View Single Post
  #252  
Old 10-08-2012, 10:22 PM
Bhoffman09's Avatar
Bhoffman09 Bhoffman09 is offline
Bogey Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Location: charlotte
Years Playing: 5.2
Courses Played: 58
Throwing Style: RHBH
Posts: 53
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cgkdisc View Post
The PDGA already has a bit more specific dress code than the USGA which only requires neat appearance and long slacks in their Championships as you can see here:

In Local and Sectional Qualifying stages and the Championship proper, players must be neat in appearance with respect to clothing and personal grooming. The Committee in charge decides whether this requirement has been met, and has authority to withdraw the entry of a player who does not comply. The wearing of short pants is prohibited in the Championship proper, but is permissible in Local and Sectional Qualifying provided the host club does not have a dress code prohibiting such.

Worrying about anything more than the current policy at the org level (PDGA) is unnecessary. Sponsors are the ones who dictate dress for their sponsored players or their events. If the sport eventually gets spectators, it will get big sponsors. They will determine a more restrictive dress code or surprise! they may want to encourage more "rad" dress than collared shirts.

At this point, worrying about what individual players look like on camera also doesn't matter for the pro version of our sport, just the viewers' opinons of each individual since it is an individual sport. In fact, seeing less conventional dressers may help the sport at the grassroots level (coolness factor, think snowboarding). If the viewer and spectator numbers are there, a few "rogue" looking players is not going to discourage potential big sponsors. It's eyeball count that matters to them. If they decide to underwrite a future event, their policies can dictate what people wear, that is if they really care.
I understand your argument, but here's some more talking points:

Yes, but without the major sponsor input in this area, shouldn't we strive to ensure that a minimum level of professionalism is met in attire? Why wait for the sponsors and risk giving possible viewers/spectators a negative impression (e.g. our pros aren't serious) at key events?

Given the current rules and the general, free interpretation of them by the professionals, I think a definite image has been established. Shouldn't we further define our baseline rules to eliminate any questionable attire?
Reply With Quote