Congrats Tom

[BernerMotorsprt]

Congrats little brother on your 2nd place in points even after missing that week you took for vacation.. Sorry we could not be there tonight to see you run, heard you were very exciting to watch come through the field from 18th to 2nd.

[DriveitinDeep]

Great drive Tommy! Way to go.

[W. J.]

Congrats, Tommy. For a guy who took a week off, you sure did finish well, thanks to your consistent finishes week in and week out when your raced. You showed last night that you are a fair competitor, and raced the eventual champ cleanly each time you were up against him. It reflects well on both of you as drivers, and you should be proud.:)
Good luck wherever you race the rest of the season, and next year.:cheers:

[Ace]

Great season Tommy, to miss a race and finish 2nd in the points is a great job. Good luck the rest of the year and hope to see ya run next year at Riverhead as you put on a good show each week.

[RGeeProductions]

Nice year of racing, for the most part.
Congrats for a fine 2nd in points.

[Wheel Racing]

Great Job Tommy! Can someone help me understand why Tommy had to start so far back. I missed the explanation,but I heard there was a driver complaining to the officials about using 2 cars.Who was crying?

[W. J.]

Don't know who was complaining, but I spoke to Tom after the races. There was an issue about him qualifying both the 5 and 6. He made clear which he was going to drive (#6) and explained #5 had motor issues. Later on, he was confronted by officials about 'they thought he was driving the #5' and after an argument with them over the issue, Tom voluntarily elected to start in the rear.

[watchinurace]

Great Job Tommy! Can someone help me understand why Tommy had to start so far back. I missed the explanation,but I heard there was a driver complaining to the officials about using 2 cars.Who was crying?


Neal,
I do not believe a tear was shed Sat night.
A review of the NASCAR Rule book educated all parties involved about about PROPER qualifyng procedures as defined by NASCAR.
So for your education, please refer to your NASCAR Rule Book under qualifying procedures.
A driver may only attempt to qualify 1 (one) car. Therefore when Rogers took time for the 5 car and qualified, that was the time he had to stand on.
By NASCAR rules he cannot attempt to qualify a second car and then pick which car he wants to drive.
Also he should not be drawing for time trial position for more than one car. Each car has to have a driver who picks for time trial order.
All owners,drivers and crew chiefs should be well versed with NASCAR Rules. Especially the rules that ARE black and white with NO grey areas.
I hope the above information is of value to you.
Ann Young

[W. J.]

Ann, is that a rule that applies strictly to time trail qualifying? The reason I ask is, I know you can have a back-up car, and run it in a consi to also qualify, but that you must race the last car you qualified. Someone I mentioned it to felt that it worked differently with time trials, and I just need a clarification. Thanks.

[watchinurace]

According to NASCAR RULES. A driver may only attempt to qualify ONE car. If he qualifies #1 car, the back up car must be qualified by a different driver. A driver cannot qualify 2 cars.......if we are talking about a NASCAR Sanctioned Event and a NASCAR Division.

[hollywoodmic]

Yeah, WJ I never remember a driver being able to qualify 2 cars unless they had to withdraw one with a problem. I believe the driver can then attempt to qualify from the back of the consi, but you can't have a car qualified and then qualify another one. To my knowledge.

[W. J.]

Okay Ann, I appreciate the help and clarification on this one, Thank you so much.

Getting the whole story, it seems that miscommunication took place as to Tommy's intentions in running the car during time trials, between Tommy and the officials. Everyone thought it was straightened out, but I guess it wasn't. Everyone should learn from this and move on.

[Ka$h25]

I thought what Hollywood said was the more accurate rule. It looks like Ann may have taken it straight out of the book so not much to debate on. However I THOUGHT the ruling was by qualifying a second car you automatically DIS-qualify your first car.

[W. J.]

I thought what Hollywood said was the more accurate rule. It looks like Ann may have taken it straight out of the book so not much to debate on. However I THOUGHT the ruling was by qualifying a second car you automatically DIS-qualify your first car.
Only in a show where there is a consi race run. Straight up time trials, you only get one shot.

[watchinurace]

Only in a show where there is a consi race run. Straight up time trials, you only get one shot.

I dont really want to beat a dead horse however if we are talking about a NASCAR sanctioned event and we are competing under NASCAR rules, a driver can only qualify 1 (ONE) car. Now in order to attempt to qualify in the consi with a second car ,the first car must be scratched from the feature event rendering the driver no longer qualified therefore he can make another attempt. This is the NASCAR rule on qualifying.

[W. J.]

Thanks Ann. I didn't go into detail, but that is basically what I meant.

[top row crew]

Congratulations Bill Park and Tom Rogers, you two are the class of the field each and every week.

[Wheel Racing]

Neal,
I do not believe a tear was shed Sat night.
A review of the NASCAR Rule book educated all parties involved about about PROPER qualifyng procedures as defined by NASCAR.
So for your education, please refer to your NASCAR Rule Book under qualifying procedures.....
Ann Young

The way it was told to me was that there was a driver comlaining/crying/*****ing(choose the one you like best) and that the track told Tommy he could take both cars out.They even announced that the #6 would be the car that would count negating the #5's times regardless of the outcome once the #6 hit the track. I thought this fair and was surprised when I heard differently. I had no idea who complained(until now,obviously). I am just a fan of Tommy and asked the question.I never had a chance to ask him personally,so I asked the question here.If rules are rules,then fine,I just got the impression that there was some misrepresentation of them initially.