LOL @ Edwards and Nascar, re Atlanta

[Nascar#3]

As I have already stated, you have absolutely no clue what the hell you are talking about.

It's insulting comments like this one Quack...That's why you loose members here, telling someone that they have no clue what they are talking about when they are sharing their opinion is insulting to say the least.

There is no need to open another thread to explain it when all the examples are in this one.
 
Sorry, just sharing my point of view and opinion but I suppose that in your eyes, I also don't know what I'm talking about !!!

[Quack]

It's insulting comments like this one Quack...That's why you loose members here, telling someone that they have no clue what they are talking about when they are sharing their opinion is insulting to say the least.

There is no need to open another thread to explain it when all the examples are in this one.
 
Sorry, just sharing my point of view and opinion but I suppose that in your eyes, I also don't know what I'm talking about !!!

N#3, with all due respect, I made a statement that her comments were clueless, because she was purporting something (my watching habits) to be fact when she in fact has no clue.  I have already explained this, but you apparently chose to ignore that.

Oh, and since the chances of it coming up are probably pretty great, I will go ahead and point out in advance that my statement to T16 about her clueless state regarding my NASCAR-watching habits is a matter of fact, rather than opinion.  Therein lies the distinction.  Fact vs. Opinion.

Now then, since you seem to be implying that I personally go around telling people they are clueless when they express their opinion (again, Opinion vs. Fact), I challenge you to show me exactly where I have done this.  I have gone out of my way to *not* do that, and I believe that I have been extremely successful in doing so.

On the contrary, I have been the #1 advocate of people freely expressing their opinions, even when theirs differs from mine.  For this reason, I am utterly stunned by your apparent disdain for me.

[Quack]

NASCAR gets it, too.

Helton said the fact that Keselowski's car went airborne at a 1.5-mile track was a bigger issue than Edwards' action.

NASCAR president Mike Helton said Tuesday there are two separate issues: the wreck itself, and the fact that Keselowski's car went airborne.

source >>

Thank you, NASCAR.

And to Carl and Brad, I am hoping and praying that you have both learned your lessons.  Let's get back to racing.

[robbybee]

I will go against what I said earlier when I stated that I would have no more to say on the subject of Eddie Haskell because there are a couple of points that have yet to be brought up...

Let's reverse the situation and assume that Brad mistakenly felt that he had been wronged by Carl in an early race incident - when indisputable video evidence showed that it was all Brad's fault. Carl just happened to be the unfortunate driver Brad ran into. Brad goes to the garage for repairs and returns to the track 150 or more laps down with one goal in mind - to get back at Carl for what he perceived to be a "malicious" act.

Are ya with me so far? Good. So, the race is winding down to it's closing laps. Brad is 150 laps down to the leader and Carl is running in 6th place. Brad works his way to Carl's back bumper and gives him a shot in an attempt to spin him out and ruin Carl's day, but fails to spin him out. Several laps later, with the checkered flag in sight, Brad again closes in on Carl who is still having a strong run. Brad, who is 150 laps down to Carl, remember, still has a misplaced desire to "even the score". As drops down below Carl and reaches Carl's left-rear quarter panel, he tugs hard right on the steering wheel, makes intentional contact with Carl's fender and spins him into the infield. Roof flaps deploy and Carl slides to a stop on the infield grass. (For this example I will exclude the aerial exhibition.)

Would y'all say "no harm, no foul" if a rookie, running in only his 5th or 6th CUP race, had intentionally destroyed the good points day of a veteran driver who has a legitimate chance at making the chase and winning a championship? Or would you say that the A-Hole, Bad Brad, needed to be "taught a lesson" by NASCAR or other drivers?

I'm just curious... I think I have a pretty good feel for how the voting will go on this.

I would sit Brad down for a race if I were John Darby or Mike Helton, because Brad's sense of retribution was mis-guided, poorly-executed and his decision to take matters into his own hands at 185 mph showed a blatant disregard for the health and safety of drivers and fans alike. And since Carl is a veteran driver and should know better than to try and slice off a pound of flesh, his penalty should probably be stiffer.

Second point: I am one of the 12,000 members of the NASCAR Fan Council. After each weekend's events I am sent a survey via e-mail which I complete and return to NASCAR. I take this seriously. There is always a spot for members to express personal feelings and reaction to the racing action. NASCAR says they listen closely to the opinions of Council members so it will be interesting to see if, in fact, Eddie is required to take a week (or more) off - because that was the opinion of THIS Council member!

[Quack]

robby, to answer your question, I don't think you've provided quite enough information.  So, to make sure that my response is not misunderstood, I will qualify it...

IF in your scenario there was no history of the recipient of the punt being aggressive and planting cars in the wall and it was a simple matter of taking retribution for one single act, then no, absolutely not, I would not say "no harm, no foul" - no matter who the drivers involved were.

On the other hand, IF the recipient of the punt was known for planting cars into the wall week after week, series after series, then yes, I would be perfectly fine with it - again, no matter who the drivers involved were.

As for your second point, I'm doubtful that NASCAR will ever announce any detailed data on what the Fan Council comments/votes were, but I am quite confident that there are plenty on both sides of the "To Suspend or Not To Suspend" debate.

[Texas16]

It's insulting comments like this one Quack...That's why you loose members here, telling someone that they have no clue what they are talking about when they are sharing their opinion is insulting to say the least.

There is no need to open another thread to explain it when all the examples are in this one.
 
Sorry, just sharing my point of view and opinion but I suppose that in your eyes, I also don't know what I'm talking about !!!

Thanks, NASCAR#3, for your observations.  I think Quack is probably fairly selective in who among us he would say something like that to,  tho' that's not apparent in this thread this time.  I'm certainly not offended by his telling me I don't know squat.  Truth be told, I haven't peeped in his windows on race days to confirm that he was watching the race when he says he wasn't.  The situation at hand is made all the much worse because I started all of this with some rather tacky jabs at him.  He and I know it's friendly banter, and I apologize for my part in not making this more apparent.

[Texas16]

As for Carl's 3-race (is that what it was?) probation, problems with Bad Brad, a little on-track tension, the Biffle/Logano feud a couple weeks ago....

Keep it up boys!  That's what makes the sport interesting and sells tickets!

Who's next? 

Okay....  A couple weeks ago it was Biffle (Roush) & Logano (new kid on the block) with their California dust-up.  Last weekend it was Edwards (Roush) & Keselowski (new kid on the block).  There's a trend going there.  So, my question is which newish kid on the block is Matt Kenseth gonna rough up at Bristol?  About the next newest guy out there is David Ragan.  Or maybe Regan Smith. 

[robbybee]

So, Quack, based upon your response let me put a different slant on things.

Let's say that I mistakenly thought I saw you flirting with my wife and that you have a history of being "A Playa". I let my mis-guided anger build up until I can no longer contain myself and I punch you in the face. No harm, no foul?

Dude, you cannot really tell me that you think Carl had a right to wreck Brad intentionally. You just can't. Every bit of evidence shows that Carl was the one who caused the initial wreck and Carl took out his frustrations on somebody else and crowed about it afterwards. What a crock!!

This is all just a ploy to get ratings, right?!! Where are the cameras? Is this gonna be on TV? Hi, Mom!!!

[Quack]

P.S. Scott Speed's Twitter comment is ridiculous, he's not one to talk....He's a waste of space on the race track, a rolling roadblock, the only reason that he is in Nascar is RedBull money !!!

By the way, I forgot to reply to this.  Scott Speed is currently qualified for "The Chase", being 12th in the standings.  Do I believe he'll be there at the end of 26 races?  Hell no.  But he has already shocked a lot of people with his results in the first 4 races of the year, and has proven that he can drive with the big boys.  He is hardly a rolling roadblock - this year, so far.

[Quack]

LOL.  Nice segue there, robby.  I dig it. 

You don't know me very well, but if that scenario were to take place, after I got over the shock and daze, we would have a couple of drinks and have a conversation about love and jealousy.    Would I initially be pissed?  Of course.  Would I try to come to an understanding of what drove you to do such a thing and rectify things?  You betcha.  (And no, by "rectify things" I do not mean "pay retribution".)

And yes, I absolutely think Carl had the right to take out Brad.  Do I think he should have done it on the straightaway at Atlanta?  Hell no.  If he had let his anger settle long enough to have a coherent thought, he would have either a) "gotten loose" in the middle of the corner, or b) waited until Bristol or Martinsville.

However, I must point out again here that I am *not* saying that Carl should have done what he did.  All I am saying is that this is a non-issue that is being made (by some) into a huge deal purely because of the "spectacular" nature of the resulting crash.  And it is that what I am against.

[robbybee]

I call Bullshit on that, Quack! You are contradicting your own opinion. You would not seek retribution but you think it's fine for Carl to do it. You are a quandary wrapped in an enigma, buddy!

Brad did NOT wreck Carl. Carl wrecked himself (and took poor little Joey out with him). That is the issue! For Carl to say that Brad needs to be taught a lesson is a case of the pot calling the kettle black!

Did somebody say POT? Sure! Don't mind if I do!!

[Quack]

robby, it is painfully clear that you refuse to take me at my word and are trying to make my statements into something they are not.  I have contradicted absolutely nothing.  It is entirely possible to feel that someone else has a right to do something even though you yourself would not do the same thing.

For example, your pot comment just now.  I feel that everyone has the right to burn some down.  I feel that all drugs should be legalized.  However, I personally have never and will never partake in any use of them.

Additionally, I never said that Brad wrecked Carl on Sunday at Atlanta.  But Brad has absolutely wrecked Carl and many others, repeatedly.  It is well-documented.

[robbybee]

OK, so if Brad did NOT wreck Carl at Atlanta, then why did Carl go after him? Why was Carl trying to wreck Brad when Carl was 150-plus laps down to the field? Was it just because Carl felt that Brad needed to be taught a lesson he decided to be the teacher? Was he trying to prevent Brad getting a career-best finish in a race that Carl had no chance of winning? Was it payback for what Brad did to Carl at Talladega? Is it just a case of the big dog peeing on the runt of the litter to establish dominance? What was Carl's justification for his actions? And how are Carl's actions not a blatant and intentional act of aggression?

I am trying to understand you, Quack. But you make no sense to me. Maybe it's because my feeble brain is a clouded in a purple haze. I dunno. But try as you might, you have not shown me that your opinion has any factual information to support it.

Maybe you should spark one up. It might help you to see things more clearly.

[Quack]

I cannot tell you what was going on in Carl's mind during those 150+ laps that he was (apparently) stewing in the garage.  I can tell you that:

• Brad has a long history of taking out top-level drivers in both the Nationwide and Cup series.
• Brad has taken Carl out on multiple occasions prior to this past Sunday at Atlanta.
• As noted in the piece that I linked to in my previous post, all of this is well-documented.  Two things of particular note from that piece:
  
  • Brad's comment on the radio after Hamlin spun him at Homestead at the end of 2009.  "That boy didn't do it good enough," Brad laughed, because he managed to keep it off the wall.  (I'm betting he thought no such thing after Sunday's incident.)
  • Jason Ratcliff, Kyle Busch's Nationwide crew chief, who said, "Somebody's going to get angry and [retaliate] at a higher-speed racetrack."  (Holy cow! A modern day prophet!)
• Carl has, as JasonHornbuckle has aptly pointed out, more or less shown us that he's a hot head who won't take shit off anyone, and is willing to take matters into his own hands.  Also, by his own admission, this is the code that he expects others to hold him accountable to, as well.
  
  

  Every person has to decide what code they want to live by and hopefully this explains mine.

I can only surmise and speculate that Carl most likely

• got more and more angry the longer he sat in the garage,
• decided that whether or not Brad wrecked him that day to put him there, he (Carl) had had enough of Brad's history, and
• was hell-bent on issuing a lesson to the young pupil.

As for my opinion having no factual information to support it, I don't know what to say.  History speaks for itself, and that is solely what I am basing my opinion on.

[JasonHornbuckle]

"# Brad has a long history of taking out top-level drivers in both the Nationwide and Cup series.
# Brad has taken Carl out on multiple occasions prior to this past Sunday at Atlanta."


"decided that whether or not Brad wrecked him that day to put him there, he (Carl) had had enough of Brad's history, and"


if that were his thought process, why not just wreck out Kyle Busch instead?

[Quack]

if that were his thought process, why not just wreck out Kyle Busch instead?

LOL.  I said that I do not know what his thought process was.  But I would pose the following questions to you:

Does Kyle Busch have a long history of taking out top-level drivers in Nationwide and Cup?
Has Kyle Busch taken out Carl Edwards on multiple occasions?

Perhaps more importantly, had Kyle Busch, arguably the most hated driver in NASCAR today, been the driver of the #12 on Sunday, would anyone care?

[JasonHornbuckle]

"Does Kyle Busch have a long history of taking out top-level drivers in Nationwide and Cup?"

yes, of course he does


"Has Kyle Busch taken out Carl Edwards on multiple occasions?"


lol, yes. are these trick questions or something?



"Perhaps more importantly, had Kyle Busch, arguably the most hated driver in NASCAR today, been the driver of the #12 on Sunday, would anyone care?"

i'm sure people would care. I dunno how much or how little. i don't think everyone now is flipping out over it because they love Brad K so much or anything.

[JG Fan 27]

So what if Kyle would have been in the 99's situation on Sunday? How would THAT argument go down? Sorry to say this, but by the way the last few years have gone, it looks to me that Carl is just as much like Kyle, maybe more immature.

[Nascar#3]

By the way, I forgot to reply to this.  Scott Speed is currently qualified for "The Chase", being 12th in the standings.  Do I believe he'll be there at the end of 26 races?  Hell no.  But he has already shocked a lot of people with his results in the first 4 races of the year, and has proven that he can drive with the big boys.  He is hardly a rolling roadblock - this year, so far.

Call it Daytona luck and mile and a half blessing...nothing more....Bristol and Martinsville are comming up, real racing...Scott "towel"s Speedy picker upper won't last long.

[BuddyG]

LMAO.  Ayep.  2-3 years.  Tops.  Ooops.  Perhaps you meant decades?  That would be much more accurate. 

How exactly have I lost any members?  Please start a thread in the Off-Topic Lounge to explain this one to me. 

Hey Quack, while you are there, ask him how he lost two Message boards because he is an a$$hole. When it comes to losing members he is the champion. I can't believe he made that statement.