Jerry Emmons speaks his mind

[GTX JOHN]

I agree 100% with Jim Carter.

[tpoh815]

Rule needs to change period. Starters discretion? So spend your hard earned money and he will tell you how your driving style should be based on "HIS" interpretation??
It sounds like it to me!

[Dwight Southerland]

However, immediate discretionary calls are common in all kinds of sports. Standards and clear rules are necessary, and an official should be at the place of action. Maybe we need a line judge and instant replay? The nature of such sports related calls always makes for controversy. This is a good time to review rules, process and procedure.

[Michael Beard]

the fact remains NHRA needs to clarify and put it into black and white exactly what is and what isn't excessive braking.

It IS in black and white. The rule specifically states:

Section 2, Page 8
Disqualifications:
Anytime it has been judged that excessive braking has resulted in loss of control that results in contact with the guardwall and/or light fixtures or crossing the center boundary lines, INCLUDING PAST THE FINISH LINE, the contestant will be disqualified.

The only 'discretion' involved in this rule is determining whether or not a vehicle hit something or crossed the centerline. Period. It is completely unambiguous.

On the recent WFO Podcast, Division Director Mike Rice quoted the rule and then went on to say he thinks it should say or mean something else. While I agree that the rule does not go far enough, it does not matter what I think or Mike Rice thinks, or anyone else. The rule says what it says. If NHRA does not like what the rule says, then they should change the rule.

If NHRA's rule read the same as IHRA's rule on the subject, they *might* have a leg to stand on. Under "Grounds For Disqualifications", it states:

Excessive braking in handicap eliminators that causes loss of control. If only tire smoke is obvious, a warning may be issued for first offense. This is at the discretion of race director.

There are runs that Emmons made that *might* have warranted a warning. The run that he was ultimately DQ'd for should not have even warranted a warning, in my opinion.

As I have said before, In my personal opinion, NHRA's rule doesn't go far enough, and NHRA's ruling went too far! There is a LOT of space between the two. They either need to rewrite the rule and start DQ'ing a LOT of drivers this year, or apologize and make amends with Mr. Emmons.


There is a completely separate issue here that is being largely ignored. There is a problem with Emmon's car, and he is aware of it. On the WFO Podcast, he said that after one of the runs where it smoked the tires and got sideways on him, they took all the wheels off the car and had the brakes inspected by a well-known chassis builder. While they did not find an obvious issue, the car continues to not stop the way they would like it to. When Thomas Fletcher had his dramatic 360 spin a couple of years ago, Dan inspected the car and found a problem with the brakes, and fixed it.

[Eric Merryfield]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

It IS in black and white. The rule specifically states:



The only 'discretion' involved in this rule is determining whether or not a vehicle hit something or crossed the centerline. Period. It is completely unambiguous.

On the recent WFO Podcast, Division Director Mike Rice quoted the rule and then went on to say he thinks it should say or mean something else. While I agree that the rule does not go far enough, it does not matter what I think or Mike Rice thinks, or anyone else. The rule says what it says. If NHRA does not like what the rule says, then they should change the rule.

If NHRA's rule read the same as IHRA's rule on the subject, they *might* have a leg to stand on. Under "Grounds For Disqualifications", it states:


There are runs that Emmons made that *might* have warranted a warning. The run that he was ultimately DQ'd for should not have even warranted a warning, in my opinion.

As I have said before, In my personal opinion, NHRA's rule doesn't go far enough, and NHRA's ruling went too far! There is a LOT of space between the two. They either need to rewrite the rule and start DQ'ing a LOT of drivers this year, or apologize and make amends with Mr. Emmons.


There is a completely separate issue here that is being largely ignored. There is a problem with Emmon's car, and he is aware of it. On the WFO Podcast, he said that after one of the runs where it smoked the tires and got sideways on him, they took all the wheels off the car and had the brakes inspected by a well-known chassis builder. While they did not find an obvious issue, the car continues to not stop the way they would like it to. When Thomas Fletcher had his dramatic 360 spin a couple of years ago, Dan inspected the car and found a problem with the brakes, and fixed it.

I think you brought up the relevant issue here Michael! Not sure what the brake issue was with the Camaro at Epping, but it might be the same with the Emmon's Camaro. I seem to recall that there were some warning signs with that other stocker also. Maybe they should reach out to Dan. The sound of that 360 was very sobering out in the pits right next to the finish line.......the tire marks on the track maybe even more so.

[TBR151J]

Originally Posted by Michael Beard

It IS in black and white. The rule specifically states:



The only 'discretion' involved in this rule is determining whether or not a vehicle hit something or crossed the centerline. Period. It is completely unambiguous.

Let me clarify. If NHRA wants to make a ruling in a case such as this based off of skid marks seen on the track OR based off of tire smoke coming from the front tires, then they need to clarify the rule and include that. I agree that what was done in no way violates the rule as written, and I can see where he would be mighty P-O'd about being DQ'd per the rule as written. My point being is if NHRA want to make a ruling on this how the did, then they need to amend the rule at the same time. That's all I was trying to say.

And I agree that sometimes its excessive braking because the driver stomped two feet on the pedal and tried to throw the car in park, and sometimes things happen because of mechanical issues and that can cause the car to wiggle, premature lock up the tires, etc. I would hope that if it's a mechanical issue NHRA would make up for it somehow, but it is NHRA after all.

[Dan Wilson]

It appears to me that racers are dialing soft with the full intension of hitting the breaks at the end of the run. If that is the plan then plan on getting tossed. They should dial closer to what they can run so this is not an issue. They know what their car will run.

Dan

[Tony Janes]

That is how it works Dan with the top notch drivers.

[MR DERBY CITY]

Originally Posted by Dan Wilson

It appears to me that racers are dialing soft with the full intension of hitting the breaks at the end of the run. If that is the plan then plan on getting tossed. They should dial closer to what they can run so this is not an issue. They know what their car will run.

Dan

Gee, you are very astute.

[Jeff Stout]

Originally Posted by Dan Wilson

It appears to me that racers are dialing soft with the full intension of hitting the breaks at the end of the run. If that is the plan then plan on getting tossed. They should dial closer to what they can run so this is not an issue. They know what their car will run.

Dan

Driver can dial whatever he or she wants under index. That's the rule. No rule stating you have to run what you know your car will run. Its to bad though as AHFS would work very quickly.