Ricky Stenhouse Jr. and Michael McDowell settled their differences on Charlotte Motor Speedway’s cooldown lap, but not everyone in NASCAR thinks the incident should end there. After Stenhouse door-slammed McDowell’s No. 71 Chevrolet, McDowell retaliated and eventually spun the No. 47. Despite reviewing the incident from multiple camera angles, NASCAR officials didn’t penalize either driver. Now, a NASCAR insider is pushing back on the decision, arguing that drivers shouldn’t be allowed to use their cars as weapons after the checkered flag, especially when the damage can hit teams in the wallet.

“Don’t use the car as a weapon after the checkered flag has dropped. That’s my rule of thumb. And I think NASCAR probably should have stepped in. This whole self policing thing, it just kind of gets lazy to me after a while,” co-host Large said on the Rubbin’ Is Racing podcast following Stenhouse Jr. and McDowell’s post-race confrontation at Charlotte Motor Speedway.

The incident reignited a familiar debate in NASCAR: how much freedom should drivers have to settle scores after the race? Large believes NASCAR should have issued at least a minor penalty, arguing that using a race car to send a message after the finish risks damaging expensive equipment for no competitive gain.

Vice president of racing communications Mike Forde described the decision as a close call, saying officials debated whether the contact warranted punishment.

He explained that they ultimately viewed it as an emotional exchange that cooled quickly when the drivers returned to pit road and Stenhouse spoke to McDowell through his window. NASCAR planned to meet with both drivers at Phoenix Raceway to discuss what happened.

“A lot of discussion on whether we penalize, or whether we don’t. I would probably say that this is probably the closest it’s gotten to being a penalty without it being a penalty. But we looked at it as emotion again. And they came down pit road, and Stenhouse went to (McDowell’s) window and had a conversation. It cooled down pretty quickly,” he said.

Large’s objection, however, goes beyond whether Stenhouse and McDowell made peace afterward. He argued that drivers should handle grievances away from the track rather than risk damaging cars teams have spent substantial money preparing.

He also highlighted NASCAR’s financial reality, noting that Stenhouse, who drives for the smaller Hyak Motorsports organization, should understand the cost of damaged equipment. Although Spire Motorsports has greater resources, Large’s point was that teams shouldn’t have to absorb repair bills because a driver wants to make a statement after the checkered flag.

The co-host, Spider, agreed with the principle, even while describing Stenhouse as one of NASCAR’s prized fighters. He believes the sport benefits from drivers who race aggressively and can stand up for themselves. But he drew a line between using a car to gain position during competition and using it to retaliate after the race.

In his view, post-race contact can cross from showing frustration into unnecessary equipment damage. Large added that drivers who still want to confront one another can do so on pit road, where a verbal exchange does not put another team’s car at risk.

NASCAR CEO Steve O’Donnell’s comments following the Bristol fight between Carson Hocevar and Ryan Blaney offer a useful look at the sanctioning body’s philosophy. After the two drivers exchanged punches on pit road following an on-track collision, O’Donnell explained why NASCAR would not penalize either driver.

“If drivers are going to handle their own business, the way we looked at that, how it played out, we’re not going to encourage fighting, but what we are going to encourage is passion, right?”

O’Donnell also distinguished between physical confrontations away from the cars and using a vehicle to retaliate. “Don’t use your car as a weapon, so to speak, right,” he said, referencing the 2010 Talladega incident involving Brad Keselowski and Carl Edwards. “We don’t want to see that.”

Those remarks make Large’s argument particularly relevant. NASCAR has signaled it will let drivers express frustration away from their cars, but the Charlotte incident raises questions about where that freedom ends. If officials want drivers to settle disputes outside their vehicles, post-race contact involving the cars themselves presents a different concern.

The 2024 Chicago Street Race provides another comparison. Race officials fined Bubba Wallace $50,000 for door-slamming Alex Bowman’s No. 48 Chevrolet on the cooldown lap and sending the race winner into a concrete barrier. Bowman had already lowered his window net, unlike Stenhouse and McDowell, whose nets remained up. NASCAR officials indicated that the Charlotte incident likely would have drawn a penalty if the contact had caused a car to hit the wall or damaged another vehicle.

That leaves a difficult question for NASCAR: should consequences depend primarily on the damage caused, or should deliberate post-race contact itself trigger punishment? Large likes Stenhouse and does not want the sport to strip away the aggression that makes him compelling. His proposed response is modest, but he believes even a slap on the wrist could clarify the boundary.

With NASCAR planning to speak with Stenhouse and McDowell at Phoenix, officials have an opportunity to make that distinction clearer without abandoning the passion they want to preserve.