If you haven't guessed by now, this column is about Gerald Swindle's disqualification at last week's Bassmaster Classic. And so, by the way, was the fictitious letter I ran here during the Classic. I guess my attempt at oblique Laney-esque satire was a little too out there for some people. But the point I was trying to make is the same one I'd like to make here.

First, it's important to note two things. One is that I'm not addressing whether Trip Weldon should or should not have DQd Swindle. That was Weldon's call to make – though I will talk about the whole "video DQs" phenomenon in a bit.

I'm also not going to address whether what Swindle did was within the rules. Obviously that's debatable and I'm not here to change anyone's mind about it.

What I have an issue with is how this all went down, namely that a BASS photographer reported the incident. Apparently the photographer felt Swindle's boat operation was a rules violation and/or was a little scared by it.

Got that? It wasn't a pro, a co-angler or an appointed observer. It was a photographer, who I'm sure felt he was doing the right thing. But that's beside the point.

Name me one sport where a photographer – some of whom regularly get smacked up pretty badly at NFL and NBA games, for example – or anyone who is not a participant in the contest or an official can participate in the rule-making process.

If you said golf, apparently you're right. A couple of sports journalists in the Classic media room pointed out that TV viewers have been responsible for at least two DQs of pro golfers. These viewers saw something they thought was a rule violation, called the PGA, the PGA reviewed the tape and subsequently DQd the golfer.

Does anyone think that sounds stupid besides me?

Golf, like all other sports, has other competitors and event/league officials right there. The competitors either protested or didn't. The officials made a call or didn't. That's it. That's competition.

Sure, like you, I've been convinced at times that certain officials (I'm thinking of football and baseball especially) had their heads screwed on wrong or bad eyes or whatever. But hey, I'm not there. I scream at the TV a little bit but then someone hands me a beverage and I'm okay.

And way more often than not, the officials get the calls right, anyway.

So to bring this full circle, if we allow non-participants to weigh in on rule violations, where does it stop?



What if a fisherman has to relieve himself with five spectator boats around him, and someone videotapes it (ESPN, or a citizen like the fictitious Wendy Williams, for example) with kids or women in the background? That puts Weldon in the spot of having to make a ruling on something he didn't personally observe and which could've been distorted by a camera lens.

I'm sure you can think of other examples, like the Wendy Williams one.

A few more pertinent questions, which came out in the Classic media room, include:

  • Are photographers supposed to know the rules?

  • Did this or any other photographer see any other rule violations at the Classic, maybe without realizing it, and not report them?

  • Did ESPN go over all the footage shot of all the anglers on all days to see if anyone else should've been DQd? If not, they probably figured they didn't need to because NO COMPETITORS PROTESTED. Photographers are a different story, I guess.

And just to make this even more tough: If you say only competitors can report rules violations, what if a boater figures out some way to cheat when he knows only a cameraman will be in the boat?

Video DQs

Speaking of cameras, at the last two Classics we've seen two "video DQs," for lack of a better term. And regardless of your feelings about those DQs, I ask again: If one competitor was DQd based on video, shouldn't all the video then be examined? If not, then is it really a level playing field? I don't think so.

Like it or not, bass fishing is big business and big-time. It has to be a level playing field. BASS has done the best job of making it one, but the whole video thing – and non-participants reporting contestants – makes it apparent that BASS officials have to spend some thinking-cap time on rules.

One place to start is the role of non-competitors. For example, sometimes only cameramen are in competitor boats. Are they supposed to know the rules and report any violations?

Another thing to consider is whether co-anglers are supposed to know the rules backwards and forwards. If not, and their anglers do something illegal and get DQd, shouldn't they get DQd too?

Thorny stuff.

Graduated Penalties

Say someone at the Classic was doing something to give him a clear advantage over the competition. I don't know what, exactly, but something that would be close to the "cheating" line. He'd be DQd, right?

Swindle was DQd too, for something that clearly didn't give him a competitive advantage at all.

Are those punishments fair?

John Johnson – BassFan's managing editor, a former sports editor and a sports nut – cites the Swindle DQ as a clear example that BASS needs to have graduated penalties for rules violations. I agree.

Johnson has some good things to say along those lines so I won't steal his thunder here. But I will point out that BassFan isn't just an armchair quarterback. With last year's Cabela's Top Gun Championship and this year's Skeeter Weekend Warrior Championship rules, we tried to address some of these concerns. Check them out here.

Notable

> You should've heard the "could've/should've been DQd" stories from media folks who've been in-boat observers at past Classics. Virtually all of it involved boat handling, but even though there were a few "could've been killed" stories, no one felt that they would've turned their pros in.

> In case you're wondering, I talked with Joe Balog about the Wendy Williams letter before I wrote it. He was okay with it – last I heard, anyway. By the way, if you ever get the chance to buy him a meal, do it. What he knows about fishing Lake Erie, and fishing deep, will blow your mind.