Do you want Freddie at the Masters?

[skialex]

Forgive my English, I’ve tried my best, I know it’s the last minute, but I believe that we ballers have some power and it would be great if people at Nautique and Freddie get together and find a solution the will be good for both sides and especially for the sport we all love.

[jjackkrash]

I'd like to see FW compete.

That said, I have not seen more than maybe one or two posters on this site who claim personal or even some knowledge of what, exactly, transpired justifying (or not justifying) the ban.  And those posters were pretty tight lipped.  I certainly don't know what the actual conduct was.  So I am not going to answer the poll as it's phrased.    

[Drago]

4 minutes ago, jjackkrash said:

I'd like to see FW compete.

That said, I have not seen more than maybe one or two posters on this site who claim personal or even some knowledge of what, exactly, transpired justifying (or not justifying) the ban.  And those posters were pretty tight lipped.  I certainly don't know what the actual conduct was.  So I am not going to answer the poll as it's phrased.    

Exactly @jjackkrash ⬆️

[lpskier]

Unless he gets in to the LCQ at Jack’s this weekend, he has no path for eligibility. So really, the issue ought to be whether to let him into the LCQ. 

[Horton]

@lpskier

Him being uninvited to the LCQs potentially a whole other can of worms. Can a sponsor instruct an LOC to exclude a participant?

[hemlock]

This whole thing is disturbing.

What other sport does this? If a player is out of line, they usually get fined. Or.. they will get suspended (for a set amount of days) for physical actions against another athlete or an official. But waterskiing isn't really like that, it's more like golf. The athlete vs the course.

Did he punch someone? Did he just say something? So... how does the governing body "uninvite or ban" someone to an event?

[Stevie Boy]

More to the point does Nautique want Freddie at the Masters, missing out on one of the Top Skiers, behind their boat , another Ten Minutes of Nautique coverage, what cost do you put on that, somebody needs to have a rethink, missing out on a Great Marketing opportunity.

So the Battle between the top six skiers, Freddie would be one of those, if Nate took the win against those skiers, being sponsored by Nautique, how good is that for them, clearly they are quaking in their boots, and want to reduce the odds, against Will or Freddie taking the Title, don't get me wrong there are other Great skiers, capable of causing a upset. 

[LeonL]

As @Horton alluded to....the "uninvite" from LCQ's is a bit more disturbing.  I didn't  realize that these tourneys were by invite only.

Is there only 1 LCQ this year?  If I recall correctly there were 3 last year. (Off topic alert and begging forgiveness) That brings up a sore spot in and of itself.  Previous to 2022 juniors who were national champions from the previous year were automatically qualified for Junior Masters.  A young man that I'm friends with gleefully thought for months that he would be skiing in the Masters.   Requirements changed and the reason given was insufficient opportunity for some skiers to get enough tourneys.  Skiing the LCQ's wasn't practical for him, what with being in school.

Edited May 17, 2023 by LeonL

[Horton]

@LeonL There are 3 Masters qualifiers. Bottas last summer & 2 this month in Orlando. 

My understanding is they are open entry events except Freddie 

[jcamp]

The poll needs a 6th option: 

I do not know enough of the details to make a call one way or another.

[skialex]

@jcamp I looked back at the questions, maybe you are right, but this is my first poll and expressing myself in English is not the easiest.

I wish someone more of a star baller or @Horton has posted this, it would have taken a greater momentum. 
I was expecting a similar post and it wasn’t coming, so that  is why I posted it.

please baller don’t avoid to vote or comment, voting is anonymous anyway…

[lpskier]

@hemlock How about golf and the whole PGA/LIV brouhaha? 

[dave2ball]

You guys are beating a dead horse. Because of the actions that occurred  during last years Masters Nautique made the decision to ban Freddie this year. No pole is going to change the out come. Watch or don’t watch the masters. It’s your choice. 
only a select few know what occurred regarding the protest and video reviews. To throw out that Nautique is basis against non Nautique skiers if extremely foolish. Nautique wants the best skiers to attend. 
Freddie is a professional. With that he is held to higher standards. You can still be  passionate but respectful.  
 

[DonT]

While I have no direct knowledge of what occured, my observation is that Freddie recieved his "consequences" at the time of the tournament...he was disqualified from that tournament.  That should be enough.  He should then be allowed to compete in this years event without respect to last year's issues.

To draw a comparision to another sport - baseball, a player may be ejected (disqualified) for arguing an umpires call -  but he doesn't sit out the next game.  In my view, this is very similar.  But, with fewer water ski tournaments compared to baseball games, the consequences are not proportional.

[ISP6ball]

If Freddie would've come out and on this forum or any other, and said he was wronged, I'd believe him and pick the first poll option all day long  (maybe he did somewhere and I missed it).

Freddie is one of my favorite skiers to watch.  He's great in the commentator booth, and an awesome rep for the sport.  I love his passion, and genuinely seems like a great guy.

Like some have said earlier.  Maybe Freddie just wants this all to disappear because he's not happy with how he handled it.  I have no clue.

I'm still a fan regardless of what happened, and he will definitely be missed at this years Masters.

[MDB1056]

Clearly a topic that without direct first hand knowledge does not warrant debate.  Yes we all love to see Freddie etc etc but IMO this is not an actionable item (Masters)    

[foxriverat]

@ISP6ball if Freddy came on this or any other Forum and told his side of the story and it made Nautique look bad he would surely get a longer ban from skiing. He should be allowed to compete.

Edited May 17, 2023 by foxriverat
Clarify

[ISP6ball]

1 minute ago, foxriverat said:

@ISP6ball if Freddy came on this or any other Forum and told his side of the story he would surely get a longer ban from skiing. He should be allowed to compete.

I'm not tracking your logic?

[rico]

you would expect Nautique to provide a public statement to explain what happened at the event and their decision to ban Freddie from Masters 24 and LCQ.

[Slalom.Steve]

I'll always enjoy watching Freddie ski, but I'm not going to vote without knowing what actually happened. That's like asking a jury to decide if a defendant is guilty or innocent before a trial starts, without hearing any evidence.

[Cam]

2 hours ago, rico said:

you would expect Nautique to provide a public statement to explain what happened at the event and their decision to ban Freddie from Masters 24 and LCQ.

Next year as well?

[dave2ball]

@rico sorry but Nautique does not owe the public or anybody else other then Freddie an explanation to why they took the actions they did. 

Edited May 17, 2023 by dave2ball

[Horton]

@dave2ball

IWWF Code of Ethics - under Governance states

"IWWF recognizes the significant contribution that broadcasters, sponsors, partners and other supporters of sports events make to the development and prestige of IWWF sanctioned events throughout the world. However, such support must be in a form consistent with the rules of sport and the principles defined in the IWWF rules and the present Code. They must not interfere in the running of sports."

Does Nautique using their influence to exclude Freddie from the MCQ events constitute "interfere in the running of sports"?

[Wish]

They are a public company selling their products to the public. You are correct in saying they do not owe an explanation. But they are coming off as looking like jerks based on posts here (a decent enough cross section of skiers). Defend the brand all you want but I would think it would be a smart business practice to not allow speculation especially when it hovers around the negative. It’s a bad look and a poor reflection on a company that has been seen as having high standards and moral high ground. 

[foxriverat]

@ISP6ball I clarified my above comment.

[dave2ball]

@Horton I have no idea. But with the events off the water that may of or may not of occurred did Freddie interfere?  I have no idea. 
 

 

[hemlock]

6 hours ago, lpskier said:

@hemlock How about golf and the whole PGA/LIV brouhaha? 

LOL, Yeah, I was thinking of that too.

I can understand suspensions because there is a "tour" card which players earn. And then to play in another league would violate their card status. And to be honest, I'm not sure what happens if a golfer violates pga tour rules at an event.
Say they lose their temper and throw a club at someone, or push another golfer into the pond, or swear on National TV. Do they lose their card for a month? a year?

It's just frustrating not really knowing what happened with FW. 

[dave2ball]

@Wish so what you are saying is let the inmates run the asylum. Freddie did something very wrong that may of violated an agreement. If Nautique let him ski where does Nautique then draw the line?  Being a publicity traded company means nothing. I’m not defending the company what so ever. I’m just looking at what fact are before us which are not too many. 

[B_S]

Correct Craft is not a public company, not that that really makes a difference. Nobody "owes" anybody a statement, including Correct Craft or Freddie Winter. It is what it is.

[Zman]

All I know is I'll have plenty of things going on the last weekend this month that won't include watching something happening on Robin Lake.

[Andre]

11 minutes ago, Zman said:

All I know is I'll have plenty of things going on the last weekend this month that won't include watching something happening on Robin Lake.

Me too. Gonna pass on Dano the mano this year. 

[vtmecheng]

This argument just keeps going, despite no new information for some time. This just wouldn’t happen in most any big sport. Those sports have press conferences and reporters who dig for the story. There would eventually be an official statement by the “league” and often the player would make a statement, either apologizing or doubling down. Only reason skiing can get away with silence is that it’s so small and the same level of money isn’t moving around. Any other sport and we would have statements.

[RAWSki]

I will be at the Masters again this year and hope to see friends on the shore and as well as out on the water.   I know that the comptetitors present will be giving it all they got to win and I dont want to disrespect any of them -- I can't ignore this event just because one person isnt there for reasons out of my control and I truly  believe those reasons are not black and white.  

[Wish]

The “inmates” buy the boats, parts, swag and anything else Nautique sells like the Masters. Again they don’t have to say boo. But the “inmates” seem unsettled with the no comment position Nautique has adopted. As mentioned..no other sport would get away with this at this level of that sport as they would have reporters banging down their doors. And ESPN would be rendering opinions, assertions, assumptions, and educated guesses right and left. The narrative would get drawn up with or without a statement. That’s now happening here. Right now it looks like Freddy is the victim and Nautique is at fault. Is that what Nautique wants the ski community to think? Maybe I guess. 

[rockdog]

Nautique own the event and pay at least the director of the event. They make the calls ultimately. A Nautique sponsored athlete would not have copped this treatment, they clearly weren't happy with something Freddie said or did so being a MC guy made it a relatively easy call to give him a ban. Not much more to it.

I'll say it again, look at the treatment Jacinta suffered as a Nautique athlete. If there's a story they can't put as a positive news item on their website, they don't have to do or explain anything. Freddie was a threat as a potential winner of the event. Say or do something they don't like and they won't hesitate to take action.

There's no fallout here for them. We here may whinge about it and 3 people might say they won't attend or watch the event, but they sell boats come Monday at a higher price than the others. Move on.

[MDB1056]

Not a productive thread...............

[Stathis Ventouris]

@Horton is right the real question is whether the main sponsor of a sport should interfere with the running of that sport.  As I already stated in the other forum (on Freddie's ban) this is against the Code of Ethics of both the IWWF and the IOC and as a high ranking official of a national Federation I can assure everybody that this statement is true and correct.

As I have read many comments with regards to why FW has not come out himself (to this or other forums) to tell his side of the story, I urge you to read again carefully @foxriverat comment.

 

[dave2ball]

@wish inmates are the skiers who ski the masters Not the general public.  

[Wish]

In that case, all pro skiers “inmates” should be very nervous that not only could this happen to them at a Nautique event but now Nautique has set the standard for other title sponsors to do the same at any event. Nautique got away with it. Why not us? Especially when there is no public explanation as to why the punishment fit the crime. 

[dave2ball]

@wish this issue is between Freddie and Nautique. Nobody else. Freddie and Nautique don’t own the public the public any explanation. Truthfully this situation is non of our business and the thread should be closed. People are making assumptions and throwing out there .02 and they do not know any facts of what occurred. 

Edited May 18, 2023 by dave2ball

[skialex]

@dave2ball you are very active on this thread, more than anybody else despite the fact that you want it to be closed. And you seem that you have more knowledge of what really happened, than us clueless people. This maybe explains why you defend Nautique so passionately. 
All I know is I love this sport and I’d like to see all my favorite skiers competing at all major tournaments.

Obviously I wasn’t there as most of us, to have a personal knowledge of what really happened, but one could tell that if  Freddie’s foul was that serious, the punishment would have come from the governing body of the sport and not a sponsor/organizer.

 

[dave2ball]

@skialex I’m just defending my opinion.  Nobody on this site has any hard facts. But they are sure quick to throw boat companies under the bus  making  serious accusations about Nautique and yet demanding g an explanation of their actions. 
the people on this site can bitch and complain about the situation all they want. but it will not change their actions. 
 

[Wish]

Dave, welcome to the wide world of sports. There will ALWAYS be controversy in all sports and it will always be talked about. If you don’t like the opinions here or in the other thread(that’s all they are is opinions) then don’t open the thread again. I think it’s fare to say it’s a bad reflection on Nautique as evidenced here and certainly a bad reflection on the sport. That’s my opinion (and plenty of others) based on what it looks like. There are more harsh opinions to be sure but Nautique has chosen to let it lie in ambiguity. Their choice and fact..not an opinion. To say we should not express an opinion is literally expressing your opinion. But wether you like it or not, it WILL be talked about and that’s actually a good thing in a day and age where speech is shut down right and left.  And the idea that Nautique wont change anything is an opinion as they may come out with something seeing all of this…just my opinion. 

[lpskier]

Interestingly, Nautique did not ban Freddie from the “Nautique Moomba Masters,” as evidenced in part by his second place finish. That fact makes this controversy seem to be more of a (U.S.) Masters “thing” and less of a Nautique thing. 

[ISP6ball]

9 hours ago, Stathis Ventouris said:

@Horton 

As I have read many comments with regards to why FW has not come out himself (to this or other forums) to tell his side of the story, I urge you to read again carefully @foxriverat comment.

And read who liked it.....

9 hours ago, Stathis Ventouris said:

 

 

[Dirt]

I agree with many of the other posters. I always want to see him compete however bad behavior should have a consequence. I have not seen or heard what exactly went down so I cannot say whether I agree with it.

[Wish]

Dirt, I don’t think anyone would argue with you. I don’t even think we have to agree or disagree with it. But should those consequences come from a title sponsor.? Players get ejected all the time from many sports. Just not by Coke or Nike or Mercedes-Benz. A football player knows what targeting is and what the consequence’s are. They get ejected by rules and consequences already established in writing by the league and have nothing to do with or any influence from sponsors.  

[Drago]

Gotta say waterskiing isn't comparable to mainstream sports. We still have "No distinction between professional and amateur ". Golf does have a sponsor exemption (that would be the opposite of this). Are we sure the suspension is from Nautique and not IWWWF?

[APB]

Fine the guy and move on. If Nautique is having influence on the decision thats 100% wrong. It makes waterskiing look lame.  The reality is... the masters are not what they used to be.... theres way cooler stuff happening in the slalom world.

[vtmecheng]

8 hours ago, Drago said:

Gotta say waterskiing isn't comparable to mainstream sports. We still have "No distinction between professional and amateur ". Golf does have a sponsor exemption (that would be the opposite of this). Are we sure the suspension is from Nautique and not IWWWF?

Either skiing is a real professional sport to be taken seriously or just an amateur hobby. I think it should strive to be a professional sport and Freddie is a professional. With that, skiing of the top professionals should include the same statements and news as all other professional sports. In the end, sponsored sports are a spectacle for the audience and the athletes are there and getting paid because it is for our entertainment. Don’t like that, then go to the non-sponsored events.