Nikko LoCastro intimidating a PDGA official at European Open '22

[Rastnav]

I think you immediately step up the applicable class when the offenses are directed at tournament officials. Intimidation tactics to try and circumvent rules from being applied is slimy behavior and should immediately be quashed by the PDGA. This is still golf, and there are certain rules of etiquette that should be followed even if they are not codified.

Being DQed from the tournament is a fairly immediate quashing. No one (OK, that one guy) is denying the unacceptability of Nikko's behavior. I might debate "slimy", but only because it has a connotation that he was intentionally trying to gain advantage by subverting rules and conventions. I think his reaction was completely instinctual (which in no way excuses it).

Putting intimidation after, and in conjunction with, stalking, to me, has the implication that we are talking about something that is well removed from the actual incident. Obviously, the interpretation of those in charge of applying these rules is the one that matters, but the wording and construction of the rule itself doesn't, IMO, lend itself to suggesting that this incident is the kind of intimidation indicated by the rule. The statement about "usually involves actual harm" should mean something.

I would think that where intimidation would start to come in would be if the behavior happened in the parking lot, on the card the next day, that kind of thing.

 

[Countchunkula]

I think his behavior should be considered intimidation. Some room for debate, but I think that's a fair way to characterize it.

Maybe even "credible threats of imminent harm" could apply, but the rule states "to another player". Even if the rule included officials and tournament staff, I think this is less cut and dried than the case for calling it intimidation.

If I had to briefly describe Nikko's actions, I would say that he tried to clown the official, but ultimately clowned himself. Of course that language is not to be found in the rule book. Maybe in bgc's copy.

 

[dmoore1998]

If I ignore specific wording in the "classes of offenses" and instead focus on..."tone" of each class...I tend to think this falls into Class C...but on the more serious side of it. So the standard 6 month penalty...plus "aggravating factors" as labeled in the description which would lead the committee to consider up to a 12 month suspension and 6 months of probation.

IMO the "tone" of Class A seems to be a physical altercation leading to injury, or something like stalking, assault.

I don't think Class B fits...it's more about intentional cheating...which I don't think he's doing.

 

[VictorB]

Being DQed from the tournament is a fairly immediate quashing.

the DQ from the event was because he didn't cooperate with the TD investigation. Not for the actual incident itself.

 

[ballgolfconvert]

If you are *still* asserting that, then you haven't listened to most of the posts. It's been said and documented that BOTH Nikko & Chandler Kramer were given excessive time warnings earlier in the round. That in and of itself impacts your "multiple players need to time him all the time after that..." philosophy, a philosophy that is not part of the rules. Accordingly the players asked for a marshal for the remainder so there'd be no bias. Clearly the marshal didn't show up right away -- he got there as quickly as logistically possible -- but missed some throws mid-round. But it has been identified as it was much earlier than hole 18. And it's been said he was timing ALL the players, not just Nikko. So, since these "JUST THE FACTS" as you call them don't change your mind, why is anything else troll-claiming untrue?

What most of us are asserting is that the PDGA Europe Tour Manager, who served as that marshal, didn't call a violation every time he got to 31 or 32 or 33 seconds once he started timing -- granted, there can be discrepancies in when the criteria starts. But the first time any of the players he was timing (it just happened to be Nikko) went well beyond any reasonably doubt (that word in disc golf rules oft repeated, "clearly and completely") that the 30-second time frame had been violated, THEN he called the 1-throw penalty>

Now, BGC, go ahead and argue with my minor points here and ignore the main one. And quit adding things not in the rules just because you think they should be. (the onus... blah, blah)

What most of us are asserting is that the PDGA Europe Tour Manager, who served as that marshal, didn't call a violation every time he got to 31 or 32 or 33 seconds once he started timing -- granted, there can be discrepancies in when the criteria starts. But the first time any of the players he was timing (it just happened to be Nikko) went well beyond any reasonably doubt (that word in disc golf rules oft repeated, "clearly and completely") that the 30-second time frame had been violated, THEN he called the 1-throw penalty>

Now, BGC, go ahead and argue with my minor points here and ignore the main one. And quit adding things not in the rules just because you think they should be. (the onus... blah, blah)[/QUOTE]

That seems more palatable and puts more of this on Nikko. That info has not been posted here prior as far as I know. I also like that every player was timed which is how ball golf does it when a group is behind. Though in ball golf the official goes away once they are back in position. Like I have said multiple times, it was a penalty under the rules, but it wouldn't be if the rules were written with fairness in mind. The whole group played every shot for at least 9 holes within or very close to the expected time.

It still leaves an issue of an official following around a group for an entire round. Seems a terrible use of his time which is why the "warning' phase needs to be defined at less than the entire round. How much would you hate life if an official was breathing down your neck for almost an entire round, just waiting to pounce on your mistake? it would make me nervy, testy and feel like i was being singled out like a criminal. I think it is totally unfair to subject the top players in the game to that. A few holes, ok. 30-40 shots in a row? Way over the top. And that also makes it seem predatory.

I will say that all players, trying to play their best, occasionally HAVE TO take more than the allotted time to make proper last minute adjustments. For instance, if the wind changes significantly right before the walk up, wouldn't you want the best players in the game to be able to switch to the proper disc or do you want them to throw all hurried with a faulty game plan? There may be an exception, but almost everyone i have ever played with, has taken this liberty at times and it is no problem for anyone and doesn't seem it should be penalized. It should only be a penalty to take more than 30 seconds if it is habitually violated during the round and some extra time is given for those playing first from tee or fairway. If it doesn't occur more than a few times, it shouldn't be penalized. These guys pay money to try to compete at their best, and we pay money to watch them throw at their best. if they are keeping pace with the card ahead, let them take the time to make their best effort. Don't penalize them for taking a little extra time twice, 13 holes apart. Again, this is what the rules need to address and they don't. You shouldn't feel like you are under the microscope for an entire round due to one bad time. There needs to be limits and leeway for multiple reasons.

 

[DanJon]

On the subject of suspensions and precedent:
- Why did Bradley Williams get suspended/on probation the first time?
- Has Nikko actually ever been officially reviewed by the PDGA for discipline on courtesy issues? I know he has a reputation as fiery, etc. but has it actually come out on the course in a manner that might have warranted discipline in the past?
- Now that the heat of the moment is over, does anyone actually think he is subject to discipline for "stalking"? IMO that is a term related to searching for and finding someone after the round is over. Things like showing up at their house, continually popping up in public places where they are, that kind of thing. Not walking up to them on the hole you are playing.

Yes, this was completely unwarranted and unacceptable behavior. But, in my mind, it doesn't warrant a suspension unless he has previously engaged in behavior that would potentially warrant a suspension. But, I'm also not exactly sure what the rules say specifically about these things and whether it is all completely discretionary.

This is also where the PDGA and the DGPT to me seem like they would be slightly at cross purposes. Or, at least, they might be in the future. Like it or not, when you are doing something for a living, the stakes are raised for the competitors in the way they should not be when you are not. That generally has to be part of the equation. Of course the EO isn't a DGPT event, but you'd like to see solidarity between the pro tours in Europe and the US. And of course this is a (theoretically) Open tournament, so maybe that doesn't quite apply.

He kicked over a temp basket during a round, made some slurs during another round and then I think he had a beer in his bag during a round if I remember correctly.

All within a short timeframe.

 

[robdeforge]

Can we all, collectively, PLEASE STOP RESPONDING TO BALLGOLFCONVERT. they're not interested in a discussion. they're not interested in the rules. they feel a certain way and that's that. "You cannot reason a person out of a position he did not reason himself into in the first place."

 

[ejvogie]

Man, that's a lot nicer than, "Don't argue with idiots. They'll drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience."

 

[Rastnav]

the DQ from the event was because he didn't cooperate with the TD investigation. Not for the actual incident itself.

I don't believe that this statement is true.

The PDGA's statement indicates the following:

Petri Anttiroiko, Tournament Director for the 2022 European Open has concluded that Mr. Locastro's actions were overtly rude and threatening toward the PDGA marshal observing his card. Therefore, Nikko Locastro has been disqualified from the European Open.

The "failing to cooperate" is just one of the reasons that they reached the conclusion that he was overtly rude and threatening. If he had cooperated, in theory he could have provided some sort of mitigating testimony (for example, and this is only a completely fictional and hypothetical example, he might have provided evidence that he was treated in a biased and threatening manner by the official prior to this specific incident).

Cooperation could potentially have saved him from DQ, but he wasn't DQed because he failed to cooperate. He was DQed for his actions towards the official.

 

[Its Snowing]

Because that is part of the rule. if you warn a player for bad times, the onus is on you to time them going forward. if you don't follow through on the next step of the rule, the previous step (warning) should no longer apply.

The official did not step in to time until the 18th hole as far as i know. Are you saying the official was timing Nikko for 11-12 holes and kept doing so even though he got no bad times for 11-12 holes? if that was the case, and i don't believe it was, it makes even a greater argument for Nikko being specifically targeted.

I'm curious how you'd suggest for the player who called the warning to prove that they are timing you on every throw going forward? Does the group need to be carrying around a stopwatch that they pass around? Do they need to announce to the player, 'Hey, we're starting the timer now!' so that there's no confusion as to when the time is starting?

Let's say I get warned for excessive time, and am carrying my own stop watch but no one else has one. I hide it in my pocket and start timing myself and clock myself at 33s on a throw and don't get called on it. Before my next throw can I let my group know that they failed to call me on a subsequent violation and so now I should reset back to needing to be warned again? Or did I just admit to an overt failure to enforce the rules by not calling the penalty on myself, thus committing a courtesy violation?

I guess it's kinda fun unnecessarily overcomplicating a perfectly fine and uncontested rule.

 

[araytx]

That seems more palatable and puts more of this on Nikko. That info has not been posted here prior as far as I know. I also like that every player was timed which is how ball golf does it when a group is behind. Though in ball golf the official goes away once they are back in position. Like I have said multiple times, it was a penalty under the rules, but it wouldn't be if the rules were written with fairness in mind. The whole group played every shot for at least 9 holes within or very close to the expected time.

It still leaves an issue of an official following around a group for an entire round. Seems a terrible use of his time which is why the "warning' phase needs to be defined at less than the entire round. How much would you hate life if an official was breathing down your neck for almost an entire round, just waiting to pounce on your mistake? it would make me nervy, testy and feel like i was being singled out like a criminal. I think it is totally unfair to subject the top players in the game to that. A few holes, ok. 30-40 shots in a row? Way over the top. And that also makes it seem predatory.

I will say that all players, trying to play their best, occasionally HAVE TO take more than the allotted time to make proper last minute adjustments. For instance, if the wind changes significantly right before the walk up, wouldn't you want the best players in the game to be able to switch to the proper disc or do you want them to throw all hurried with a faulty game plan? There may be an exception, but almost everyone i have ever played with, has taken this liberty at times and it is no problem for anyone and doesn't seem it should be penalized. It should only be a penalty to take more than 30 seconds if it is habitually violated during the round and some extra time is given for those playing first from tee or fairway. If it doesn't occur more than a few times, it shouldn't be penalized. These guys pay money to try to compete at their best, and we pay money to watch them throw at their best. if they are keeping pace with the card ahead, let them take the time to make their best effort. Don't penalize them for taking a little extra time twice, 13 holes apart. Again, this is what the rules need to address and they don't. You shouldn't feel like you are under the microscope for an entire round due to one bad time. There needs to be limits and leeway for multiple reasons.

Well you're still making up things ... SO I guess I'll make my last piece and leave you to have the last word. However, consider:

1 - "it wouldn't be if the rules were written with fairness in mind..." Most of us disagree with you here. That is simply a one-off opinion.

2 - "an official following around a group for an entire round. Seems a terrible use of his time which is why the 'warning' phase needs to be defined at less than the entire round..."
BGC, you just don't LIKE this. Admit that. It isn't anything inherently wrong though, with a TD exercising his authority to marshal certain groups if that's where the complaints are coming from. Logistically we don't have the manpower to marshal all groups for all 18 holes. So the TD is simply trying to use them where they are needed. I do the same when I TD big tournaments. And if ONE group has constant complaints of time violations, well yep, they have put themselves in the position of having a marshal the whole time. Recall that NOT one but TWO players in group were given violations before they ultimately called for the marshal.

3 - "How much would you hate life if an official was breathing down your neck for almost an entire round, just waiting to pounce on your mistake? it would make me nervy, testy and feel like i was being singled out like a criminal. I think it is totally unfair to subject the top players in the game to that."
For me personally, it wouldn't phase me. And I'm a former slow-player. When I started competing in tournaments I'd get informally warned, to the point where I started timing myself in my routine at home. When I found I was taking 30-35 seconds at home, I knew it had to be more in tourneys, so I simply learned and changed. Some people haven't done that, though. And it is easy. Chandler Kramer changed his routine mid-round and never had another timing issue again. Nikko, on the other hand, has been taking more time than allowable for at least a decade, and on a more regular basis than any other player whose been on tour that long. The RC changed the rule specifically in 2021 to eliminate the "distractions" loophole that Nikko and others used, and they also (via a clarification) made it acceptable for TDs and their marshals to make that call. Ironically all that happened after two of the young guns were taking forever at a tournament, then Nikko simply waited for the wind to die down on that hole 18 putt to win the Preserve that year, so Jeff Spring had a long talk with leaders. One thing people don't seem to realize is that, while we in our local events still have the player stigma issue so rarely will excessive time be called, the networks and DGPT do want it called, because they are concerned about how their product is presented visually on TV. Now please let's not discuss that (I'm out now) because that isn't the crux of my thoughts here -- it's just information I am sharing because of direct conversations I had back in 2020. On this year alone on coverage I can recall somewhere between 10-20 excessive time warnings/violations being mentioned. SO the Pros at big events should realize they need to toe the line.
Also, when I still get the occasional foot fault or excessive time call, I do NOT protest. I simply ask for an explanation telling my mates that I what to know what I did so I don't do it again.

4 -"I will say that all players, trying to play their best, occasionally HAVE TO take more than the allotted time to make proper last minute adjustments."
Occasionally being the operative word there. And most of those occasions are when a stance is difficult to get to, and most of those occasions aren't more than one-minute like Nikko was.

5 - "For instance, if the wind changes significantly right before the walk up, wouldn't you want the best players in the game to be able to switch to the proper disc or do you want them to throw all hurried with a faulty game plan?"
If he/she didn't consider both options before stepping up to the putt or shot, then it wasn't a faulty plan; it was a failure to plan. And when they fail to plan they deserve failure.

6 - and the last thing I'll say is being out of place isn't the factor in our sport. We work with 4 or 5 player groups most of the time; no parallel to BG where it is 2 or 3 most of the time. We can't wait until they are out of place to do something.

And now in the famous words of my favorite sports talk host -- BGC, "It's over I am out!"

 

[Jimb]

edit: nevermind.

somehow 5 pages of discussion were added while i was typing haha.

Here's your obligatory "You're doing it wrong if 5 pages were added. You should show more posts per page and you can avoid your issue" comment.

I'm a ten post per page guy, myself, so I do feel for you. LOL!

 

[dashiellx]

edit: nevermind.

somehow 5 pages of discussion were added while i was typing haha.

I HATE when that happens

 

[dashiellx]

All I know is I've done things incorrectly or just wrong at work. If I responded like Nikko, at the least I'd be called into my bosses office

 

[BionicRib]

I don't see how this is a Class A offense:


There was no actual harm. You could potentially justify "intimidation", but given the context of the rest of the description of a Class A, I don't believe that is the intent of the class. At the very least, the lack of actual harm would have to be considered as a potential mitigating factor.

Class C seems potentially applicable:


Here I am not talking repeated violation of the time rule, but, rather repeated courtesy violations. If Nikko is actually making a habit of engaging in some kind of behavior like this, even if not this extreme, when he is called for some other violation, a Class C could be appropriate, perhaps?

Getting in someone's face or their personal space is a form of assault. He definitely did that. Not sure what the laws are like across the pond regarding that, but here in the states I would almost guarantee if that exact scenario happened and the official involved called the police and told them what happened and that he felt threatened Nikko would have ended up in handcuffs. Not sure of the exact charge, but what he did is assault.

Yes nobody was hurt and he may get a lighter suspension. Personally I think he deserves a few years. It would suck for him, but it also may be a blessing in disguise.

 

[roblee]

Nikko's act was an invitation to fight. "I'm an elite player, you're a scorekeeper. Get you some." I'm not saying he would throw the party but he asked for a RSVP.

 

[mcrow]

All I know is I've done things incorrectly or just wrong at work. If I responded like Nikko, at the least I'd be called into my bosses office

At a lot of places with workplace violence the way it is there's a good chance you get fired and put on the never hire again list.

 

[ohtobediscing]

I say we should abandon this thread and let bgc, rastnav and hurricane continue their circle jerk in lonely silence.

 

[SaROCaM]

Getting in someone's face or their personal space is a form of assault. He definitely did that. Not sure what the laws are like across the pond regarding that, but here in the states I would almost guarantee if that exact scenario happened and the official involved called the police and told them what happened and that he felt threatened Nikko would have ended up in handcuffs. Not sure of the exact charge, but what he did is assault.

Sounds like a law school hypothetical question. Did the facts fulfill the elements of assault? Discuss. Cite authority to support your argument.

 

[foxdawg10]

Sounds like a law school hypothetical question. Did the facts fulfill the elements of assault? Discuss. Cite authority to support your argument.

"Assault is generally defined as an intentional act that puts another person in reasonable apprehension of imminent harmful or offensive contact."

I'd say being inches from Nikko's grill qualifies as offensive contact. (Insert sarcastic and humorous intent here)