Langdon Final Round Run Under Review (2 Viewers)

[Just Paul]

I think disqualifying the run is a consistent call. Thinking back to a few runs recently where things were found to be out of spec or safety related items found similar punishment. Steven Densham in Vegas made a quick repair on their chute cable/handle in the staging lanes NHRA didn't like, the run was tossed. Terry Haddock had something with a body latch that had the run DQ'd in Vegas as well. It was a run that put him in the field as I recall, and that run being tossed left him outside the show. The other recent infractions with wing angle / position, funny car header angle / width, Fire bottle pins being left in - all resulted in the runs being tossed out. This run just happened to be the final round. Unfortunately to unify things it really doesn't matter if it's Q1 or E4, the punishment has been the run gets thrown out. I think to say we'll let things slide just because it's the final is not the correct thing to do.

I guess what I may have an issue with is the time it took to figure things out. I mean, they all had to know at the top end what the deal was. If it's a black and white issue, I feel the call should have been made right away and not let the team go through the winners circle and all that stuff. Even if it took a half hour to hash out, have both teams go back to the pits and let the correct winner know so they can come out and celebrate appropriately. Sounds easier than it actually is, I know.

Pure speculation- I'm going to guess after the crash in the pro mod final and with the time delay to clean things up, they make a quick decision to change something in the bellhousing. Possibly with it cooling off, the track was getting a little better and they threw some primary on it at the last minute and the mistake was made. However, you know what assuming gets you.

 

[BOO BOO]

The car that won the race was the one that didn't blow up. Which is a bigger safety infraction? When was the last time an inspection cover changed the outcome of a race? Tires yes, this no.
Dock them points and money if you want but the winner of that race was Langdon....

Taking the win away did dock them points.

 

[Rich D]

I think disqualifying the run is a consistent call. Thinking back to a few runs recently where things were found to be out of spec or safety related items found similar punishment. Steven Densham in Vegas made a quick repair on their chute cable/handle in the staging lanes NHRA didn't like, the run was tossed. Terry Haddock had something with a body latch that had the run DQ'd in Vegas as well. It was a run that put him in the field as I recall, and that run being tossed left him outside the show. The other recent infractions with wing angle / position, funny car header angle / width, Fire bottle pins being left in - all resulted in the runs being tossed out. This run just happened to be the final round. Unfortunately to unify things it really doesn't matter if it's Q1 or E4, the punishment has been the run gets thrown out. I think to say we'll let things slide just because it's the final is not the correct thing to do.

I guess what I may have an issue with is the time it took to figure things out. I mean, they all had to know at the top end what the deal was. If it's a black and white issue, I feel the call should have been made right away and not let the team go through the winners circle and all that stuff. Even if it took a half hour to hash out, have both teams go back to the pits and let the correct winner know so they can come out and celebrate appropriately. Sounds easier than it actually is, I know.

Pure speculation- I'm going to guess after the crash in the pro mod final and with the time delay to clean things up, they make a quick decision to change something in the bellhousing. Possibly with it cooling off, the track was getting a little better and they threw some primary on it at the last minute and the mistake was made. However, you know what assuming gets you.

I agree Paul. It actually makes Clay's penalty look way too harsh in comparison. Both are valid safety violations, but didn't he get disqualified from the entire event? I can see that a safety violation gets the run thrown out, and in my opinion an intentional rule violation resulting in a performance advantage should escalate to a more serious consequence.

 

[Marchboom]

Another consideration: Were the bolts that came lose in the bellhousing cover during the run? Or did they come out AFTER the finish line? The race track is from the start line to the finish line and rules apply on the race track. Can the NHRA prove when the bolts came out? Maybe they came out as Langdon was turning off the track. With the in-car cameras, how many times have we seen prostock drivers take off their helmets before turning off the track? Rules say a driver has to wear a helmet while on the track and it has been determined that the "track" is from the start line to the finish line. Just a thought.

 

[Just Paul]

but didn't he get disqualified from the entire event?

I don't think anybody was disqualified from the entire event.

 

[Ponyhntr]

Another consideration: Were the bolts that came lose in the bellhousing cover during the run? Or did they come out AFTER the finish line? The race track is from the start line to the finish line and rules apply on the race track. Can the NHRA prove when the bolts came out? Maybe they came out as Langdon was turning off the track. With the in-car cameras, how many times have we seen prostock drivers take off their helmets before turning off the track? Rules say a driver has to wear a helmet while on the track and it has been determined that the "track" is from the start line to the finish line. Just a thought.

That is not correct. The racetrack is from ready line to return road. It is stated no less than 10 times in the rulebook.

 

[mikie]

its in the rule book thats why there is no appeal

 

[Rich D]

I don't think anybody was disqualified from the entire event.

"The disqualification led to a loss of 74 points and imposed a $5,000 fine to Millican".

 

[Just Paul]

"The disqualification led to a loss of 74 points and imposed a $5,000 fine to Millican".

You might want to check what event that was quoted from.

 

[Rich D]

You might want to check what event that was quoted from.

Sorry if I wasn't clear. My original post was referencing the safety violation for the loose ballast.

 

[Ponyhntr]

Sorry if I wasn't clear. My original post was referencing the safety violation for the loose ballast.

The rulebook specifically states loose ballast is an Event DQ. It’s back and white at that point.

 

[TSK]

I'm betting these bolts won't be left loose again.

I wonder if the person responsible for tightening those bolts will be part of the crew at the next race(s).

 

[Rich D]

The rulebook specifically states loose ballast is an Event DQ. It’s back and white at that point.

I am not claiming that the rule book wasn't followed. I just think recent events have highlighted some inconsistencies with the prescribed punishments for different infractions. I think safety infractions (although sometimes serious) should be a certain "tier" of punishment, while outright "cheating" (knowingly circumventing the rules for a performance advantage) should be a more severe "tier". In all of the safety violations I can recall over the last few years, none seemed to have ill intent. Cheating is a whole other conversation in my book.

 

[Ponyhntr]

I am not claiming that the rule book wasn't followed. I just think recent events have highlighted some inconsistencies with the prescribed punishments for different infractions. I think safety infractions (although sometimes serious) should be a certain "tier" of punishment, while outright "cheating" (knowingly circumventing the rules for a performance advantage) should be a more severe "tier". In all of the safety violations I can recall over the last few years, none seemed to have ill intent. Cheating is a whole other conversation in my book.

A safety violation is a safety violation. You can’t tier them. All of them are serious, and one could argue they all have the same level of danger… the ultimate sacrifice- for multiple parties. Driver, crew, NHRA Officials, spectators, etc.

 

[Topfuel386]

Hey Josh, any idea why Antron’s infraction from Bristol wasn’t listed with the other Bristol infractions?

 

[Ponyhntr]

Hey Josh, any idea why Antron’s infraction from Bristol wasn’t listed with the other Bristol infractions?

I couldn’t tell you for sure Kyle. If I were to guess, it was probably just an oversight.

 

[Butch]

Hey Josh, any idea why Antron’s infraction from Bristol wasn’t listed with the other Bristol infractions?

I'm wondering if the problem was similar to the one that Clay got. Both are from the same builder and after finding AB's infrastructure they will be looking at all

 

[Ponyhntr]

I'm wondering if the problem was similar to the one that Clay got. Both are from the same builder and after finding AB's infrastructure they will be looking at all

No, 2 completely different infractions. Antrons was too much positive wing angle (attack of the main element), Clay’s was too much wing setback (rear wing was too far behind the rear axle centerline).

 

[65 Goatboy]

I wonder if the person responsible for tightening those bolts will be part of the crew at the next race(s).

We will never know, at least not here.

 

[BaldyLochs]

What’s done is done. It’s 3 day old news now; But everyone in Ashley world knows that Shawn clocked a .940 at nearly three hundred and twenty miles per hour. Ohio here we come!