Rules question.....looked could not find answer

28car

28car

Team Owner
Joined
Aug 5, 2016
Messages
655
Points
273
Location
Ohio
Using Kevin Harvick as an example...or even Kyle Busch
won 3 races early in the season, just on their track record, very good chance to make chase

Question is,
What is the minimum races to start to still qualify for the “Chase”?

What if Kevin decided after his 3 wins to not run the Talladega and other Daytona races..eliminate the risk
If it’s 30 races , theoretically he could skip them and still make the “Chase”
Give up a few points driver points...last Talladega race he did not get any Chase points

I know it’s a different sport
In golf you don’t have to play every tournament, to qualify for FedEx cup...golf’s championship playoff
 
28car
Busch missed 11 races in 2015 due to being injured on track. He came back and with a win and making it into the top 30 in points. Nascrap gave him special dispensation and he then won the 2015 championship.

DISCLAMER: I am NOT a busch fan and thought this a chicken**** move on nascraps part.
 
Bobw said:
28car
Busch missed 11 races in 2015 due to being injured on track. He came back and with a win and making it into the top 30 in points. Nascrap gave him special dispensation and he then won the 2015 championship.

DISCLAMER: I am NOT a busch fan and thought this a chicken**** move on nascraps part.
Click to expand...
for once I agree with you
 
The rule is that you have to be in the top 30 in driver points and have started every race, that is why you cannot skip races even after you have won. The exception to the rule would be when NASCAR grants a waiver, as Kyle Busch was a great example. Because he was injured on track, he was granted a medical waiver on the rule that you must start every race. Kyle Busch qualified for the playoffs in 2015 because he won a race upon his return and made his way into the top 30 in driver points, even though he missed the first 10 or 11 races. The flip side of this would be Spencer Gallagher who won the Xfinity race at Talladega last week. He has since been suspended by NASCAR because he failed a drug test. He will miss races because of the suspension and therefore is no longer eligible for the Xfinity playoffs because he did not (will not) start every race this season, even though he has a win.
 
flash242g said:
The rule is that you have to be in the top 30 in driver points and have started every race, that is why you cannot skip races even after you have won. The exception to the rule would be when NASCAR grants a waiver, as Kyle Busch was a great example. Because he was injured on track, he was granted a medical waiver on the rule that you must start every race. Kyle Busch qualified for the playoffs in 2015 because he won a race upon his return and made his way into the top 30 in driver points, even though he missed the first 10 or 11 races. The flip side of this would be Spencer Gallagher who won the Xfinity race at Talladega last week. He has since been suspended by NASCAR because he failed a drug test. He will miss races because of the suspension and therefore is no longer eligible for the Xfinity playoffs because he did not (will not) start every race this season, even though he has a win.
Click to expand...
Bogus waiver. In my opinion of course.
 
flash242g said:
The rule is that you have to be in the top 30 in driver points and have started every race, that is why you cannot skip races even after you have won. The exception to the rule would be when NASCAR grants a waiver, as Kyle Busch was a great example. Because he was injured on track, he was granted a medical waiver on the rule that you must start every race. Kyle Busch qualified for the playoffs in 2015 because he won a race upon his return and made his way into the top 30 in driver points, even though he missed the first 10 or 11 races. The flip side of this would be Spencer Gallagher who won the Xfinity race at Talladega last week. He has since been suspended by NASCAR because he failed a drug test. He will miss races because of the suspension and therefore is no longer eligible for the Xfinity playoffs because he did not (will not) start every race this season, even though he has a win.
Click to expand...
Yeh we knew all this, I was being sarcastic because Kyle, a great driver, should never of been allowed to be in contention for a championship. You should have to compete in every race, if you are injured ...oh well. It's not fair to the other competitors who ran every race.
 
lolla79 said:
How is it bogus if NASCAR indirectly caused him to miss races? They're in charge of competitors safety, and they failed Kyle.
Click to expand...
Did you see the part where I stated that it was my opinion? I may disagree with your opinion but you are certainly entitled to it. He missed 11 races due to an "Accident" because he was involved in a dangerous sport.
 
Johali said:
Did you see the part where I stated that it was my opinion? I may disagree with your opinion but you are certainly entitled to it. He missed 11 races due to an "Accident" because he was involved in a dangerous sport.
Click to expand...
I saw that, but it doesn't preclude me from asking questions about your opinion. Sure it's a dangerous sport, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't make an effort to make things safer. His situation was avoidable if there was a safer barrier, which NASCAR has discretion over.
kkfan91 said:
The only person who made Kyle miss races was Kyle running an Xfinity race to pad his stats and ego.
Click to expand...
That doesn't have any bearing on this argument. It's NASCAR's responsibility to make tracks safe, regardless of how many events drivers decide to run. Let me ask you this: If this happened instead during the 2015 Daytona 500, should Kyle be allowed a waiver? Or is it his fault for 'padding his stats' at the elite level?
Mopardh9 said:
He missed because he was incapable of racing, how is that nascar making him miss races?
Click to expand...
He was incapable of racing because NASCAR was negligent. See how it links together?
 
lolla79 said:
I saw that, but it doesn't preclude me from asking questions about your opinion. Sure it's a dangerous sport, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't make an effort to make things safer. His situation was avoidable if there was a safer barrier, which NASCAR has discretion over.
Click to expand...
The safer barrier is the tracks responsibility not Nascars.
lolla79 said:
He was incapable of racing because NASCAR was negligent. See how it links together?
Click to expand...
Nope.
 
  • Like
Reactions: sdj
Johali said:
The safer barrier is the tracks responsibility not Nascars.
Click to expand...

Lol once again these statements link together. It's the track's responsibility to install safety equipment that meets NASCAR'S standards. If NASCAR doesn't think a track meets their standards, they won't race there.

Do you really think that NASCAR doesn't have any input on what the track's responsibilities are? If they want to remain on the schedule, they have to listen to their commands. In fact, to help illustrate this point here's a quote from one of the track presidents shortly after Kyle's crash:

“We work with NASCAR and the consultants every year, and we have always followed every safety recommendation that has ever been made to us”
Source: http://www.kansascity.com/sports/nascar-auto-racing/article10904081.html

In other words, they don't have to follow recommendations per se, but they choose to do so because they know keeping NASCAR happy is the main priority.

In this event, you can place blame on both the track and NASCAR. But it doesn't change the outcome at all. NASCAR was still responsible in some portion.
 
StandOnIt said:
that is a good one, if it made any kind of sense at all, there wouldn't be any sports period and everybody would be walking around in a nerf suit.o_O
Click to expand...

How so? The issue here is if he should've been allowed a waiver to compete for something the sanctioning body helped to cause. It never implied anything that would be detrimental to the series like a monetary payout.
 
Johali said:
The safer barrier is the tracks responsibility not Nascars.

Nope.
Click to expand...

The track he was injured at, Daytona, is owned by ISC. ISC owns 11 other tracks. ISC is ''owned'' by the France family which also owns nascrap.
 
lolla79 said:
How so? The issue here is if he should've been allowed a waiver to compete for something the sanctioning body helped to cause. It never implied anything that would be detrimental to the series like a monetary payout.
Click to expand...
no here is what you said: as far as the cause, you are supposed to stay on the racetrack Kyle failed to do so... it isn't nerf ball.
The safety is shared by many people involved, sue the car builder next...it wasn't safe enough, sue the grass, he couldn't stop on and on blah blah blah.
"How is it bogus if NASCAR indirectly caused him to miss races?" They're in charge of competitors safety, and they failed Kyle.
 
StandOnIt said:
no here is what you said: as far as the cause, you are supposed to stay on the racetrack Kyle failed to do so... it isn't nerf ball.
The safety is shared by many people involved, sue the car builder next...it wasn't safe enough, sue the grass, he couldn't stop on and on blah blah blah.
"How is it bogus if NASCAR indirectly caused him to miss races?" They're in charge of competitors safety, and they failed Kyle.
Click to expand...

Classic strawman. You just brought in "suing" which is exactly what I precluded from this discussion in my previous post. It was never about suing the series for anything. It's about being allowed to qualify for something that the series has rules for, and the competitor wasn't able to meet those rules because of something the sanctioning body had control over.

On a side note, what do you think walls are for? If drivers are supposed to stay on the track, why do we need them? Additionally, who do you think sets the specifications for how the cars are built? Who has control over how much grass is on the track?
 
Who knows, but if Kenseth wins a race, they will find a reason to allow him in the chase. If Bayne wins as well, he's out of luck because Kenseth would obviously be the one that RFW would allow in the chase.
 
Personally...do not like the "chase", too WWF for me.

But since it is here...believe if you win a race and are in the top 20 in points, you should qualify or if you are in the top 16 in points without a win.

Just my 1/2 of a cent
 
lolla79 said:
How is it bogus if NASCAR indirectly caused him to miss races? They're in charge of competitors safety, and they failed Kyle.
Click to expand...
It is impossible to know every potential hazard at any track. That's like saying why hasn't somebody written an antivirus program, that will protect against future viruses. There is no way to know what actions are coming down the line. Sure, it may look obvious after there is an accident, but it took a certain sequence of events for that injury to happen.
 
Saying that NASCAR is or was negligent to Kyle is like saying that playing a guitar is not Bob Dylan's forte.
 
28car said:
Using Kevin Harvick as an example...or even Kyle Busch
won 3 races early in the season, just on their track record, very good chance to make chase

Question is,
What is the minimum races to start to still qualify for the “Chase”?

What if Kevin decided after his 3 wins to not run the Talladega and other Daytona races..eliminate the risk
If it’s 30 races , theoretically he could skip them and still make the “Chase”
Give up a few points driver points...last Talladega race he did not get any Chase points

I know it’s a different sport
In golf you don’t have to play every tournament, to qualify for FedEx cup...golf’s championship playoff
Click to expand...

You have to start every race, unless you get a medical waiver.

I think you should be allowed to miss races myself. Make it a standard, concrete rule, that way waivers aren't at NASCAR's discretion.

I think it's a bad idea to sit out races though. I could see it backfiring quickly.
 
28car said:
Question is,
What is the minimum races to start to still qualify for the “Chase”?
Click to expand...
Good question, I'm wondering that myself.

When Busch missed a bunch of races and came back and started winning big time I was torn between what was fair to the field and the need to have one of the better drivers in the Chase. NASCARS made their call. NASCAR needs a policy that allows some lenience to address possible concussions. I don't think it would be right to disqualify a driver for a concussion or for some short term medical condition. They setup the win and in deal but they might need to consider additional qualifications. I'm guessing it will be decided on a case by case basis and I'm good with that (there are always gray areas).

Back in the day many good drivers ran partial seasons for several reasons; it was expensive to travel, skipped short tracks due to the cost of fixing a damaged car, and drivers might not like certain tracks. There were drivers like Petty that ran several times a week when others couldn't (I think the the championship was structured different then).
 
We like to over-complicate.

Busch was granted a medical exemption for cause. His was not the first such exemption granted and Spencer Airplane has a “medical condition” that won’t qualify.
 
aunty dive said:
We like to over-complicate.

Busch was granted a medical exemption for cause. His was not the first such exemption granted and Spencer Airplane has a “medical condition” that won’t qualify.
Click to expand...

Exactly.
 
Yogisd1 said:
It is impossible to know every potential hazard at any track. That's like saying why hasn't somebody written an antivirus program, that will protect against future viruses. There is no way to know what actions are coming down the line. Sure, it may look obvious after there is an accident, but it took a certain sequence of events for that injury to happen.
Click to expand...

It's actually not like that at all. You do the best job you can to protect the drivers, which means having a safer barrier on every wall around the track. It doesn't matter if you "predict" drivers will hit that area or not. Assume that they will. Money should not be an issue for an entity like NASCAR.

In regards to your virus analogy, it's actually more analogous to say that not having a safer barrier there is like pretending a virus is too small to worry about.

"I don't think that will ever infect my computer, so I won't write a script to protect it."
"I don't think a driver will hit the wall there, so I won't build a safer barrier."
 
lolla79 said:
It's actually not like that at all. You do the best job you can to protect the drivers, which means having a safer barrier on every wall around the track. It doesn't matter if you "predict" drivers will hit that area or not. Assume that they will. Money should not be an issue for an entity like NASCAR.

In regards to your virus analogy, it's actually more analogous to say that not having a safer barrier there is like pretending a virus is too small to worry about.

"I don't think that will ever infect my computer, so I won't write a script to protect it."
"I don't think a driver will hit the wall there, so I won't build a safer barrier."
Click to expand...

Having a safer barrier on every wall is your idea of "the best job" Yeah if money was no object we motorists should have a safer barrier on every road we drive on. But we like the sanctioning bodies would have to pay for it. Safer barriers aren't bought at the local Home Depot, and there isn't a barrier builder on every corner. For the impatient and those with 20/20 hindsight up in arms, It is getting done with the more dangerous areas being addressed first. It is pretty much a non issue at this point.
 
I personally think that Samantha is back with a new name.
 
StandOnIt said:
Having a safer barrier on every wall is your idea of "the best job" Yeah if money was no object we motorists should have a safer barrier on every road we drive on. But we like the sanctioning bodies would have to pay for it. Safer barriers aren't bought at the local Home Depot, and there isn't a barrier builder on every corner. For the impatient and those with 20/20 hindsight up in arms, It is getting done with the more dangerous areas being addressed first. It is pretty much a non issue at this point.
Click to expand...

As I stated, money shouldn't be a problem for a corporation like NASCAR. If they want to keep drivers and fans, they must put in the effort required to protect them. We aren't talking about civilian life here so whatever roads we drive on are irrelevant. NASCAR has learned the lesson multiple times now that you always put lives before money. They finally started to listen, which is why it appears to be a "non-issue" to you.

We're getting a bit off track here, and it's quite obvious that we aren't going to come to an agreement.
 
lolla79 said:
As I stated, money shouldn't be a problem for a corporation like NASCAR. If they want to keep drivers and fans, they must put in the effort required to protect them. We aren't talking about civilian life here so whatever roads we drive on are irrelevant. NASCAR has learned the lesson multiple times now that you always put lives before money. They finally started to listen, which is why it appears to be a "non-issue" to you.

We're getting a bit off track here, and it's quite obvious that we aren't going to come to an agreement.
Click to expand...

no problem?, you have no idea of how many miles and the millions that need to be spent to achieve your idea of safety.
 
I think this subject of safety really has no satisfactory answer to anyone.
I think Jeff Gordon said that they could find places to wreck that no one ever thought of. You do your best to protect -- that's all
anyone can do. The only, truly safe thing --- no racing at all. Well, maybe slot racing cars.

Can we get back to the original question --- although I think that has been answered to the best of anyone's ability.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom