I think Val got burned.

[sjberry2017]

What is the rule? You can't have alcohol at the site, or you can't have it during the round?

The PDGA announcement cited sections 3.05C and 3.03B.10 of the Competition manual:

3.05C: Players choosing to use a caddie will be solely responsible for their caddie's conduct from the two minute warning until the player's card is turned in. Misconduct by a caddie may subject both the player and caddie to disqualification and/or suspension.

3.03B.10: Possession of alcohol from the start of play until the player's scorecard is submitted is not allowed. Such possession shall result in immediate disqualification at PDGA events sanctioned at B-Tier or higher. The Tournament Director may, at his sole discretion, elect to issue a warning to the offending player in lieu of disqualification solely at PDGA events sanctioned at C-tier and below. If a player has been previously issued a warning for alcohol possession at the same event, all subsequent violations shall result in immediate disqualification.

I don't think Val got burned really; it sucks for her and the event, but it's in the rules and she should definitely know better. The NT, with all respect to the DGPT, is the premier disc golf tour, and as such, is where professionalism matters most. It is not unreasonable, then, to hold the largest stakeholders for the sport becoming more professional (the pros), to these high standards. That's not to exclude alcohol sponsors from the sport, but to set the expectation for behavior on the course. For example, even though the Colorado Rockies play at Coors Field, you don't see them chugging Coors in the dugouts or on the field. While that at one time was just part of the game, nowadays it's changed, and even if the old ways were better, I really don't see a way to go back to them.

 

[wims]

Why didn't she tell her caddy to f off?

 

[SonicGuy]

I don't really see how making a discretionary DQ for the fairly innocuous action by a caddie makes this sport any more professional. It does confirm the status of disc golfers as small time rules lawyers.

 

[_MTL_]

I don't really see how making a discretionary DQ for the fairly innocuous action by a caddie makes this sport any more professional.

I would agree had alcohol been legal in the park.

 

[Fly_High]

Let's throw some gas on this fire. I have hear mama Jenkins was caddying for her.

 

[BlazedOrangeHat]

Yes, for the offending person. The caddie rules leave it up to the TD to DQ players for the actions of their caddies.

Val absolutely was supposed to be disqualified by the rules. There is no wiggle room.

B. Players will have the option to bring a caddie or carrying device during their round of play. Although a player's caddie is subject to all items within the PDGA Rules of Play and the PDGA Competition Manual including the dress code. A caddie need not meet membership or certified official requirements.

B. Players are expected to behave in a professional and sportsmanlike manner while participating in a PDGA-sanctioned event. Actions that are in violation of this conduct include but are not limited to:

10. Possession of alcohol from the start of play until the player's scorecard is submitted is not allowed. Such possession shall result in immediate disqualification at PDGA events sanctioned at B-Tier or higher. The Tournament Director may, at his sole discretion, elect to issue a warning to the offending player in lieu of disqualification solely at PDGA events sanctioned at C-tier and below. If a player has been previously issued a warning for alcohol possession at the same event, all subsequent violations shall result in immediate disqualification.

C. Players choosing to use a caddie will be solely responsible for their caddie's conduct from the two minute warning until the player's card is turned in. Misconduct by a caddie may subject both the player and caddie to disqualification and/or suspension.

The "may" part is saying that the infraction committed by the caddie MAY result in a disqualification (...depending on the infraction). the "may" part is hinged on the severity of the infraction. If the caddie said, "****", which could be a courtesy violation, the player will get a warning and nobody gets DQ'd. Because caddies are a direct extension of the player and the player is solely responsible for the caddie, if the caddy commits an immediate disqualification behavior, the player will automatically be disqualified.

It also doesn't matter if Val carried her bag the whole round, as soon as her mom stepped in to start fulfilling caddie duties, she became Val's caddie. Doesn't matter if she was carrying it for one hole or the entire round.

 

[SonicGuy]

You are out of your element Donny.

You are incorrect about the "may" language. You are reading intent as interpreted by yourself into the rule, instead of reading the rule as written. The rule does not pass through the punishment for the infraction from caddie to player, the punishment is completely separate. The TD could DQ the player within their discretion for ANY violation by the caddie. Likewise the TD can refrain from DQing the player regardless of the infraction by the caddie.

 

[SonicGuy]

I would agree had alcohol been legal in the park.

I fail to see how the park regulations impacts the DQ of a player for their caddie's violation.
Are you saying that violation of a parks regulation makes it sich a huge issue where it required the TD to swing the banhammer?

 

[_MTL_]

I fail to see how the park regulations impacts the DQ of a player for their caddie's violation.
Are you saying that violation of a parks regulation makes it sich a huge issue where it required the TD to swing the banhammer?

Because when alcohol is not allowed at a tournament site due to park rules / laws, section 7 of 3.03 kicks in as well which says:

"Activities which are in violation of federal, state or local laws or ordinances, park regulations or disc golf course rules"

 

[DiscFifty]

This weekend's incident is a blip on the radar that will be largely forgotten sooner rather than later.

I disagree..and I'm a HUGE fan of Nate & Val. But I'm still confused/shocked...that Val or her mom...would even think of allowing a beer to be anywhere close to a pdga event. Her mother is also a huge ambassador for the sport. Granted...this has to be simply a case of..."Had a beer in between rounds and oops...forgot to remove the next one from my bag". No way was she drinking on the course. Val was doing great and I was looking forward to her finishing out the event.

 

[BlazedOrangeHat]

You are out of your element Donny.

You are incorrect about the "may" language. You are reading intent as interpreted by yourself into the rule, instead of reading the rule as written. The rule does not pass through the punishment for the infraction from caddie to player, the punishment is completely separate. The TD could DQ the player within their discretion for ANY violation by the caddie. Likewise the TD can refrain from DQing the player regardless of the infraction by the caddie.

Okay, so leave this "may" interpretation out of it.

The others rules clearly say that the caddie MUST follow all competition manual rules. The competition manual also says the player is solely responsible for all caddie conduct. If the caddie is responsible to adhere to all competition manual rules and the player is responsible for all caddie conduct... then all caddie conduct IS player conduct. The caddie and the player are two souls, one entity.

Anything the caddie does is technically also what the player does. If the rules say alcohol is an immediate DQ, it doesn't matter if it was the player or the caddie because they are one entity.

 

[_MTL_]

The saddest part of this entire situation is that people actually think she shouldn't have been DQed and that the PDGA is taking a step back or should be embarrassed for this.

 

[SonicGuy]

Okay, so leave this "may" interpretation out of it.

The others rules clearly say that the caddie MUST follow all competition manual rules. The competition manual also says the player is solely responsible for all caddie conduct. If the caddie is responsible to adhere to all competition manual rules and the player is responsible for all caddie conduct... then all caddie conduct IS player conduct. The caddie and the player are two souls, one entity.

Anything the caddie does is technically also what the player does. If the rules say alcohol is an immediate DQ, it doesn't matter if it was the player or the caddie because they are one entity.

Clearly you believe this but it is not true. Being "responsible" does not translate into suffering the exact same consequences had the player been the one to make the action.

Look, you can go on and on interpreting these things however you want, I will continue to go by the written rules. The written rules have a single paragraph stating the penalty for caddie misconduct. That penalty is not "whatever penalty would have been given had the player committed the misconduct themselves" as you read into the rules. The rules state that the only punishment is that the TD *MAY* subject them to disqualification and/or suspension.

 

[SonicGuy]

The saddest part of this entire situation is that people actually think she shouldn't have been DQed and that the PDGA is taking a step back or should be embarrassed for this.

Why exactly is that sad? She didn't do anything wrong, her caddie did. Big freaking whoop.

Now if her caddie where doing things to help her win in some illicit way, like pencil whipping or changing a lie or interfering with a competitor, then sure, DQ all day long.

 

[Aim For The Chains]

4 real. DG should embrace the culture.

Dranxing and zmoke'n awwwwlllldaeeee! $

 

[SonicGuy]

Btw this is just another example of Boomer mentality. Boomers set up the rules for them to succeed, therefore they want the rules abided by. This is why ball golfers are such jerks with country club rules. "That polo is off-white not white, I'm sorry Chadderick but you are disqualified."

Any time a rule is used to take skill out of the equation I am offended by it unless there is an iron clad need for that to take place. In this case the rules violation could have easily been handled by asking the caddie to leave, allowing the skill of Val and her competitors to decide the outcome of the event.

 

[_MTL_]

The rules state that the only punishment is that the TD *MAY* subject them to disqualification and/or suspension.

So, in essence, you are arguing a judgment call that the TD has the right to make.

You have the right to disagree, just as a player can argue that a pitch shouldn't have been a strike, but that doesn't change the right for the TD to make that call. And you have to respect that right just as you have to respect the right of the ump to call a strike.

 

[BlazedOrangeHat]

Clearly you believe this but it is not true. Being "responsible" does not translate into suffering the exact same consequences had the player been the one to make the action.

The definition of "responsible" - being the primary cause of something and so able to be blamed or credited for it.


Need I say more?

The manual says the caddie must follow the competition manual... the manual says the player is RESPONSIBLE for the caddie... as in SO ABLE TO BE BLAMED (from the definition of responsible)... therefor if the caddie does a DQ action, then it also applies to the player.

This is a really simple flow of logic...

 

[_MTL_]

Why exactly is that sad? She didn't do anything wrong, her caddie did. Big freaking whoop.

Now if her caddie where doing things to help her win in some illicit way, like pencil whipping or changing a lie or interfering with a competitor, then sure, DQ all day long.

I would argue that someone breaking the rules that has access to the group is gaining an advantage. The last thing as a player I want to deal with is calling someone out on an avoidable rules violation and I certainly don't want to deal with someone potentially being intoxicated.

 

[Slippy]

Why didn't she tell her caddy to f off?

Was her mom