BOWMANVILLE, Ont. -- Chase Elliott wrecked Ty Dillon on the last lap Sunday to win the NASCAR Truck Series race at Canadian Tire Motorsport Park, and a drivers angry girlfriend got into action when she slapped a rival racer. Elliott, the son of former Sprint Cup driver Bill Elliott, plowed into Dillon on the final turn on the 2.459-mile road course to take the lead and went on to his first series victory. At 17 years, 9 months, 4 days, he became the youngest winner in series history. "We only have so many shots to win these things. I really hate to win them like that, I really do," Elliott said. "Thats not how I race and thats never been how Ive raced before. I had a shot. I was up next to Ty and I knew he was going to try and chop me off. I tried to make up the difference. ... Sometimes youve got to do what youve got to do to get to victory lane." Dillon dropped to 17th, the last car on the lead lap, in the series first race in Canada and first on a road course since 2000 at Watkins Glen. "Youve got to show respect," Dillon said. "I hope he runs Iowa (next week). He wont finish the race." The ending of the race was overshadowed by a post-race altercation between Max Papis and the girlfriend of driver Mike Skeen, who approached Papis after the race and slapped him across the face. Papis and Skeen had been battling for third in the closing laps of the race until contact between the two on the last lap ruined Papis finish. The two hit again during the cool-down lap, and Papis voiced his displeasure about Skeen during his post-race interview. When he finished talking he was approached by a woman later identified as Skeens girlfriend and slapped across the face. Papis complained to NASCAR officials about the incident and said on Twitter the slap dislocated his jaw. Skeen, meanwhile, said Papis entered his team hauler after the incident and tried to pull his girlfriend down the stairs as he tried to get past her while looking for the driver. Elliott, driving for Hendrick Motorsports in only his sixth series start, further explained the wreck. "Had two ideas that didnt work out for me and had an opportunity there getting into 10," Elliott said. "I felt like the 3 (Dillon) was sputtering. I felt like he was really, really close or he was out of gas or something and got to his right rear quarterpanel and tried to move him out of the way and unfortunately ended up putting him in the fence. ... "He obviously wasnt happy. He has a right not to be happy. I wouldnt have been happy, either, but at the same time, like we all three said, youve got to do what youve got to do." Chad Hackenbracht was second, followed by Miguel Paludo, Darrell Wallace Jr., Ron Hornaday Jr., Papis, Ross Chastain, Timothy Peters, James Buescher and Matt Crafton. Skeen was 13th. Crafton leads the series standings, 47 points ahead of Buescher. Dillon is third, 63 points behind Crafton. Ryan Blaney was the previous youngest winner, taking the Iowa race last September at 18 years, 8 months, 15 days. Nike Air Max 2016 Blu .ca NFL Power Rankings, overtaking the Denver Broncos and remaining ahead of NFC competition San Francisco, Carolina and New Orleans. Nike Air Max Lunar 90 Br . -- Claudio Bieler hadnt scored since early September, and not from the run of play since mid-July. ht... .C. -- Kemba Walker and the Charlotte Bobcats got off to a fast start, and the Sacramento Kings were never quite able to catch up. [url=http://www.airmax-2016.it/nike-air-max-2016.html]Nike Air Max 2016 Scontate . Ouellette, from Montreal, already has three Olympic gold medals since joining the team in 1999. Nike Air Max 95 Offerte . Darren Helm scored on Detroits sixth attempt in the shootout and then Jonas Gustavsson stopped Andrew Shaws shot, lifting the Detroit Red Wings to a 5-4 win over the Chicago Blackhawks on Wednesday night.Got a question on rule clarification, comments on rule enforcements or some memorable NHL stories? Kerry wants to answer your emails at cmonref@tsn.ca. Hi Kerry, Ive been a huge fan of you and your hair for as long as I can remember. Loved your book and the insights you give in your columns. In regards to the disputed goal by the Red Wings during their game versus the Kings on Saturday, can you provide some insight as to how the on ice officials made their determination?From what Ive read, there seems to be two different thoughts on why a goal was allowed with a puck that was clearly out of play. One, none of the on ice officials saw the puck clearly hit the safety netting so the call on the ice stands, a goal. Two, on ice official(s) did see the puck hit the safety net, but as none of them blew the play dead (or intended to), the play was still active and whether or not they saw it hit the net is irrelevant. The call on the ice stands as the play was active and cant be overruled. Both reasons center around the fact that no video review was allowed so the call on the ice had to stand. In an age where basic things like boundary violations can easily be determined with video review, when is the NHL going to change things to expand video review for goals? Thanks for your great work and insights. Sincerely,Kurt JordanEncinitas, CA Kurt: To answer your first question, you can take it to the bank when I tell you that none of the four officials on the ice saw the puck strike the fan-friendly protective netting above the end zone glass. If one of the crew had witnessed the puck leave the playing surface (or even came to that conclusion through self-reflection) a goal would have subsequently been disallowed in spite of the fact that the whistle had not blown. The officials intent to blow the whistle would prevail to ensure that the correct call was made. When the play occurred in real time, I was bombarded with questions on Twitter as to how four officials can possibly miss this call. I hope you will understand there are times when it is next to impossible to track the puck at ice level. The perfect storm resulted on this play after Niklas Kronwalls slapper was blocked by Jarret Stoll causing the puck to rocket into the upper atmosphere of the Joe. Referee Rob Martell was appropriately focused on Todd Bertuzzi and the action in and around Jonathan Quick. The other three officials attempted to locate the puck in its flight path. Please dont suggest that the whistle should have immediately blown because these three officials lost sight of the puck. A reasonable time frame is allowed to make sure the puck is either frozen or out of play in an effort to avoid a premature whistle. The very best angle to track and detect the puck hitting the protective net was enjoyed by Kings defenceman Drew Doughty as he approached the goal line, facing the end boards and looking in an upward stare. None of the Officials shared Doughtys perspective! The next visual connection with the puck that any of the offficials possibly had was when it was tracking downward just prior to striking Jonathan Quick on the numbers and deflected directly into the net.dddddddddddd Drew Doughty immediately appealed to referee Martell and provided the evidence he had witnessed. Doughtys information would have been communicated in the conference held at the Referee crease. The gut wrenching truth these guys wrestled with was that none of them had seen the puck strike the protective netting to rule the play dead. The Officials were helpless to do anything other than allow the goal to stand since the puck clearly enter the net off the back of Quick. With an understanding of what took place I cant fault the Officials one bit. The blame rests clearly on the current video review process and the Hockey Operations Department and personnel that make exclusive "officiating decisions" on a nightly basis in the Situation Room in Toronto. Kurt, you asked when is the NHL going to change things to expand video review for goals? I cant understand why the general managers have not insisted on revamping the review process. It is surely time for a complete overhaul! I point out Rule 38.4 (viii) which says, "The video review process shall be permitted to assist the referees in determining the legitimacy of all potential goals (e.g. to ensure they are "good hockey goals"). For example (but not limited to), pucks that enter the net by going though the net messing, pucks that enter the net from underneath the net frame, pucks that enter the net undetected by the referee, etc." I would hope that an undetected puck that leaves the playing surface (hitting protective netting out of play) and then directly results in the puck entering the net would fall under that broad "ETC" in the rule to permit video review to "assist the referees" in determining the legitimacy of the goal. This was well beyond the parameters of a "good hockey goal!" There was absolutely zero "assistance" provided from the Situation Room as the officials huddled on the ice in an attempt to make a correct determination. I suspect the officials were dying a thousand deaths on the ice and the replay clearly demonstrates that a telephone call was not initiated by the Toronto Situation Room to "assist the referees." Major League Baseball announced last Thursday (link) at the Owners Meetings their unanimous decision to fund and expand instant replay for the 2014 season. The key points for quick reference are including the managers challenge and most importantly that off-site decisions will be conducted at the Replay Command Center in New York which will become their Situation Room. Two additional four-man umpire crews will be hired and rotated through New York to review video feeds. The replay umpires decision in New York will be final. Take a lesson NHL; its time to make a positive change with regard to video review. Perhaps Los Angeles Kings general manager Dean Lombardi might agree. cheap nfl jerseys cheap jerseys cheap jerseys cheap jerseys cheap nfl jerseys wholesale jerseys ' ' '