I agree with Weber on this one. 

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.

Quote from: Jesse James on June 14, 2022, 01:02:41 PM

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.

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.

Quote from: Bowler19525 on June 14, 2022, 08:05:23 AM

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!

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.

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.