BallReviews
General Category => Miscellaneous => Topic started by: TWOHAND834 on June 11, 2022, 01:27:16 PM
-
Just came across JR Raymond's video on YT showing where PDW was disqualified from the Senior Masters for getting into it with a competitor's wife. Sounded like she went a little overboard when rooting for her husband after a shot he made and he didnt like it. So in traditional PDW fashion; he argues with her, proceeds to throw a strike and then crotch chops while saying something back at her. I will say that the video is not very long so not sure what happened before this all started nor after the crotch chop. But JR defends Pete up until the point he said something to her after doing the crotch chop and have to imagine it didnt stop there. But interesting to see what the entire story is behind this.
-
I found the video.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bCrz56x8aZU
-
He was fined and disqualified. The fine was understandable after PDW called her a "b", but disqualification was too much. The competitors wife was being obnoxious with her cheering and the tournament director should have told her to tone it down or leave. The PBA would have fined PDW and removed the spectator, but there would have been no disqualification. This is just another example of the USBC being the USBC. Constantly focusing on the wrong things.
-
Apparently a bit more based on these two comments from people who were there:
Steve Wright
6 hours ago
Pete told John Delaneys wife to be quiet and quit cheering for her husband when Jon was bowling. She didn’t say anything or make any noise when Pete was bowling. When she told Pete no she was going to cheer for her husband Pete called her an F’ing Bitch and said I do this for a living.
The consensus of us guys bowling was that he got what he deserved. For once USBC did the right thing. Pete thinks he can do anything because of who he is. Props to Gotchall for making the decision.
8
bob20011
bob20011
3 hours ago
She yells NEXT after Delaney hits the spare that sealed the game. This was after Pete already had 2 7-10s that game. He got pissed at her saying next and said something along the lines of ill get him next time. Then she says Alright, and thats when he says I dont really give a shit and calls her a bitch. He then turns to go back to bowl and she says "iTS jUsT a GaMe" and then he points at himself and says its my living. Interesting how you broke it down though lol.
-
Apparently a bit more based on these two comments from people who were there:
Steve Wright
6 hours ago
Pete told John Delaneys wife to be quiet and quit cheering for her husband when Jon was bowling. She didn’t say anything or make any noise when Pete was bowling. When she told Pete no she was going to cheer for her husband Pete called her an F’ing Bitch and said I do this for a living.
The consensus of us guys bowling was that he got what he deserved. For once USBC did the right thing. Pete thinks he can do anything because of who he is. Props to Gotchall for making the decision.
8
bob20011
bob20011
3 hours ago
She yells NEXT after Delaney hits the spare that sealed the game. This was after Pete already had 2 7-10s that game. He got pissed at her saying next and said something along the lines of ill get him next time. Then she says Alright, and thats when he says I dont really give a shit and calls her a bitch. He then turns to go back to bowl and she says "iTS jUsT a GaMe" and then he points at himself and says its my living. Interesting how you broke it down though lol.
Thanks for telling us what really happened and not cherry picking bits and pieces.
-
Sorry, I'm not trying to take a side on this, I was not there. When I posted those, they were the only comments I saw that appeared to be from other bowlers who were there. Since then, there have been more follow-up comments posted in response to those two comments.
But remember, as law enforcement officers and lawyers have learned, witnesses almost always see/hear things differently than what actually occurred.
-
Here are the follow-up comments to those two:
Scott Demirjian
1 day ago (edited)
Steve Wright, that's a marvelously dishonest way to dissect that scenario. I counted 10 extra claps by one person that continued beyond the cessation of clapping by everyone else, well into Pete's pre-shot routine. It was obviously a calculated effort to antagonize him. It wasn't merely cheering for her husband, it was positively calibrated to attempt to negatively affect Pete's performance, and you're going to need to own that. And if what bob20011 has said about the incident is true, then one really is left without a leg to stand on in defense of that woman's conduct. Spectators have duties to not palpably interrupt or interfere with the players beyond what standard cheering would entail, and she was overtly trespassing on the wrong side of those duties, period.
Steve Wright
1 day ago
The interaction between Jon’s wife and Weber happened in the middle of the second game. He 7-10 twice after his comment to her. Not after she said Next at the end of the match.
Steve Wright
1 day ago
The video segment is the end of the match. Weber’s crotch chop had nothing to do with him being DQ’d by USBC. The interaction between Weber and Delaney’s wife happened in the middle of the second game.
Ryman66r
23 hours ago
She obviously wasn't just cheering for her husband. She was being obnoxious about it. Someone from the tour should have stepped in and took care of the situation before it escalated. Pete was also wrong for acting the way he did.
Scott Demirjian
23 hours ago (edited)
@Steve Wright I'd love to find a video of the entire match. It's impossible to form a good opinion without understanding what preceded this video.
Steve Wright
23 hours ago
Scott,
I had the benefit of being there when it happened. I was in the middle of getting my ass kicked by Kloempken.
I’m not sure what process the USBC used in making its decision. There were several witnesses to what happened. I don’t know if Gotchall talked to them or not. I know he did talk to Delaney. The first round matches were at 9 am. The USBC didn’t inform Weber he was DQ’d until just before the first losers at round at 4pm.
Scott Demirjian
22 hours ago
@Steve Wright right, I gathered that you were there in person, competing. Ultimately, I side with the bowlers unless they've made egregious judgement calls. If what I'm hearing is this woman shouting "NEXT" while clapping hysterically after John's converted 7-pin in the 9th, I hope we can both agree that that isn't merely "cheering." So if that's relatively consistent with the antics Pete objected to earlier in the match that aren't in this video (and that you say you witnessed), then I agree with Pete that she needed to discontinue cheering in a way that compromised the integrity of the match.
Also, someone left this comment that I loved: "if my wife said "it's just a game, man" to a living legend that i am currently bowling against, she'd be left in the parking lot," and i couldn't agree with that sentiment more.
Julie McCook
6 hours ago
My husband and I were lucky enough to be there bowling nationals, so we were able to see some of the qualifying in person and connect with some old friends bowing in the tournament. We watched Pete bowl and he had “issues†with some other bowlers. He got upset with a couple bowlers that were 4 lanes away, who apparently didn’t give him enough lane courtesy. He yelled at them, pointed at them and stared them down several times, making it clear to them and the fans that he was annoyed, but no one could really understand why. These guys were outside the area concerning Pete and lane courtesy with the double jump rule used, and we didn’t see anything else they could have possibly done to warrant him being annoyed. He acted ridiculously and unprofessionally, wanting to intimidate these guys and apparently motivate himself. If he didn’t like something they did be an adult and have a quick talk with them and explain.
In this last instance he was losing and lost to the #64 player when he was the #1 qualifier. He was already mad and her cheering for her husband loudly ,(not heckling Pete), took him over the edge. Her cheering may have been a little excessive, but her husband did just beat one of the best bowlers ever, like him or not. She could have been a little more gracious about it, yes, but Pete has to own his actions and words. No one made him do or say what he did and said.
I personally witnessed him act like a spoiled child and not a professional. Not a good example or ambassador for the game we love.
-
The reason people feel empowered to do and say whatever they want is that everyone else has been told to tolerate or ignore it, so there are no repercussions for acting like a jerk, the only repercussions are to those who respond or react to it.
USBC should have told Pete to cool it or he'd be disqualified and should have told the woman to knock it off or her husband would be disqualified. That would have ended all of the nonsense. But no, now the woman feels empowered to act the same way at the next event.
-
There was a line crossed that applies to the competitor more so than the spectator. If a spectator does something, says something or acts in a way that is abusive, distracting or obnoxious to a player it's up to the player to address the situation with tournament officials. PDW crossed the line by going after her himself. Had he gone to Rob he would have taken care of it.
It cracks me up to see all of the "USBC screwed it up again" comments. What did they do wrong? Weber broke the code of conduct. End of story. He got what he deserved with his words and actions. This wasn't a PBA event where he can put on the bad boy act and thrill the fans without repercussion.
-
When PDW reacted to the woman she got her satisfaction, whether she was out of line or not. From now on she'll brag about getting inside the head of the great PDW. As if that's something to be proud of...
If he puts on his big boy pants and ignores her, or uses it as motivation, this thing doesn't blow up and she just looks like a jerk instead of both participants looking bad. A little self control goes a long way.
-
There was a line crossed that applies to the competitor more so than the spectator. If a spectator does something, says something or acts in a way that is abusive, distracting or obnoxious to a player it's up to the player to address the situation with tournament officials. PDW crossed the line by going after her himself. Had he gone to Rob he would have taken care of it.
It cracks me up to see all of the "USBC screwed it up again" comments. What did they do wrong? Weber broke the code of conduct. End of story. He got what he deserved with his words and actions. This wasn't a PBA event where he can put on the bad boy act and thrill the fans without repercussion.
The USBC fining PDW for calling the woman a "b" was the correct move. Disqualification was unwarranted...that is where the USBC went too far. The woman was obviously taunting PDW with her excessive clapping. She knew what she was doing and is just as much to blame for what happened.
This event is also a major title on the PBA50 tour despite being put on by the USBC. If PDW had won it, it would have been a major title for him.
-
She was probably being a jerk, but after bowling as a professional for 30+ years you should be able to either 1) block it out, or 2) use it as motivation.
Nothing she could say affects YOUR next shot UNLESS YOU ALLOW IT to. Use your years and years of "maple moxie" to benefit you rather than acting as a teenager would. The crotch chop is getting old, very old.
I don't dislike PDW. I admire his talent. Sometimes he, reacts in a way that is not how I would, but we're different people.
I'm no saint, but you will never see me kick a ball return, smack a monitor, or the like. The last thing I want to do when I'm bowling bad is draw attention to myself and my lack of self control. I'd rather quietly blend in and accept that not every night will I be 100% on my game...
-
I’m going to come from a few different tangents here, so bear with me.
Was Pete in the wrong? Yes. He should have acted a lot better than what he did. He had nearly the same situation in that 5th US Open final, and handled it better than this, and that was an even bigger major than the Senior Masters.
But he got off light. Yeah, that’s a big thing to say, but let’s put it into perspective.
Around 40 years ago, without spectator involvement, Marshal Holman ticked out a foul light from a bad shot and got a multi-month suspension in addition to a fine. Not exactly apples to apples, but a fine and DQ could have been worse.
That said, the competitors wife was also out of line. If she was being antagonistic and then condescending as stated, PDW should have gone to the tournament director to have them tell her to knock it off or her husband risks a fine or DQ and she gets escorted out. While there is a line for the competitor, there is also a line for the spectator that should not be crossed, and it was profoundly crossed here. I wouldn’t be surprised if the USBC and the PBA/PWBA/PBA50/PBA Jr. make a serious statement on this, as we know the USBC already has.
Finally, I think we’re back to PDW, Rash, and Simo in a triple threat match for who the true Bad Boy of Bowling really is.
BL.
-
As others have pointed out, PDW was at work when this happened. This is his job and how he earns his living. This spectator was bothering him at work. Imagine if you were at work and someone was sitting in your workspace being loud. That would be tough to tune out. You are probably going to tell them to be quiet or go to the boss and get the problem solved. PDW decided to address it himself with some colorful language. Hence the fine, which was deserved. Disqualification was excessive.
-
Any guesses who called Pete shortly after the DQ to take this post down?
-
I agree with Weber on this one. ;D
-
Its USBC hypocrisy to me. That crotch chop is Pete's thing. Always has been. She chose to get verbal and mix it up with him. He just returned fire, in kind as he always does. I clearly heard him say, "I don't give a shit!" after she chose to comment on a particular made shot.
Fine the dude and give him a warning so he doesn't cross the line again but DQ'd!!
GTFOH! That is over the top as usual and just another reason why there needs to be a major defection of members from the USBC or another similar organization started so folks don't have to deal with the hypocrisy and BS the uSBC constantly throws in our faces!
-
Its USBC hypocrisy to me. That crotch chop is Pete's thing. Always has been. She chose to get verbal and mix it up with him. He just returned fire, in kind as he always does. I clearly heard him say, "I don't give a shit!" after she chose to comment on a particular made shot.
Fine the dude and give him a warning so he doesn't cross the line again but DQ'd!!
GTFOH! That is over the top as usual and just another reason why there needs to be a major defection of members from the USBC or another similar organization started so folks don't have to deal with the hypocrisy and BS the uSBC constantly throws in our faces!
Amen Sir!
I would also add, escort her ass out of the building if she can't control herself.
-
Any guesses who called Pete shortly after the DQ to take this post down?
Reckon Bill called him personal like, or just one of the employees?
-
Its USBC hypocrisy to me. That crotch chop is Pete's thing. Always has been. She chose to get verbal and mix it up with him. He just returned fire, in kind as he always does. I clearly heard him say, "I don't give a shit!" after she chose to comment on a particular made shot.
Fine the dude and give him a warning so he doesn't cross the line again but DQ'd!!
GTFOH! That is over the top as usual and just another reason why there needs to be a major defection of members from the USBC or another similar organization started so folks don't have to deal with the hypocrisy and BS the uSBC constantly throws in our faces!
Amen Sir!
I would also add, escort her ass out of the building if she can't control herself.
I don’t think it was those, I think it was the indiscriminate name calling that did it.
-
Its USBC hypocrisy to me. That crotch chop is Pete's thing. Always has been. She chose to get verbal and mix it up with him. He just returned fire, in kind as he always does. I clearly heard him say, "I don't give a shit!" after she chose to comment on a particular made shot.
Fine the dude and give him a warning so he doesn't cross the line again but DQ'd!!
GTFOH! That is over the top as usual and just another reason why there needs to be a major defection of members from the USBC or another similar organization started so folks don't have to deal with the hypocrisy and BS the uSBC constantly throws in our faces!
Amen Sir!
I would also add, escort her ass out of the building if she can't control herself.
I don’t think it was those, I think it was the indiscriminate name calling that did it.
I tend to agree with you on that. But it shouldn't have been allowed to go that far. The tournament officials should have taken control of the situation before it got to the point of Weber feeling the need to call her a bitch.
-
As others have pointed out, PDW was at work when this happened. This is his job and how he earns his living. This spectator was bothering him at work. Imagine if you were at work and someone was sitting in your workspace being loud. That would be tough to tune out. You are probably going to tell them to be quiet or go to the boss and get the problem solved. PDW decided to address it himself with some colorful language. Hence the fine, which was deserved. Disqualification was excessive.
Being "at work" isn't an excuse for the conduct. Any person doing this at their normal 9-5 job would be taken straight to HR and get written up, if not fired for such conduct. PDW doesn't get a pass for doing this at a bowling tournament because he was "at work". That doesn't excuse his conduct, nor should it excuse anyone's conduct.
If anything, PDW's conduct would create a hostile work environment, which would result in termination. So let's not bring "at work" into this, because that makes his situation worse than what it is.
That said, the woman was being antagonistic and contributed to that hostile work environment that PDW exacerbated. In this case she was wrong, because she poked the bear in his environment, and the bear responded. She shouldn't get off free on this, which the tournament director should have done something about. Unfortunately they didn't, so now the woman feels empowered and entitled to do it again, especially should her husband face PDW again. You know there are going to be some unspoken words that are begging to be said, and that people are expecting another conflict. Here is where the USBC failed PDW.
In this sense, all three are at fault: PDW for his conduct, the wife for her conduct, and the USBC for not handling the situation better and creating the chance for this to happen again.
BL.
-
Pete turns 60 in August, so 40+ years of being a "professional" bowler. Professional should mean more than what one does for a living.
I'm not excusing the woman's behavior even a little bit. She was excessive and rude. But after being in bowling houses for that long shouldn't he have developed the mental game to block it out somewhat?
There are those who would argue that PDW is their distraction because of his prima- donna antics (excessive lane courtesy, etc). I'm sure that PDW has been told how great he is since childhood, so any sign of adversity becomes a shock to him, I don't know.
I am 60 and must be "ancient" compared to many of you here, but it would be much easier to be a PDW fan just like I feel about Norm Duke, if he wasn't quite so easily provoked. No one threw any of his shots but him... Congratulate your opponent for bowling well and move on hungrier to win next time. (I must be crazy. Don't answer that!)
-
As others have pointed out, PDW was at work when this happened. This is his job and how he earns his living. This spectator was bothering him at work. Imagine if you were at work and someone was sitting in your workspace being loud. That would be tough to tune out. You are probably going to tell them to be quiet or go to the boss and get the problem solved. PDW decided to address it himself with some colorful language. Hence the fine, which was deserved. Disqualification was excessive.
Being "at work" isn't an excuse for the conduct. Any person doing this at their normal 9-5 job would be taken straight to HR and get written up, if not fired for such conduct. PDW doesn't get a pass for doing this at a bowling tournament because he was "at work". That doesn't excuse his conduct, nor should it excuse anyone's conduct.
If anything, PDW's conduct would create a hostile work environment, which would result in termination. So let's not bring "at work" into this, because that makes his situation worse than what it is.
That said, the woman was being antagonistic and contributed to that hostile work environment that PDW exacerbated. In this case she was wrong, because she poked the bear in his environment, and the bear responded. She shouldn't get off free on this, which the tournament director should have done something about. Unfortunately they didn't, so now the woman feels empowered and entitled to do it again, especially should her husband face PDW again. You know there are going to be some unspoken words that are begging to be said, and that people are expecting another conflict. Here is where the USBC failed PDW.
In this sense, all three are at fault: PDW for his conduct, the wife for her conduct, and the USBC for not handling the situation better and creating the chance for this to happen again.
BL.
A "hostile work environment" is only created and present after repeated instances of intimidating or abusive behavior. PDW calling the spectator a name once in a specific instance does not meet the requirements to claim a "hostile work environment". His behavior was not proper, and certainly warranted a fine, but not a DQ.
If he was yelling obscenities at all competitors and spectators repeatedly during every match and every round at every event, that would meet the traditional definition of creating a "hostile work environment". Not one incident at one event in response to a heckler instigating him while he is earning his living.
Having been employed now for 35+ years, I have seen some crazy things happen at work, including some wicked verbal altercations. There were some write-ups, but never any terminations (which would be a corporate version of a DQ.)
-
I might be WAY out of line here, but why was everyone else fine with the lady acting up?
I did not see anyone else being disqualified or calling her names.
Is this just PDW being PDW?
The whole situation stinks!
-
I might be WAY out of line here, but why was everyone else fine with the lady acting up?
I did not see anyone else being disqualified or calling her names.
Is this just PDW being PDW?
The whole situation stinks!
From the video(albeit very limited), it appears she was specifically targeting Weber. Not that anyone is saying Mr. Weber handled the situation well either.
-
Pete has been bowling in the spotlight for long enough he should be able to handle "hecklers". Granted she could have called out his drug and alcohol problems or any number of things, but she didn't. She was excited that her husband who has zero titles was getting ready to go over on one of the best. Despite what I think of him personally, he has always been a great bowler with ridiculous talent across plastic, urethane, and reactive eras.
He needs to realize it's going to start happening more and more because he's in the twilight of his career. If he was "working" he should have thought about potentially getting dq'd and losing the entry, travel, and other expenses he had invested in the tournament. The officials can't police every match going on, and from the video it seemed to escalate quickly. I don't know if she was on his ass from shot 1, but even then you're supposed to be a professional.
-
Life is very simple. It's always the person who retaliates that gets caught\punished.
Fans and spectators have nothing to lose. Their public image means nothing, they are not on someone's payroll, they don't represent someone's brand, nor do their actions directly effect their marketability.
A spectator can say and do anything, but if an athlete my company sponsors, or my broadcast is associated with, or my tournament is allowing to play, says that same thing, it's NIGHT and DAY difference. Her actions do not reflect on anyone other than herself, and likely her husband.
Pete's action directly reflect on the tournament, the PBA, Storm, and probably 5 other companies that compensate him to use their products.
It's not that complicated. A spectator can be a POS human and get away with it, but an athlete can not. Not if you want people to pay to be associated with you.
Anyone who's ever watched any other sport in the world knows exactly how this works. Pete should consider himself lucky that no one cares about bowling like they do bigger sports, otherwise every sports network would be blasting him for the way he treated that "poor woman" even if she started it\deserved it, that's the narrative that would be on headlines. "60 year old bowler makes obscene gesture to female spectator, implying to 'suck his ****'." Then the court of public opinion trickles into your wallet, companies get pressured to drop you, cut ties, etc etc etc.
Imagine if an NFL or NBA player did this to a spectator, we wouldn't hear the end of it for weeks, they'd get suspended multiple weeks for conduct detrimental to the league, be forced to make an apology, the team would have to make a statement condemning his actions, yadda yadda. Combine that with what he tweeted after... Yikes.
He got off easy in the grand scheme.
-
I am going to add something that I dont think anyone has brought up. Pete acts like he is the only one bowling as a "livelihood". If he wants spectators and other bowlers to respect him; then he needs to do the same. Granted we dont really know what happened before that particular game started or if something happened earlier in the day before that match to light the fire per se. But Pete is a well documented hot head when a bowling ball is in his hand. Some are somewhat tunnel visioned and only looking at the situation involving him and the opponents wife when what he is really doing is also extending the distraction to the other participants around him. What he could have done, is finished the game and then walked up to her and her husband and explained that while he respects his wife cheering him on; that the tournament is a big deal and the excessive nature of the cheering is distracting to the other participants. So, in my opinion, the DQ for conduct unbecoming a professional is warranted not only due to that one incident but the fact he has a long history of poor sportsmanship and someone finally came down hard on him to send a message. Quite frankly; Storm needs to do the same if they have not done already. I am pretty sure that in the contracts it states somewhere that poor attitudes, sportsmanship, and antics will not be tolerated as a member of their company. Pete is bad enough and they have Simonsen and then added Rash if the previous two were not enough. What would Storm really be losing had Kloempken walked up to Pete and told him to take the shirt off and leave the equipment as Storm was done supporting him? At this stage in his career; I cant imagine they would lose anything.