Edwards to Face Punishment for Wrecking Keselowski on Purpose in AtlantaBy Brian Lohnes Posted 03/09/10
When Carl Edwards lined up his ramming sights on Brad Keselowski's car last weekend and sent him flying in the air toward the catch fence, NASCAR was faced with its first challenge to the "go git 'em boys" attitude they have taken towards the 2010 season. Not surprisingly they weren't impressed with Edwards' actions, and most likely even less so with this Facebook posting about the incident.
If it were a couple decades ago, the two drivers would have wrecked, found each other in the pits and entered a closed room with clenched fists. A few minutes later, a couple of bloody guys would emerge and stalk off in different directions. Now they whine on Facebook.
Edwards left NASCAR with no choice but to lower the boom on him with punishment. Guys wreck each other all the time, but they do it in such a way as to make it look like an "honest racing deal" unlike last weekend in Atlanta when it was blatant.
NASCAR officials must have held their collective breath when Keselowski's car took flight and headed toward the catch fence and most importantly the fans. Luckily, the car didn't make it that far, but after the recent death of a spectator at an NHRA event, all racing organizations are hyper concerned with fan safety.
NASCAR is supposed to announce their sanctions against Edwards today. It is rare for them to suspend a guy for races, but if they are serious about sending a message, ol' Carl may be riding the pine for a week or two.
Source -- The New York Times -- NASCAR's Call for Agressiveness Is Met by a Deliberate Crash
Comments + Post your comment!
Written by Speedzzter.blogspot
Mar 10 2010
[quote author=IRONHEAD link=topic=20510.msg382933#msg382933 date=1268255089]
[quote author=RCR link=topic=20510.msg382812#msg382812 date=1268236567]
I seen and heard all the complaining about what Edwards did, and I'm not going to debate if he was right or wrong , but why is nobody talking about why the car took flight , the hit would have less likely had the same result if the car had a spoiler instead of a wing, if you look the roof flaps they can't work and the wing acts like, well like a wing look like at take off when going backwards . If I'm not mistaken this has happen quite a few times with the COT an I think it's very dangerous ,thank god they'll be taken them off in a couple of weeks.
Rob
[/quote]
this is THE REASON the wing is gone and the spoiler is back..
[/quote]
Nope. Empty seats and lower TV ratings, not aerodynamics are the reasons for returning to drag-inducing spoilers. Far larger wings have been commonplace on far lighter (and often faster) racing cars around the world for decades without any measureable increases in flight during spins.
Return to the spoiler is merely a weak attempt to make the still-hideous, non-production COT more palatable to hidebound NASCAR fans (some of which lack the capacity to understand even rudimentary aerodynamic concepts).
[quote author=Buickguy link=topic=20510.msg382946#msg382946 date=1268258006]
So mayfield is gone because of drugs (suicide), this guy is riding pine for two races for trying to kill someone else..... I think I understand; suicide bad, killing someone else good.
[/quote]
WRONG! NASCAR merely said it was "taking the gloves off." It didn't say it was opening the floodgates for (alleged) "dope fiends" and "hopheads" (on the track, that is . . . ISC would probably build a special "Crack and Hooka Party Porch" at most tracks if it would guarantee more ticket sales . . . . (That was a JOKE! Please don't sue me Brian France!))
I'm not sure that Cousin Carl's probation is really "riding pine."
Why is it that when I hear or read "probation" I think of . . .
[img]http://www.tvcrazy.net/tvclassics/wallpaper/oldshows/dukes/dukes-of-hazzard.jpg[/img]
Written by stoneshrink
Mar 10 2010
So mayfield is gone because of drugs (suicide), this guy is riding pine for two races for trying to kill someone else..... I think I understand; suicide bad, killing someone else good.
Written by IRONHEAD
Mar 10 2010
[quote author=RCR link=topic=20510.msg382812#msg382812 date=1268236567]
I seen and heard all the complaining about what Edwards did, and I'm not going to debate if he was right or wrong , but why is nobody talking about why the car took flight , the hit would have less likely had the same result if the car had a spoiler instead of a wing, if you look the roof flaps they can't work and the wing acts like, well like a wing look like at take off when going backwards . If I'm not mistaken this has happen quite a few times with the COT an I think it's very dangerous ,thank god they'll be taken them off in a couple of weeks.
Rob
[/quote]
this is THE REASON the wing is gone and the spoiler is back..
Written by speed service Mar 10 2010
Wings are for planes and pantie sheilds !! And he is one of the "Golden children" so the punishment was not to bad you do have to respect him for not trying to lie about the deal! And all the Napcar ad's said they were taking the gloves off !!
Written by JeffMcKC
Mar 10 2010
Is that like being on "Double Secret Probation Mr."
Written by Speedzzter.blogspot
Mar 10 2010
I thought they were taking the gloves off. ;D
Keselowski should have been disqualified at Talladega. NASCAR allowed this thing to fester by letting "Bangin' Brad" skate.
As for all the rank speculation that the wing is the problem, it doesn't make a lot of sense aerodynamically. The wing would be in stall position for virtually all of the ride and would not be a very efficient air foil reversed. At ~ 200 m.p.h., air lifting the car from the underside would create enough lift for a blowover (as happened several times during the PRE-COT era). The entire downforce package for the COT going the proper direction is less than 2000# (including all aerodynamic elements, not just the wing).
I'm not a fan of the wing because aesthetically it's awful. But when DW and TV "experts" who probably never even passed a high school physics class start posing as armchair aerodynamicists, I'm skeptical. BTW, if NASCAR wanted to keep the wing (which they don't) and scientific testing showed it was the root of the problem (it doesn't), merely adding some additional air brakes (flaps) to it would spike drag and kill lift in the event of a spin.
A pressure-activated retractable rear air dam (extends from the bumper area only when reversed at speed like the roof flaps do) might go along way toward keeping the cars on the ground.
Written by RCR
Mar 10 2010
I seen and heard all the complaining about what Edwards did, and I'm not going to debate if he was right or wrong , but why is nobody talking about why the car took flight , the hit would have less likely had the same result if the car had a spoiler instead of a wing, if you look the roof flaps they can't work and the wing acts like, well like a wing look like at take off when going backwards . If I'm not mistaken this has happen quite a few times with the COT an I think it's very dangerous ,thank god they'll be taken them off in a couple of weeks.
Rob
Written by 1988montecarloss
Mar 09 2010
[quote author=BOOOGHAR link=topic=20510.msg382445#msg382445 date=1268167470]
he's on probation for 3 races ?!?!?! WTF - ok im going on a 3 race boycott of SUBWAY
[/quote]
quiznos is better anyway ;D
[quote author=SpiderGearsMan link=topic=20510.msg382542#msg382542 date=1268181973]
talladega - edwards made an ill timed blocking move against a chevy freight train
[/quote]
he even took the blame for it after the race
[quote author=BigBlockRanger link=topic=20510.msg382450#msg382450 date=1268168874]
Is anybody else surprised at how much the rollcage pancaked on that car? :o
[/quote]
yes :o
Written by SpiderGearsMan
Mar 09 2010
talladega - edwards made an ill timed blocking move against a chevy freight train
maybe if carl edwards took his gloves off first
too bad crank is so rampant in the carolinas now , race fans get stuck with these hype-sensitive midwestern momma's boys now :)