Guests - If You want access to member only forums on HSO. You will gain access only when you sign-in or Sign-Up on HotSpotOutdoors.

It's easy - LOOK UPPER right menu.

Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
jwhjr

Busch and Edwards have to play nice

22 posts in this topic

This ought to get things going a little more...

Busch, Edwards placed on probation for Bristol antics

By NASCAR.COM

August 27, 2008

12:07 PM EDT

-NASCAR announced on Wednesday that it has placed Kyle Busch and Carl Edwards on probation for the next six races in the Sprint Cup Series, as a result of their on-track incident Saturday night at the conclusion of the race at Bristol.

Busch and Edwards violated Section 12-4-A (actions detrimental to stock car racing; hitting another competitor's car after the race had concluded) of the 2008 NASCAR rule book.

The probation takes effect beginning with this weekend's event at Fontana, Calif.

Executing an adroit bump and run on Lap 470, Edwards passed for the lead and pulled away over the final 30 laps, winning by 1.969 seconds over Busch.

"It's one of those deals where I couldn't get by him, I couldn't get by him, and I just had to ask myself, 'Would he do that to me?' Edwards said after doing his trademark backflip off the car in Victory Lane. "And he has before, so that's the way it goes.''

Unhappy with the way Edwards passed him for the lead, Busch bumped Edwards' No. 99 Ford after the checkered flag. Edwards bumped back, and Busch's No. 18 Toyota went spinning (watch video).

"He'll always come back and say he's sorry," Busch said. "He did it at Milwaukee and he's done it a few other times. It's just his normal fashion. That's fine. I've grown to know that now.

"You know, to pass a guy, to hit him getting into the corners ... is very tired. But that's what he did. ... I had been getting into the corner light all day, and I don't know, maybe I over-braked and drove myself right back into his nose."

NASCAR summoned Busch to the sanctioning body's transporter after the race.

"Let's make it real clear -- I'm not apologizing for it," Edwards said, citing several instances where he felt like Busch took him out of races to gain positions. "We're even.

"They keep talking about rivalries,'' Edwards added. "We might have one now.''

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now this is just not right in my mind Busch has gotten away with takin alot of people out of races all year and one little bump at bristol by Edwards to get by him and nascar puts them both on probation.Busch should of been on probation way back after the 4 race of the season when his stupid driving took out allmost half the field.All i can say is bristol has allways been a bangum up race track if your slow a little bump to get you out of the way should be ok as long as your not putting someone into the wall been that way allways will be.To put Edwards on probation in my mind was a big mistake by nascar he did nothing wrong the rat came affter him after the race ended like the rat poor driver he is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regardless, Edwards still spun Wild Thing.

Everybody knows Carl is a dink. Just ask Matt Kenseth

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then I have to ask why The Rat wasn't placed on probation after he purposely spun the #88 on the last lap at Richmond? If not probation, at least a black flag for rough driving at the time of the incident?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm pretty sure it wasn't the contact during the race that got Carl in trouble (or shrub for that matter). It was Carl spinning him out after prickly bush ran into him on the cool down lap. I heard him on the radio yesterday saying he fully expected a penalty for that and didn't disagree that he'd deserve one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree Lawdog, the play after the race was more than likely the issue.

At least Edwards admitted that he was wrong, something the kid probably would not do.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the whole thing was great! Did you hear the crowd go nuts when it happened? Now that is racing. Give the fans what they want. I guess I don't think anybody should be penalized. I just thought it was good PR.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was good PR thats why they did it.

If they had not done anything and let it fly no one would be talking about it 5 days after it happened and they also waiting until Wed. to hand out the news. In the past we hear about it on Tuesday?

Nascar needs somthing for the fans to talk about right now in a year where the cars are junk (IMO) and the big name guy's are struggeling the ratings are down attendance is down Nascar needs something to help them threw the "down time" and get the fans pumped up about the chase.

There is my 2 cents.

Sifty

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to letting the boys be boys?

Is Busch on his first probation of the year, or is he now on double probation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What happened to letting the boys be boys?

I agree.

Guess it's a kinder and gentler NASCAR for 2008.

No rivalry after all. (yawn)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Everybody knows Carl is a dink. Just ask Matt Kenseth

Carl's darn lucky Ol Matty did'nt slap the tar outta him !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ha! I'd like to see him try and do that. Would make for good entertainment, but Carl would knock the cheese right out of 'ol Matty. By the time he came to, he'd be a finely aged cheese! whistle

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ol, Matty will have Carl doing back flips alright.

Whoopin a man aint nuthin to him !!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought the mantra at the beginning of the season for NASCAR was to let boys be boys? They wanted to spice it up a little due to their plummeting ratings and attendance.

My dad was at the Bristol race(s) this past weekend and it sounds like he had a blast at his first NASCAR event. I had the opportunity to go and passed on it for various reasons. I dozed off during the race so it's not the Bristol of old that's for sure. It still would have been a hoot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally Posted By: NAPAFISH
Everybody knows Carl is a dink. Just ask Matt Kenseth

Carl's darn lucky Ol Matty did'nt slap the tar outta him !!

Carls a pretty big, athletic guy. Matts fairly skinny. I don't actually think too many guys would mess with Edwards that race with him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Carls a pretty big, athletic guy. Matts fairly skinny. I don't actually think too many guys would mess with Edwards that race with him.

Thanks, I had no idea. gringrin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was pretty obvious Edwards had the faster car, after all Busch had 30 some laps after the pass to catch him and put Edwards in the wall and couldn't. The antics after the flag was a Nascar version of roadrage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ol, Matty will have Carl doing back flips alright.

Whoopin a man aint nuthin to him !!

I dont care who ya are now that theres funny! Two times come to mind--- the look on Matty's face when Little Jeffey pushed him and the same look when Couzin Carl faked like he was gonna put an A$$ whopin on em grin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0



  • Posts

    •     I believe you said it was "libertarian" drivel, actually, so you dismissed it out of hand...          
    •   You posted about neither.     But if you would read the article, my commentary and TJ's commentary you would know that's not really what the article is about.     You have to be kidding, right? Just about everyone who has an opinion on politics at all is this sort of person. Do you look at social media at all?
    •     Ok, now getting back to whether Trump will win the War on Drugs, do you think he will take any steps at all to decriminalize drugs, such as reclassifying marijuana, and recognizing state laws and programs designed to move towards the decriminalization of drugs?   Or do you think he will take steps to protect vested interests, such as prisons and the pharmaceutical. industry?   Just going off his rhetoric and his choice for a drug czar, I'm guessing he much prefers the latter, and will end up spending a bunch of taxpayer's money, and actually lose ground by continuing on with the brute force/criminalization approach.        
    • Because at the time, I don't have anything better to do.   I posted about the article, and you wanted to talk about the topic.  I posted about the topic and you want to discuss the article.    Which is it?     I support a particular candidate because their positions, taken as a whole, are preferable to me as compared to the other candidate(s).   In a few years I get to do it over.     I don't think there are really that many ardent "rah rah for my party" type folks out there, in spite of what we see on TV, or the occasional people we meet.     So the article is basically drivel, as I said before, based on a false premise.   
    • Borch I just signed up Ryan, Morgan, and me but I only see my name listed in the summary. Do my kids not show up because they don't have hso usernames?  Or did I not enter it right?     Please let me know how to fix it and I'll do so.  Thanks!
    •   Because I think self reflection is good for all of us from time to time.   If you don't wan't to discuss this article, why do you persist in posting here?           No one is disputing that at all. The premise of the author's article is in regards to the hypocrisy of then justifying everything your chosen candidate or party does blindly while vilifying the other candidates or party. It's the "all in" sports like mentality that is being discussed here.  
    • There is a really excellent book called "The Righteous Mind" that approaches this tribalist mindset from an evolutionary psychology standpoint. The author, Jonathan Haidt, does a remarkable job of unpacking why people persist in truly irrational defense of the indefensible - when it's their team doing the stupid stuff. I highly highly highly recommend it to anyone who is interested in lessening the hyperpartisan idiocy we have today.

      The trouble is that the closed-off mindset that lends itself to reflexive support for Obama/Hillary/Trump/whomever also tends to preclude any serious engagement in self-examination that the book is designed to provoke. Really good read, though.
    •   I get what your saying here but I think what Dave is talking about is the willingness of some to blindly follow, without question, their party or candidate. I saw this first hand during the primary with some of my own relatives, for example. I had a SIL who was a huge Bernie backer. The things she said about Hillary were worse than anything said here. As far as she was concerned, Hillary should be tarred and feathered and ran out on a rail. Then Bernie loses the nomination. She then became Hillary's biggest defender. Everything she said about her during the primary was instantly washed away. Even her own husband called her out. She wasn't simply voting for her because she found Trump worse. That's understandable. She defended or at least tried to deflect the issues with Hillary when just a few months prior, she said things that would make even Cooter or Bill say, "man you're harsh on her."   I don't think this is a new phenomenon. I also don't think it's widespread. Like everything else, access to more and diverse information just makes it possible to hear more about it than before. I think human nature causes people to internalize candidates and/.or elected officials. It's a "if you're critical of my candidate, you're critical of me," kind of thinking.   I don't fault anyone for voting for a candidate that one feels best represents their line of thinking. Or even defending their candidate from detractors. I don't think that is what Dave is talking about here. It's also the flipping of political opinions just because the candidate you voted for or support is supporting certain positions. For example, many conservatives opposed BHO's stimulus, including myself. It didn't work  as promised and we just added more on to the debt. So on the campaign trail, Trump also spoke of a stimulus plan that was even more expensive than BHO's and  those same people not only supported it but are justifying it. In summary, one can vote for a candidate without defending everything that person does        
    •  Come on.   The world, life is a bit more complicated then that.          Quit passing the blame. Your whole thesis is on choice and owning it.   Let me guess, you hate big banking also since they made it easy to refinance and purchase.   It just proves that general society is incapable of making the right decisions as a whole.   Sorry, you go down with the ship.    
  • Our Sponsors