My immediate thought when I heard about this was "why the hell was he out of the car??". I make a big deal about it at my safety meetings. I don't know about how things usually run at dirt tracks, but if you're out of the car on a hot racetrack you are taking a serious and unnecessary risk - day or night. Bad news.
fasted58 wrote: Given the explicit explanation of other rules... conduct, engine, chassis, nuts n bolts etc. I thought a driver exit rule would be included if there were such one. Not making an issue, just saying, it may be something so simple that it is covered in the driver meeting tho.
I've never circle track raced, but have been told before that it's typically stated in most drivers meetings...So I always just assumed it was more than a mere suggestion. I guess that explains a lot though.
I'm not going to go off on any tangent but my thoughts go out to the family of the driver who was killed.
In reply to Driven5:
What does it explain?
That we have to have a rule so grownups know to not play in traffic???
Supposedly he had as much as 16 years behind the wheel in various racing venues. He didn't need a rule. If he believed there was no risk, why did he have a roll cage, a helmet, and a Nomex suit?
He was grandstanding.
E36 M3, gave in and watched a couple of vids on You Tube. I have to say, I can't see anything Tony did from the cars around him. Sad sad state of affairs, but I think it was self inflicted by walking down the track like that. I doubt Tony will take part in another spint car race again as he'll be demonized for what happend by the fans regardless of the truth.
Edit, by Sprint car I mean what he was racing, not the Sprint cup...if that's who even sponsors NASCAR anymore, I really don't know.
In reply to Adrian_Thompson:
That confused me as well (sprint cars and Sprint Cup cars). If they really call the NASCAR car Sprint cars why do they still run 500 and 600 mile races? Shouldn't they just run 10 laps or something like that?
SVreX wrote: What does it explain?
It explains why drivers acting this way happens so often on ovals across this country, yet don't seem to actually be penalized for doing so.
.
T.J. wrote: That confused me as well (sprint cars and Sprint Cup cars). If they really call the NASCAR car Sprint cars why do they still run 500 and 600 mile races? Shouldn't they just run 10 laps or something like that?
"Sprint" as in the title sponsor corporation of the NASCAR Cup Series, not the style of race format...Same as when it was Nextel Cup and Winston Cup before that.
In reply to T.J.:
They're called that because the series sponsor is a E36 M3ty wireless provider.....not because they have anything to do with "Sprinting"
In a recent interview Ricky Craven relayed how emotions can run high in an incident and that he had exited his wrecked car under caution to confront his offender. Not just another sports channel talking head, he btdt.
He did however call for an industry wide (motorsport) driver rule for exiting vehicles, stay in the vehicle until released by safety crew... well, except in the case of fire.
Industry wide meaning local short track to the big leagues.
Kudos
A lot less people got shot than if we didn't have rules about shooting people (Somalia doesn't. A lot of people got shot.)
As far as I can tell, every track pretty much seems to run independently with little to no national sanctioning body oversight and often with their own specific classes and rules. So I'm not sure how implementation of such a widespread rule could be enacted. Although I sincerely do hope they will find a way to band together and apply a common (sense) written rule everywhere, to move away from a culture that overlooks (and has even come to accept as normal) such flagrantly dangerous behaviors.
In reply to Driven5:
These traveling series (sprint, midgets, whatever) run under the rules of the sanctioning body. The officials go around with the circuit and the individual tracks have very little say in how the races are run on track barring specific situation regarding pits and such.
The risk of running into traffic is that you can be hit and killed.
The risk is the rule.
Another for Darwin.
nicksta43 wrote: In reply to Driven5: These traveling series (sprint, midgets, whatever) run under the rules of the sanctioning body. The officials go around with the circuit and the individual tracks have very little say in how the races are run on track barring specific situation regarding pits and such.
Every event I've entered under a set of national rules has sent out 'sups' or suplimentals for local track or venue rules. If any series is stupid enough to not have a stay in the car rule then the tracks could
In reply to Adrian_Thompson:
And should IMO.
Maybe we should have a "Don't run into a wall" rule too.
More rules does not equal safer racing.
Can anyone actually watch that video and think anything other that it was dumb?
When the competitive juices are flowing common sense goes out the window. But if the guy knew he would be barred from racing for a year for running out on the track he "may" have had second thoughts. But who knows. In this case it should be a rule with very stiff penalties.
One thing that I am unsure of... I have seen it said many times that he was running into traffic. I have a strange feeling he was slightly above the racing line, as his car ended up well above the groove after the impact with the wall. Methinks the camara angle and zoom effect makes it appear he was running in the groove, when its possible he was actually a bit offline.
Another, watching the speed of the cars in the initial part of the video, its rather apparent that the caution, deservedly so, was out tthe next lap and the cars were passing by at a reduced speed. This is one that all of the major news outlets didn't seem to realise.
In reply to SVreX:
By that logic we shouldn't need any such driver behavior rules, such as requiring cars to stop racing for position and slow for yellow flags, coming to a complete stop for red flags, or driving slowly in the pit/paddock area. It should just be left up to the discretion of a mob of competition fueled adrenaline junkies to be an infallible model of restraint and common sense at all times.
GameboyRMH wrote: A lot less people got shot than if we didn't have rules about shooting people (Somalia doesn't. A lot of people got shot.)
That is not true.
There are laws against murder in Somalia. There are no laws protecting private gun ownership.
If convicted of murder, the courts will give 3 options to the victim's family: pardon the killer, demand blood money from the killer's family (about $20,000), or call for his execution.
If they decide the latter, they would have to perform the execution themselves.
When I first heard of this incident, I mentally tried Stewart, found him guilty, and executed him. After actually seeing the video, I must admit that I may have acted hastily....
my parents taught me not to run into traffic...
dDI get a cookie?
Driven5 wrote: In reply to SVreX: By that logic we shouldn't need rules that require cars to stop racing for position and slow for yellow flags, or come to a complete stop for red flags either. It should just be left up to the discretion of a mob of competition fueled adrenaline junkies.
No.
Rules define the game.
Flag rules, etc, are not inherently understood, they have to be explained and defined.
Rules that try to define behavior and make people act right regarding things that are commonly understood are doomed to failure.
If you have a "Don't run in traffic" rule, you have to fine someone who is trying to save someone's life. We will also then need a "Don't punch somebody" rule, and perhaps a "Don't shoot yourself in the head" rule.
And then we will have to fight about all the rules. (Well, he didn't MEAN to punch that guy in the eye).
Rules create loopholes. They do not create a society that behaves right.
He may have been a bit out of the groove, but if I were in that situation, on a race track, my eyes would be tuned for other cars, not people wearing black and who aren't near rescue vehicles with flashing caution lights.
I watched the video knowing what would happen and I still found myself mentally shouting for Ward get back.
This sucks for everyone.
SVreX wrote:Driven5 wrote: In reply to SVreX: By that logic we shouldn't need rules that require cars to stop racing for position and slow for yellow flags, or come to a complete stop for red flags either. It should just be left up to the discretion of a mob of competition fueled adrenaline junkies.No. Rules define the game. Flag rules, etc, are not inherently understood, they have to be explained and defined. Rules that try to define behavior and make people act right regarding things that are commonly understood are doomed to failure. If you have a "Don't run in traffic" rule, you have to fine someone who is trying to save someone's life. We will also then need a "Don't punch somebody" rule, and perhaps a "Don't shoot yourself in the head" rule. And then we will have to fight about all the rules. (Well, he didn't MEAN to punch that guy in the eye). Rules create loopholes. They do not create a society that behaves right.
So in your opinion no rule would have gave this guy pause to run out on the track? I don't buy it, if the penalty is big enough it certainly would give pause. And it's very easy to tell the difference between someone jumping out of the car to pull someone out of a burning wreck and someone running out there to throw a helmet or punches or themselves at a competitor.
You'll need to log in to post.
