Oct 4, 2010 - When David Reutimann wrecked Kyle Busch in Sunday's Kansas race – blatantly, intentionally – there was no outrage from fans, no hand-wringing from media, no penalties from NASCAR.
An informal Twitter poll suggested 90 percent of fans agreed with Reutimann's action. The media categorized Reutimann's retaliation under the "Have at it, boys" policy. And NASCAR didn't make a peep about it.
So that's that. Busch ruined Reutimann's day, so Reutimann ruined Busch's day in return. Like most other people, I can say I would have probably done the same thing as Reutimann.
But Reutimann's wreck offers us an important lesson: It's not the action that matters in NASCAR, it's what happens as a result of the action.
After all, what Reutimann did is almost identical to what Carl Edwards did to Brad Keselowski at Atlanta earlier this season. Only with a different result.
Edwards' day was ruined by Keselowski, so Edwards decided to retaliate. Except when Edwards did it, Keselowski flew through the air in a terrifying wreck that drew national attention. When Reutimann did it, nothing of the sort happened.
In Edwards' case, the driver was parked for the remainder of the day after his intentional wreck and then put on probation.
Reutimann was neither parked nor will be put on probation. Did he do a "better" job of wrecking Busch than Edwards did on Keselowski?
If you said "yes," you're getting into dangerous territory; Reutimann had no control of what happened to Busch after the initial contact. He's fortunate Busch slid down the track without hitting any other cars.
The only difference was the outcome.
Both incidents occurred at a 1.5-mile track. Both times, the drivers had previous history that may have factored into the payback decision (though in the Busch/Reutimann case, it was just words).
And at Atlanta, Edwards intended to do exactly what Reutimann did on Sunday. But instead of spinning out, Keselowski's car went airborne and flipped. Edwards was crucified by some fans and media as a result.
It's important to ask ourselves:
My guess: Fans would have called for Reutimann's head, the media would have written "'Have at it, boys' has gone too far" and NASCAR would have parked Reutimann for rough driving and penalized him during the week for what happened.
So the policy isn't "Have at it, boys." It's "Have at it, boys, unless we decide otherwise." NASCAR has proven that the result – not the intent – is what really matters.
This creates a murky policy for drivers and a difficult decision to weigh on the track. On the one hand, drivers are being encouraged to police themselves.
But on the other hand, drivers are basically gambling when they retaliate. The simple act of spinning out another driver could be attempted 10 times with 10 different results.
There's no way to control what happens once after you wreck another driver. And depending on how severe the results are, drivers could be penalized for causing mayhem (Carl Edwards at Gateway) even if they intended to just cause an innocent single-car spin.
Because of that, Chase drivers can't risk it. Anyone contending for a championship would be an absolute fool to attempt retaliation now.
Thus, it's open season on Chase drivers. Reutimann – or anyone else with nothing to lose – doesn't care about a penalty at this point. But Chase drivers do.
The era of treating Chase drivers differently is apparently over. The non-Chasers aren't putting up with much anymore.
"I don't care if you're in the Chase or not," Reutimann said. "You need to think about who you're running over when you're running over them. I don't care who you are. If you're in the Chase, you have as much responsibility to drive with respect as I do, or anybody else."
If there's ever been an ideal time for a non-Chaser to get payback, NASCAR's policy has provided a good opportunity during the Chase.
6 comments
Comments
Toyota
DW – posted something on Twitter about this hurting Toyota’s chase hopes. I’m very interested in their take, and the possible consequences.
by kwms on Oct 4, 2010 1:00 PM EDT reply actions
Great minds..
I was thinking the same thing this morning..Maybe that is why Reuty was so dejected in his interview.
Both he and Kyle run Toyota, and Shrub was their BEST chance at taking the Championship. They would be REALLY, really pissed at that, and rightfully so.
What a dumbshit. Honestly. I’m all for payback, when payback is due, but in this case, there was nothing due from a nothing driver.
by Sky inLas Vegas on Oct 4, 2010 2:43 PM EDT up reply actions
I know!
I can’t believe no one has reported on this. It was a total about face between his interview right after race and then a while later (at RV in street clothes).
I’ve got mixed feelings on this – Kyle should have radio’d to spotter and said “my bad.” I know he was pissed. They had just had pit stops and he didn’t like them. BUT, it did not look intentional to me. IF they had a history of on track incidents I would be ok with it, but they don’t. The 00 races everyone really hard. That’s why he gets knocked around like a ping pong ball. DR admitted that he and KB hadn’t had any trouble previously.
I hope Toyota rips the crew chief if he really demanded the pay back.
by kwms on Oct 4, 2010 6:00 PM EDT up reply actions
toyota wanted manufacture’s title this year…but the situation like this- toyota driver vs toyota driver won’t gain any points…ruining their hopes by themselves….
by Yuuk on Oct 4, 2010 11:51 PM EDT reply actions
There are many drivers who owe Kyle Busch a payback, David Reutimann is just the first to collect. Since Kyle took him out of contention there was no one better to exact his revenge on him.
Guess I’m with the 90% who agreed it was deserved.
by napagirl on Oct 5, 2010 12:53 AM EDT reply actions
Well . . .
Very interesting . . . but I’m not sure it’s so bad to consider what actually happened—the outcome—along with intent. That’s certainly not a foreign principle in our legal system. If you try to shoot someone and miss you don’t get the same punishment as if you try to shoot someone and kill them. Yes, consider what the driver tried to do but also consider what actually ended up happening.
The fact is what David did and what Carl did were different and they ended up having different results, even if you want to argue that the intention was the same. And I’m not sure Reutimann had “no control” over what happened to Kyle. He may not have had total control, but what he did and where he did it made certain outcomes more likely than others. The same is true of Edwards. If I run a guy up into the wall in the center of the turn at Martinsville, for instance, it’s not quite the same thing as hitting him in the left rear at 200 on the straight at Atlanta. Yes in both cases you are taking a chance that something bad will happen, and if something bad does, than you should have to deal with the consequences.
And if intention is all that matters, should we punish a driver who tries to hit another guy but misses??
by Leonard Masters on Oct 7, 2010 8:24 AM EDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed