Flick Maniac
* Ace Member *
You have a good point actually. In an alternate universe that could have worked.
-
Discover new ways to elevate your game with the updated DGCourseReview app!
It's entirely free and enhanced with features shaped by user feedback to ensure your best experience on the course. (App Store or Google Play)
Nikko LoCastro intimidating a PDGA official at European Open '22
- Thread starter zenbot
- Start date
- Status
You have a good point actually. In an alternate universe that could have worked.
ballgolfconvert
Eagle Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2019
- Messages
- 886
So everyone knew it would happen? And the official chose to make the call at the point of time where exceeding the time was irrelevant to the pace of play of the round and had no effect on slowing down the players behind him? It was a victimless penalty which didn't give any advantage to Nikko or affect the pace of play for anyone else. It never should have been called like the many dozens of infractions each event that are not called.
The way the official first approached Nikko would have set off my defenses as well. Bounding across the fairway with that look on his face. It was targeting pure and simple.
ballgolfconvert
Eagle Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2019
- Messages
- 886
I will add that Paul should show his displeasure by skipping any Euro Tour event going forward, as should the rest of the Americans. let them entrap their own.
Hampstead
* Ace Member *
Hampstead
* Ace Member *
I suggest the author look into the actions and subsequent punishment history of Josh Gordon.
I mean Josh Gordon smoked pot. He's lucky the NFL didn't have him executed. :|
He made some decent arguments for re-evaluating the current rules and policies, but I don't think that necessarily indicates the 9 mo suspension is too long.
I do like the idea of an escalation clause that starts with a fine and goes up to a suspension.
dmoore1998
Eagle Member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2021
- Messages
- 961
There are really 2 arguments to consider.
1. Are the current policies good? IMO no...they are probably too long for single, isolated offenses.
2. Is Nikko's suspension too long given the current policies? IMO no, he got off pretty light compared to what he could have been given.
It's a question of "are the policies just" vs "was Nikko's treatment under the policies just".
seedlings
* Ace Member *
If both sides are mad, maybe everything is fine.
Author makes some good points.
I believe the consideration for Nikko's livelihood needs to be counterbalanced with consideration for the livelihood of the players who are affected by Nikko's shenanigans.
I know mcbeth publically supports Nikko, but I'd love to hear how he feels about playing on a card with Nikko when all the nonsense is happening.
The suspension was not for excessive time. His behavior is abhorrent. Justifying or defending his aggressive behavior toward an official, is wrong. Setting a precedent, that officials WILL be listened to and respected, is paramount to ANY discussion of growing the sport.
dmoore1998
Eagle Member
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2021
- Messages
- 961
His behavior can be wrong while still arguing the penalty is too severe. Jaywalking is wrong, having your legs cut off for doing it is probably too severe.
I think his penalty in this case is fine as-is. But I do think it brought to light the penalties in the PDGA rules...like a 6 month penalty for alcohol use...and how those might be excessive (and I think that's backed up by the PDGA ruling here IMO...he was ruled as Class A...but then got less than 50% of the standard Class A suspension).
I'm going to go out on a limb here and say you didn't actually click the link and read the article. The author is talking specifically about Nikko's behavior post penalty call, the suspension that behavior received, and how it compares to similar behavior and penalties in other professional sports.
The author is making a more long form argument to the one I made yesterday. More clarity and specificity around conduct that will merit suspension, and how long those suspensions will be, is generally part of the package of professionalism. This in no way condones Nikko's behavior, it simple makes a point about what it means when, if someone is suspended, they have their sole means of income essentially removed.
ballgolfconvert
Eagle Member
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2019
- Messages
- 886
It most certainly should not have happened the way it did. It screamed targeting and prejudicial enforcement. Just by the fact of the official being with the card for such a long period of time. Time limits on time warnings is the one major change that can fix this. I mean, the other players could have been violating the time limit as well, but if they didn't have the warning, then they couldn't have been penalized for taking the exact same amount of time as Nikko. The whole thing stinks to high heaven if you ask me.
Hampstead
* Ace Member *
I'll give you this, you got more hot air than a balloon.
Nale72
Birdie Member
Well, Chandler Kramer in the same group also got warned during the round. To get some more info about the incident and not only the short clip that is publicly available I recommend checking The Nick & Matt show interview with Chandler Kramer. Chandler also made clear that he was happy the call came that late in the round and only disturbed the end of that. If it had happened earlier the whole round for all players on the card had been more or less ruined.
Supposedly Nikko didn't only misbehave during that clip, he continued through the hole, on the green, after they finished play, all the way to the parking lot. Plus that he refused to co-operate with the officials after the round to get his side of the story and confirm or contradict what had been reported.
During an episode of SmashboxxTV it also was said that there are more video of Nikko, that has not been public. Whe do not know what material the PDGA Disciplinary Comittee had and what further info they had when making this decision. Terry also did his best to explain that this was in no way a targeted operation against Nikko.
I did click the article. It is well thought out and well written. I don't think it has any merit. The discussion of changing rules or administrative process is interesting, but a new and different discussion. There are simple, enforceable rules for the time violation, Nikko's disgusting behavior and his refusal to cooperate. His behavior, could be argued to be the ugliest and worst violation in the game, to date. It strikes at the integrity and fabric of the game. We cannot allow players to physically accost other players or officials when called on a rules infraction. CANNOT.
I postulate that using hockey, baseball, basketball...as points of comparison is wrong. Marble racing, footgolf or caroms....perhaps. Using financial loss or hardship is irrelevant. Do we vary punishment based on earnings or endorsements?
Nikko physically intimidated an official, MORE THAN ONCE, upon being called for a violation. (I REPEAT....FOR BEING CALLED ON A VIOLATION). He then refused to cooperate with the sanctioning body, when asked for information on the transgression. I simply do not see ANY argument, that lends credence to the idea that he was treated harshly, by his punishment. I don't think the article presents any point that supports that.
I, honestly have no qualms with the entire process. I think it was handled quickly, professionally and punishment doled out for the right reasons. If this were to happen at my local C Tier....I would hope for the same. Really, I think both should see more than 9 months.
Supposition, conjecture, innuendo and conspiracy theory. Not to dismiss factually inaccurate.
- Status
