
in the post incident interview both had a "guilty face" and carl edwards said something along the lines of "we both have this thing going on.... i didnt think it would be this bad".... i say ban them both and let them carry out their "thing" off track.
this is not ice hockey.
that car + parts and shrapnell flying off could have hit spectators.
and if someone says... well there is no precedent for punishing drivers that punish eachother on track, i say let NASCAR put a precedent.
in the post interviews they both showed zero remorse and responsibilities regarding safety for spectators.
Edited by glorius&victorius, 08 March 2010 - 17:07.
#4
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:07
and if someone says... well there is no precedent for punishing drivers that punish eachother on track, i say let NASCAR put a precedent.
Ted Musgrave got banned in 2007.
#5
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:10
Ted Musgrave got banned in 2007.
then let nascar apply that.
and this concerns not the drivers only but especially the crew chiefs!
i can imagine sitting in that car and racing someone and someone doing something nasty to you and you want to get back... right... i can understand the "heat of the moment" argument...
but the freakin crew chiefs they have the bigger picture of things... they know their drivers, they know the emotional state they can get it... they should remind the drivers to back off...
Edited by glorius&victorius, 08 March 2010 - 17:11.
#6
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:23
but the freakin crew chiefs they have the bigger picture of things... they know their drivers, they know the emotional state they can get it... they should remind the drivers to back off...
A) The crews are often in on it and B) The driver isn't going to talk about it on the radio if he's serious about actually doing it, especially if the crew aren't in on it already.
#7
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:27
ban them both for two races!
in the post incident interview both had a "guilty face" and carl edwards said something along the lines of "we both have this thing going on.... i didnt think it would be this bad".... i say ban them both and let them carry out their "thing" off track.
this is not ice hockey.
that car + parts and shrapnell flying off could have hit spectators.
and if someone says... well there is no precedent for punishing drivers that punish eachother on track, i say let NASCAR put a precedent.
in the post interviews they both showed zero remorse and responsibilities regarding safety for spectators.
agreed.
I didn't vote because there isn't an option for being against both of them. Besides, intentionally crashing isn't good racing anyway.
Edited by Nustang70, 08 March 2010 - 17:31.
#8
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:30
were/are a LOT more guys out there pretty pissed at BK's driving, and worst of all, lack of respect for his fellow drivers.
As someone else posted in the race thread, if krashalotski had not gone flying, there would not be this hullabaloo.
This kid, no wait, punk, has had it coming for a while now. NASCAR warned him, the other drivers warned him and I'm sure his team warned him.
All of which went in one ear and right out the other.
Personally, I'm a bit shocked at the incident being as violent as it was, but I'm *not* shocked it happened, the writing was on the wall for quite
some time that this kid was gonna get nailed.
#9
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:37
this is not ice hockey.
If it was they would have already been suspended for quite a long time.
#10
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:42
The punishment should be that they have their 2010 salaries docked and donated to Ken Anderson
Edited by Gilles12, 08 March 2010 - 17:42.
#11
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:43
#12
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:49
#13
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:49
Any deliberate contact, no matter what the circumstances, at high speed is not and never has been allowed in any form of racing. Edwards' comments just make me feel even more angry towards him "I didn't mean for it to end like that", well you should have considered that before hand, shouldn't you? It doesn't take a genious to realise that that could have happened and did.
He could have killed somebody, whether Brad or (heaven forbid) a spectator. The incident that I believe this stemmed from with the contact between Brad and Carl last year was a RACING ACCIDENT. Brad never meant to take him out, but Edwards did here and has said so.
I don't follow NASCAR, but from where I'm sitting it's totally clear. Ban him for a minimum of one race or go the whole hog and for the whole season. I can't believe he's even allowed to race those cars with the maturity levels he's shown. Getting "revenge" is something you'd expect primary school kids to want to do, not professional racing drivers.
He wrecked Brad's race AND Brad's car for something that won't stand up. Then again, knowing NASCAR and the bias they have shown to particular drivers before *cough* Dale Jnr *cough* I wouldn't be totally suprised if he got off lightly.
Edited by Jamesy, 08 March 2010 - 18:15.
#14
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:52
Totally uncalled for. Edwards is a ****. He doesn't deserve to be racing those cars at those speeds.
Any deliberate contact, no matter what the circumstances, at high speed is not and never has been allowed in any form of racing.....
I don't follow NASCAR, but from where I'm sitting it's totally clear.....
Never been allowed?
I don't follow NASCAR...
Obviously.
#15
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:56
#16
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:56
The same should have happened to BK last year.
High speed racing has no place for "getting even". Much too dangerous for drivers and fans.
If NASCAR would have come down hard on these guys last year it would have never happened.
I blame the officials.
#17
Posted 08 March 2010 - 17:59
Edwards should be suspended for 3 races.
The same should have happened to BK last year.
High speed racing has no place for "getting even". Much too dangerous for drivers and fans.
If NASCAR would have come down hard on these guys last year it would have never happened.
I blame the officials.
It surprises me that was not nearly this much of an uproar when the exact same thing happened in the last race of the year between Montoya and Stewart.
No calls for suspensions. No calls for banning.
No beef between the drivers involved, in fact two weeks later they were both laughing about it.
#18
Posted 08 March 2010 - 18:02
#19
Posted 08 March 2010 - 18:06
Advertisement
#20
Posted 08 March 2010 - 18:15
There was wrecking Stewart at Pocono several years ago on pit road in retaliation for an incident TS caused that Edwards inadvertently became involved in:
He also ran into Earnhardt Jr. on the cooldown lap of a Nationwide series race at Michigan, almost flattening his arm in the process, and there was the well-publicized feud with Kenseth where Biffle and other Roush personnel didn't exactly take his side.
Edited by John B, 08 March 2010 - 18:16.
#21
Posted 08 March 2010 - 18:17
If Edwards gets a huge fine, I'm pretty sure there will be other drivers in the paddock sliding him a few bucks for it, no one was shocked at all and there
were/are a LOT more guys out there pretty pissed at BK's driving, and worst of all, lack of respect for his fellow drivers.
As someone else posted in the race thread, if krashalotski had not gone flying, there would not be this hullabaloo.
This kid, no wait, punk, has had it coming for a while now. NASCAR warned him, the other drivers warned him and I'm sure his team warned him.
All of which went in one ear and right out the other.
Personally, I'm a bit shocked at the incident being as violent as it was, but I'm *not* shocked it happened, the writing was on the wall for quite
some time that this kid was gonna get nailed.
If Keselowski was killed, what would your view have been? Self regulation never works, period. It will always be abused by some and defenders by others who'll argue the one bad egg defense. I've personally had to identify a friend who died in a car crash when it flipped onto its roof. He was basically compressed in his car when he died. It was only then I grasped and understood what multiple injuries meant. I heard the term used many times, but it never meant anything first hand, until he died. Broken neck, crushed sternum and the list of injuries went on. If it wasn't his neck, any one of his 5 other serious injuries would have killed him. As soon as Keselowski crashed on his roof, my heart was in my mouth, because his side of the roof appeared extremely low at first glance. Thankfully he was able to walk out of it alive. But listening to some of the comments on this issue, some people have completely overlooked the safety aspect. A 2kg lump of debris flying into the crowd would have caused serious injury. I'm sure if this hypothetical piece of debris had smashed into a relative of yours who was watching this race, you would not be so understanding of Edwards "payback" to Keselowski. If another driver crashed into Keselowski's car and been killed, would you still be understanding of Edwards maneuver? NASCAR is dangerous enough under normal conditions.
Crashes by there very nature are unpredictable. Sometimes the most harmless looking 50MPH incident causes a fatality and then you'll see a 180MPH mega-crash, with a million pieces flying off the car and the driver walks out without a scratch. Drivers causing a crash by accident you cant legislate for, but when it is intentional, not only does the offending driver have no regard for the driver he is wrecking, but he also has no regard for the other drivers nor the spectators. I agree, if Keselowski never went airbourne I would not have given the incident a second thought. But sometimes these crashes bring things home and reminds us of the dangers and especially not to be complacent. This was such a crash. IMO NASCAR must act.
Edited by The Ragged Edge, 08 March 2010 - 18:19.
#22
Posted 08 March 2010 - 18:18
Cos no cars went upside down.It surprises me that was not nearly this much of an uproar when the exact same thing happened in the last race of the year between Montoya and Stewart.
No calls for suspensions. No calls for banning.
Also, the damage to Stewart was more minor than the initial damage to Montoya. Tony Stewart finished on the lead lap still at the end of the race, and Montoya was tens of laps down, even before the penalty (I think he was held for a lap or two). In this case Edwards was still circulating and Keselowski was done for the day.
You might also argue that Montoya did it way more artfully than Edwards did, speed aside.
#23
Posted 08 March 2010 - 19:20
#24
Posted 08 March 2010 - 20:05
#25
Posted 08 March 2010 - 20:08
#26
Posted 08 March 2010 - 20:21
Punting on a 20 mph road course hairpin would be equally rude but much less dangerous for spectators, certainly a better option if the drivers are so kranky..Cos no cars went upside down.
#27
Posted 08 March 2010 - 20:29
#28
Posted 08 March 2010 - 20:35
#29
Posted 08 March 2010 - 20:36
#30
Posted 08 March 2010 - 20:42
Of course what Edwards did is wrong, but it's exactly what the WWF of racing is looking for. Next time a car flips into the stands they'll probably just put up a few more layers of chain link fence.
#31
Posted 08 March 2010 - 20:44
Only Kurt Busch, his team mate, and only because he doesn't like to see Penskes equipment tore up...pretty weak support for krashalotski TBHHow many current Nascar drivers have come out and criticised Edwards for this move?
#32
Posted 08 March 2010 - 20:44
#33
Posted 08 March 2010 - 20:46
Actually they are just taking the wing off and putting back on the spoiler, which in NASCAR's POV will keep the COT on the ground.I believe the problem here is that crashes are pretty lucrative (just take a look at some of the comments here, the less mentally endowed love this stuff), as is the drama behind them. NASCAR is turning away money if they hand out any serious penalties, while fines and docked points only add to the drama.
Of course what Edwards did is wrong, but it's exactly what the WWF of racing is looking for. Next time a car flips into the stands they'll probably just put up a few more layers of chain link fence.
#34
Posted 08 March 2010 - 21:24
I mean if someone like schumacher get's haunted all his life about things like jerez 97 etc which he actually did to either win the championship or not, then surely this is even worse. Or is there a difference between F1 and Nascar (more normal in Nascar to wreck other people)?
#35
Posted 08 March 2010 - 21:33
#36
Posted 08 March 2010 - 21:36
I find it amazing that so many people actually defend Edwards in this.
I mean if someone like schumacher get's haunted all his life about things like jerez 97 etc which he actually did to either win the championship or not, then surely this is even worse. Or is there a difference between F1 and Nascar (more normal in Nascar to wreck other people)?
Ok then, let's put things in perspective: before Jerez -97, had the word Villeneuve become a swearing word on everyone's lips due to him getting involved in many incidents? And if so, did Villeneuve escape any serious punishment for his collisions?
Edited by Arska, 08 March 2010 - 21:37.
#37
Posted 08 March 2010 - 21:48
#38
Posted 08 March 2010 - 21:57
I find it amazing that so many people actually defend Edwards in this.
I mean if someone like schumacher get's haunted all his life about things like jerez 97 etc which he actually did to either win the championship or not, then surely this is even worse. Or is there a difference between F1 and Nascar (more normal in Nascar to wreck other people)?
You're right, there's a huge difference between the two series and I think that difference is evident in the reactions posted within this forum. You really can't view either series through its analogue's lens.
#39
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:02
Advertisement
#40
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:04
With all the road-rage that is going on on our freeways, NASCAR should use this is an example to punish this kind of behavior, and show that they feel responsibility for how their sport influences the youth who are watching.
#41
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:10
why brad was not given any harsh penalties until now (if he deserved) should also be dealt within nascar.
but this has gone too far now
#42
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:23
So, what are your views on attempted murder?I'll go first: no blood, no foul.
#43
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:23
Yes, they let drivers "police" one another, but not like this. This was different.
I think Carl Edwards could use some therapy-- I am not completely kidding. His ability to come off as friendly and happy and then do something completely insane like that is concerning. Does he have some anger management issues or something? I seriously have questions about his mental stability. At the very least, I have lost all faith in his judgment. What a disturbing incident. And just to cap it all off, it was with three to go. It was incredibly disrespectful to everyone else in the race. Just an awful, awful move.
#44
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:33
If he had been killed? What would have happened? Of course no one wants that. It would be horrible. But viewer ratings would sky-rocket. Sad but true. But I dont believe its possible to be killed in those cars anymore. I really dont. Unless someone starts racing in the opposite direction or something.
#45
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:38
If he had been killed? What would have happened? Of course no one wants that. It would be horrible. But viewer ratings would sky-rocket. Sad but true. But I dont believe its possible to be killed in those cars anymore. I really dont. Unless someone starts racing in the opposite direction or something.
I tell you what would have happened, Edwards would be up on a a manslaughter, possibly a murder charge.
That's a great image for your sport right there.
#46
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:38
Everyone last year was waiting for the Homestead race as everyone who watched it knew it was going to be Denny Hamlin giving Brad K some payback for all the times during the season he had crashed Hamlin.
Hamlin had promised it after he had been crashed out by Brad the week before.
After Hamlin had spun Brad, his crew chief said this about Hamlin 'that boy will never learn he didn't do it good enough', Brad replies 'that was fun'.
So now Carl did do it good enough or too good and Brad is crying.
#47
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:43
Everybody who is calling for banning should find some testosterone. People want to see at least one big crash at every race. Its not good, but its the truth. Besides, Keselowski had it coming. Unfortunate that he flipped over but it was action on the track and we are talking about it now. As long as the cars are as safe as they are, then Nascar needs incidents like this from time to time. I would have done the same if I was Carl. I wouldnt be aiming for a flip of course but neither was he.
If he had been killed? What would have happened? Of course no one wants that. It would be horrible. But viewer ratings would sky-rocket. Sad but true. But I dont believe its possible to be killed in those cars anymore. I really dont. Unless someone starts racing in the opposite direction or something.
I hate all the crashes and cautions in Nascar. Not everybody needs to see crashes and restarts every 30 laps to be entertained.
I stopped watching Nascar regularly in 04 so I don't know what kind of racer Brad is but of the 3 incident between him and Carl, all 3 were caused by Carl's incompetence and stupidity.
Edited by gincarnated, 08 March 2010 - 22:43.
#48
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:50
Slight difference, like about a thousand kilos and open wheel/open cockpit vs. enclosed wheel/enclosed cockpit.Or is there a difference between F1 and Nascar (more normal in Nascar to wreck other people)?
This type of thing has been going on for fifty years in NASCAR.
It is well known in NASCAR that krasholotski had ruined a LOT of peoples races, and a lot of them were innocent bystanders.
He had a bill that was overdue. He's been using his car as a battering ram for two years now.
NASCAR told him to stop it. He didn't.
The drivers told him to stop it. He didn't.
I'm sure his team told him to stop it. He didn't.
Unfortunately yesterdays incident got his car into the air, if it hadn't gotten air under it, Edwards would have gotten a
Standing O from nearly everyone in the pits, and we wouldn't be seeing the whinging from the casual NASCAR fan in here today.
#49
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:51
Edited by Denier, 08 March 2010 - 22:52.
#50
Posted 08 March 2010 - 22:53
I tell you what would have happened, Edwards would be up on a a manslaughter, possibly a murder charge.
That's a great image for your sport right there.
Murder I doubt, involuntary manslaughter maybe. NASCAR could also fall foul of criminally negligent manslaughter because they have endorsed such acts before or have not taken action for previous acts when it may be ruled it was their duty to do so.
Edited by PassWind, 08 March 2010 - 23:40.