Didn't necessarily plan on blogging today, but we're all prisoners of the news cycle....
But before we get to that, perhaps a bit of World Cup blogging?
The U.S. vs. Iran? Hmmm, at least there's no history between those two countries. I'll be watching, although the best bit might have been that press conference, in which a regime-supporting faux-journalist asked some truly bizarre questions. Here's a taste:
In a surreal scene Monday in Qatar, USMNT coach Gregg Berhalter and team captain Tyler Adams were quizzed on government relations by Iranian journalists ahead of the
United States’ must-win match against Iran in the World Cup on Tuesday.
Berhalter was asked why he hasn’t asked the U.S government to move a U.S. Navy vessel from the Persian Gulf and about U.S. immigration policies, to which the 49-year-old head coach responded, “I don’t know enough about politics, I’m a soccer coach.”
See how life imitates golf? Just a few months ago guys like Bryson and Poults were hiding behind that robotic "not a politician" bit, though I'm pretty sure they were never asked to move U.S. warships.
Think I was kidding about them being regime supporters?
Some Iranian reporters applauded
Iran coach Carlos Queiroz and forward Karim Ansarifard before and after their news conference on Monday afternoon. An hour later, they scolded Adams
for pronouncing “Iran” incorrectly; they asked Berhalter why people with an Iranian passport can’t travel to the U.S; they asked him, through a translator, why he hadn’t told the U.S. government “to take away its military fleet from the Persian Gulf”; and they created an atmosphere unlike any that U.S. Soccer officials had ever seen.
They accused Berhalter and U.S. Soccer of being “unprofessional” for closing training after 15 minutes on Sunday night — as U.S. Soccer always does, and as most teams do, in line with FIFA rules.
They stated, bafflingly, that there’s “no support of your team” back in America amid “the high rise of inflation and economic problems,” to which Berhalter responded that 19 million people watched the U.S.-England game. When he concluded his answer, USMNT press officer Michael Kammarman jumped in to say, “the figure was 20 million,” which drew chuckles from the room.
And yet, will they be sanctioned or tossed about by FIFA? Yet the U.S. puts up with this nonsense...
But I do like this young man, about whom i knew nothing previously:
'Second of all, are you okay to be representing your country that has so much discrimination against black people in its own borders?' he asked pointedly.
Adams, whose mother is a White American but whose biological father is African-American, responded cordially: 'My apologies on the mispronunciation of your country. That being said, there's discrimination everywhere you go... in the U.S. we're continuing to make progress every single day... as long as you make progress that's the most important thing.'
Of course, he'll be cancelled by our SJWs at home, but pitch perfect. Your humble blogger would have loved him to reference how the Islamic Republic treats minorities, in fact there's rough treatment required under the Koran, mandatory conversion or the payment of jizya, a tax.
They were also asked about an iconic U.S.-Iran match-up at the 1998 World Cup, a huge upset for the Islamic Republic. ESPN has a long feature on that game, which is well worth your time is the subject intersts you, including interviews with many of the participants. The funny bit was this, the very definition of an unforced error:
But Sampson made a stunning decision just two months before the tournament: He dropped captain Harkes from the squad
for what The New York Times reported as "both technical and leadership reasons." It wasn't until almost 12 years later that the real reason for Harkes' dismissal was made public, when Eric Wynalda divulged that Harkes had had an affair with Wynalda's wife at the time. Sampson confirmed Wynalda's characterization of events.
He was a great captain by all accounts, except, yanno, for sleeping with the wife of a teammate. As always, George Costanza said it best:
George: Was that wrong? Should I have not done that? I tell you I gotta plead ignorance on this thing because if anyone had said anything to me at all when I first started here that that sort of thing was frowned upon, you know, cause I’ve worked in a lot of offices and I tell you people do that all the time.
That was in 1998, and we're only clued in now? Does that mean we have to wait 24 years to find out what Shipnuck and Pat Perez have on Phil?
I promise, I'm done World Cup blogging....
The Tiger In Winter - I'll take headlines that haven't aged well for $1,000, Art:
'See you soon at Albany': Tiger Woods set for 2022 Hero World Challenge in the Bahamas
And this:
Tiger Woods has potential for largest-ever career OWGR jump at Hero
Upon further review:
Tiger Woods has withdrawn from this week’s Hero World Challenge due to injury.
Woods, who serves as host for the 20-player exhibition event, announced via social media on Monday that he has developed plantar fasciitis in his right foot. “After consulting with my doctors and trainers, I have decided to withdraw this week and focus on my hosting duties,” Woods said in a statement.
Well, fortunately the Father-Son also offer sup OWGR points, so he's got that going for him. What? Really, no OWGR points even with Charlie in the field?
The Tiger dead-enders are going to be despondent, and you have to pity the folks at Hero as well. Without the Big Cat, it's hard to see the broadcast generating enough eyeballs to get an actual audience measurement. Though they were apparently able to land Sepp Straka as a replacement, and you know what a draw he is.
Everyone was over the moon about Tiger playing, as evidenced in this Sunday evening Tour Confidential, which reads very differently with this news:
1. For the first time in four months (since Friday at the Open), Tiger Woods will tee it up at a golf tournament (and address the media) when Woods pulls double duty and hosts/plays in the Hero World Challenge Thursday through Sunday at Albany in the Bahamas. A lot has happened in the golf world since he last played. What are you hoping to hear from Woods, see from him on the course, and what kind of finish are you expecting in the 20-player field?
Josh Sens: All the obvious LIV-related questions. Should they get world-ranking points? Be
welcomed back into the majors? Potential for a Camp David accord with the Tour? Would/should the Tour pursue a peace agreement? Also — what was he really offered to join LIV? I’m sure Tiger will have PR-vetted answers at the ready. On the course, we know he can still swing it beautifully. The question is more how much his body can handle. How he walks, bends to scoop a ball out of the cup, steps into a bunker, etc. All of those will be under Zapruder-like scrutiny as signs for the year ahead.
Sean Zak: I’m hoping to hear that he’s reached a different level of comfort with his body. How close is he to his ceiling, comfort-wise? Doubt he’ll share much but can it look better than the grinding he did this summer? I expect him to finish 15th. Every year a handful of pros play bad golf down there so he should be able to beat a couple of them.
Jack Hirsh: I’m pretty sure we know what Tiger Woods’ takes are on LIV Golf by now, and I’m honestly more interested in hearing what his schedule might look like for next year. Will he be able to play in the U.S. Open again? His own Genesis? This will play into the second part of the question above because how he is physically determines everything here. He makes a lot of birdies on this golf course and has showed before he can do that at less than 100 percent. I foresee something similar to 2017, when he made a ton of birdies but finished tied for ninth.
Zephyr Melton: As my comrades have noted above, my biggest curiosity concerns how Woods’ body is holding up. This year, he showed glimpses of his old self, but he didn’t have the stamina to keep it up for four rounds. December should give us an idea of his progress, and give us an idea of what we can expect in 2023.
Bingo, Zephyr! We now know exactly what to expect from Tiger in 2023... And his schedule? Well, I think we'll see him at the Father-Son and....well, at the Father-Son.
This one didn't hold up well, either:
2. This is the first of three-straight weeks Woods will star on our TV screens. He’s also playing in the Match (Dec. 10) and then teaming with his son, Charlie, at the PNC Championship (Dec. 17-18). How would you rank the three when it comes to your viewing interest as a golf fan?
Sens: The parent-kid pairings are the most interesting to me. How similar/different are the swings? What’s the family dynamic like? As tough as it is to make it in pro golf, can you imagine the weight of expectations being the child of one of the greats? For all the privilege they’ve grown up with, that’s also gotta be an unenviable burden. Maybe I’m being too shrink-y here, but that stuff is interesting to ponder as the tournament unfolds. As the most-watched famous kid golfer, Charlie seems to be still playing with youthful joy and intensity. And with that swing, he should be at least able to land a college scholarship, sparing his family the insane tuition costs that the rest of us struggle to afford. So that’s a relief.
Zak: The Hero will tell us the most about his body. The PNC will tell us … not too much. The Match will be fun! So I’ll tune in first for the Match and then the Hero and lastly the PNC.
Hirsh: Sens is spot on. As someone who grew up playing father-sons with his dad, I absolutely love these events and think they’re what golf is all about: fun! Charlie talking smack to JT and Karl Stenson’s interviews (the absence of this year is by far the greatest thing LIV has taken from the PGA Tour) were hilarious and a nice break from the uptight nature of the typical pro golf event. I also agree with Zak that the Hero will be a test of Woods’ body. As for the Match, I haven’t really cared for this series too much, save for the Tiger, Phil, Peyton, Brady match that was the ONLY live sports on during the pandemic. This one will be more like a regular Thursday buddies game. It goes PNC, Hero, then Match for me.
Melton: While the PNC might be the least competitive of the three, it’s also the most intriguing. Seeing Tiger compete alongside Charlie has been a blast the past two years, and this time should be no different. Parent-child hit-and-giggles show us a different side of these athletes, and the intel we get about the Woods family is always a treat.
I am so glad that Karl Stenson got a shoutout, as he was a delight (so was his Dad, although he's now a non-person).
I find it so charming that guys are convinced The Match will be fun... Maybe, but I'm having trouble identifying who will make it fun. It sure won't be the guy pictured above...
As long we're in TC mode, let's get their thoughts on bromance interruptus:
3. As for the future of the aforementioned Match, Phil Mickelson, who started the inaugural event alongside Woods, will no longer be involved, Match executive producer Bryan Zuriff told our James Colgan. What are your thoughts on Mickelson’s departure, and will that hurt future installments?
Sens: Mickelson was a natural fit for these TV-made confections. But there are other decent gabbers and smack-talkers out there. The fluffy franchise hardly depends on Phil.
Who exactly?
Zak: You can argue Mickelson was the one who kept this enterprise afloat. Last year’s duel between Brooks and Bryson was a snore, but Phil was great in the broadcast booth. It’ll be a shame not to have him involved, because who is going to fill the Phil void? It’s not Tiger, or nice guys Rory and Spieth.
Hirsh: It also isn’t going to be Barkley filling that void! Phil provided the X-factor to these things, and his presence in the booth for the LIV finale was all the more proof.
Melton: I’ll definitely miss Lefty’s quick wit on the mic, but the franchise should be OK without him as long as they keep attracting the big names.
Is Sir Charles not on the broadcast? If so, they've got nothing.... I know JT was good on the second one during the pandemic, but in a fairly limited role. I love that "the franchise will be OK" bit, because it's sucked pretty much even with Phil and Charles. I'd take it behind the barn and put it out of its misery, though perhaps I've been watching too much Yellowstone.
Rank This - I promised this yesterday, Mike Bamberger with a hot take on a trendy subject:
Is It Time to Abolish the World Ranking?
The OWGR has been updated but the idea that underpins it has grown antiquated
Not at all clear what he means by that sub-header, but do tell, Mikey:
A friend called the other day and asked if I had heard about a comment that Davis Love III made.
“No,” I said. “What was it?”
“Something like, ‘Get rid of the World Golf Ranking.’”
I clicked off the call with a full head of steam. What a brilliant idea. Get rid of the Official World Golf Ranking!
Who needs it? It’s a real thing, in as much as it exists. But it’s not a true real thing. You can pretend there’s a systematic way to rank professional golfers playing all over the world in all manner of tournaments on all manner of courses. But in the end it’s a subjective list that is dependent on criteria that have been put into a formula in the first place. Just because a computer spits it out doesn’t make it true.
Mike, was it really necessary to kill off that straw man? Because exactly no one has bene arguing that the OWGR are "truth", it's just that certain organizations that hold golf tournaments need a methodology to decide who to invite.
Mike's description of the origins of the OWGR is also a tad strange, as apparently an agent working in the best interests of his clients is somehow suspect. Isn't this more a case of the golf bodies recognizing the growing importance of non-U.S. tours and trying to ensure international players appropriate access to golf's most important events? I mean, you humble blogger is old enough to remember when diversity was our strength....
Mike next goes off the deep end, burning pixels that including one man's ranking of country music performers and Rolling Stones' ranking of rock guitarists, to prove to us that it's all subjective. There's only one small, niggling problem, which is that it's not subjective. It's imperfect and imprecise in spades, but there is nothing subjective about the game of golf, as we are subject to the tyranny of the scorecard.
LIV Golf, understandably and I would say fairly, wants its players to earn OWGR points. (The acronym alone is offensively unpoetic.) A player’s OWGR is a primary way to get into golf’s four major events. When Davis played in his first Masters in 1988, the tournament was still basically an invitational. There were a handful of ways to get an invitation, like winning on the PGA Tour or being the U.S. Amateur champion. But the OWGR, even though it already existed, was not a path to an invitation. Being a noteworthy player from overseas was. The lords of Augusta invited players from Japan and Australia and Thailand on that basis. Now, being in the top 50 on the OWGR list at the end of the previous year is one path in.
That’s not good for LIV players, who aren’t earning any World Ranking points playing LIV events. And they are barred from playing PGA Tour events. A fundamental concept of golf, at every imaginable level, is fairness. No matter how you feel about the LIV series, you could make the case that’s not fair. I would. The OWGR list gives the appearance of fairness, but that’s all it does. See Jon Rahm or Andy Ogletree if you want more on that.
Mike, you're free to make that case, although this blog isn't big enough to cover the litany of inconvenient facts that you're sweeping under your area rug.
Let me just spend a moment on little nit. Why are they barred form the PGA Tour? You present it in this weird passive voice as if it's something unforeseen that just happened out of the blue. Mike, perhaps you didn't here Marc Leishman's recent comments, but these guys value money over fairness, so you might be out there alone.
Now Mike slowly starts edging back towards the objective world:
“Ahh, the Official World Golf Rankings kerfuffle. If there were no OWGR, what would replace it? Having some kind of printed eligibility list, albeit subjective, is beneficial.
“Let’s face it, we live in a world of subjective lists and rankings. Colleges (academic). Colleges (football playoffs). Restaurants. Doctors and lawyers. Golf courses. Automobiles. EVERYTHING in this world is ranked, subjectively.
“This morning, I looked at the final results from the Saudi tournament. Many recognizable names. Rory [McIlroy], Jon Rahm. The tourney at Sea Island? Brian Harman was the only name I readily recognized. (You can tell I’ve ceased having much interest in the weekly Tour events.) So I agree with Rahm:
There’s a big flaw in the system.
Mike, here's a free pro tip for you: While making fatuous, nonsensical arguments it might be helpful if you correctly named the location of that Euro Tour event, because, the country you cited might just be the least likely spot on the globe for that event to have been situated.
But this is the second shout-out to Jon Rahm from Mike, in which he refuses to engage with the depth of field arguments.
So, his solution is preapproved eligibility list, although even that he admits would be subjective.... so, you've blathered on and you have exactly nothing.
So, after wasting our time, he finally gets to a bit in which there's a germ of an actual idea:
“But I’m meandering. To your question, my recommendation is for OWGR to remain in place, but to consist of just the four bodies that host the majors: the Masters; the PGA of America; the U.S. Open and the Open. No professional tours—zero, none, zilch—would have a seat at the table. The four majors alone will determine eligibility for the majors. And among the Big Four, each of the majors will be entitled to include special exemptions of their own choosing. For example, amateurs in the Masters and the two Opens, club pros in the PGA Championship.
“As for the week-to-week eligibility for the PGA Tour events and the DP World Tour, leave that up to those tours. The four majors should have nothing to do with that decision-making. Sure the tours will howl at not having a seat at the table and a vote. But so what?
If his major (pun intended) point was to argue that the tours, and really he's only interested in Jay's tour, should not be on the board of the OWGR, that's a point worth discussing. It's also probably hopelessly naïve, but at least it has some logic...
But even with that he can't help going off t5he deep end. is the Masters going to allow this organization to determine who plays in their event? So all of that is comically inane... Yes, the four organizations could run that entity, but all they would do is administer the same kinds of formulae that exist now, there simply needs to be metrics to rank players, though the methodology by which strength of field is measured will of course remain subjective.
I'm left with the same amusing thought I've had for some time now. Sure, Mike, LIV wants OWGR points, but shouldn't they have figured that out long ago? They seem to have believed that the entire golf world was going to roll over and play dead, and Mike seems to think that was realistic on their part.
Alan, Asked - A new one just dropped, so shall we live blog it together? Ummm, you do know that was a rhetorical question, right?
Why doesn’t Tiger just ride a take this week at the World Challenge so he can play despite the plantar fasciitis? @kevinp613
Pride. Obstinance. An old-school worldview. Woods has been quite
consistent on this point since he mangled his leg a year and a half ago in a single-car accident: there isn’t a place for golf carts in a serious competition. Yes, he supported Casey Martin in his court battle with the PGA Tour way back then, but that was only because of Tiger’s allegiance to his old Stanford roommate. And at last year’s Father-Son, Woods signaled the support for old-timers taking carts, noting many of them wouldn’t be able to participate without them. But that’s a hit and giggle. Tiger is very proud to host the World Challenge and he leans on his friends and admirers to make sure top players show up. By Woods’s own reasoning, him taking a cart would devalue the tournament. It would also be a concession to his own golfing mortality, which Woods is loathe to make, even at this challenging juncture.
Ride a take? Well argued...
But, really, WTF? Boys, we don't award world ranking points to events where guys ride a take, something you might expect Alan to have known.
How should the PGA Tour better spend the PIP money … or is it money well spent? @EatandSleepGolf The existing system is gross and tacky…but necessary. To keep its stars, the Tour simply has to pay them, and the PIP is easy guaranteed money for the biggest names. This kind of socialism goes against the essential meritocratic nature of the Tour…but the landscape has changed. The money would certainly be better spent funding the Korn Ferry, Latinoamerica and Canadian tours, but at this moment the Tour is doing what it must to hang on to its needle-movers.
The problem with what Phil did is that the inevitable reaction of the Tour to head off the threat will make the tour a worse place. So thanks, Phil.
Now that he’s back with Butch, does Rickie Fowler ever win again? @KitDuncan10
Well, that’s up to Rickie. Butch low-key fired him the first time around because he felt Fowler was too complacent to slurp up endorsement dollars and wasn’t working hard enough to maximize his considerable talent. Now that Fowler has been kicked around by the game (and marketplace) perhaps he can access a different level of grind and grit. If so, he can have a very fruitful second act to his career between the ropes.
I referenced Tiger dead-enders above, but I remain surpsied at how many folks still care about the man in orange. At the very least, he seems a good guy and has accepted his fall from grace with...well, grace, so I'd be happy if he had a second act.
Does grabbing lunch at the turn help or hurt your game? @RobFord58
Well, if it’s a hot dog, French fries, chocolate chip cookie and two beers, I’m gonna say it’s a hindrance. That’s a lot of fat and sugar and sodium and gluten and alcohol your body has to process. Would you consume all that halfway through a marathon? I eat a lot on the golf course but I try to pack healthy snacks: apple, banana, trail mix, protein bars, maybe beef jerky. At the turn I’m definitely grabbing a turkey sandwich over something greasy. I just don’t want to feel like I have an anvil in my stomach when I’m trying to swing my driver 110 miles per hour. (Okay, fine, 105.) Golf is an athletic endeavor that requires proper fuel. Now, for the post-round meal, all bets are off.
If I'm playing well, it hurs. If I'm playing poorly, who cares? Just glad Alan is sticking to the big issues of the day...
Like I said, only the important issues:
PIP might be the worst idea the Tour has come up with. Why not require all the exempt players to set up an Only Fans account and see who does best? At least it would a real competition. @JBShaw9
Hardly! Adam Scott would win this in perpetuity.
A perfect example of how Alan and I differ. Adam Scott popped into his mind, whereas Harry Higgs intruded into my own.
This is actually an important subject, and he's about the first to actually tell us what such a deal might look like:
Once Greg Norman exits the LIV stage, how would a potential compromise with LIV and the PGA Tour work? American sponsors want a Cam Smith type to draw eyes to their advertisements. #AskAlan @david_troyan It seems likely that after this season some of the Tour’s top players are going to chafe at the number of elevated events they are expected to play. So a reduction on this front would open up more space for co-sanctioned LIV events, mostly in the fall. They would take their rightful place as fun, Silly Season-style events at a time of year when most top players are MIA – the big LIV money would lure them off the couch. It doesn’t seem that hard to me. Sure, eligibility criteria would have to get hashed out, but this is solvable.
He gets it wrong, but at least he takes a crack...
Problem is, virtually everything he says is kinda wrong, except for that first bit. The players will chafe, but of course the LIVsters have the same issue.
Alan seemingly doesn't understand supply and demand. The alphas want to play less, making their presence that much more important. LIV could have had the Fall without spending $2 billion, it's just Death Valley in the golf world, nothing can grow in that climate.
Alan, do you think Europe will ultimately allow LIV players to play in Rome next year? What if Eugenio Lopez-Chacarra wins a couple LIV events next year and has a top-10 or top-5 in a major? Would they still opt to not pick him because he’s on the LIV tour? @bobbytrunole
The courts will likely have a say about this; it is a temporary injunction from the International Dispute Resolution Centre, an independent U.K. body, that has allowed all the LIV guys to compete on the Euro Tour this season. I’m not an attorney I just play one on the Internet, but from what I’ve read, the labor and antitrust laws over there are more favorable to the LIV plaintiffs so Eugenio et al may be able to litigate their way into consideration through a newfangled, court-mandated qualifying process. But short of that, I don’t see any of them being considered for a captain’s pick. Ryder Cup captains are obsessed with camaraderie and team-building. Also, Rory McIlroy wields a ton of power within Team Europe and he has made it very clear he doesn’t want LIV’ers in the inner sanctum of the team room. Something seismic would have to happen for that to change.
There's a few major assumptions baked in there, but this I see as even a bigger flash point than the OWGR. There's the big issue of Jay maintaining control of Keith Pelley, one can only assume he has the necessary compromising pictures. But, assuming Alan's hypothetical plays out, if LIVsters are on the Euro Ryder Cup squad, does Zach get his day in the sun?
One potentially interesting aspect to that is that, it being a Euro home game, it's not Jay's revenue stream. Although, given the PGA Tour's financial support of the Euro Tour, that could be argued otherwise as well. But, as long as we're spinning hypotheticals, we could also argue that Jay might not want Pelley to have that cash windfall, which would logically make him less dependent on Jay.
Question: Is there any scenario on this earth that the PGA Tour doesn’t give free first place PIP money to Tiger? Lots of players trying to add value and Tiger gets paid for not playing. Heck it’s not even Tiger on his social media. #AskAlan @SHistorians The Tour is obviously beholden to Woods for his leadership and advocacy and the PIP is a way of rewarding him. But Tiger has enough money and, given his outspokenness, there’s pretty no way he could go to LIV at this point. So, I could see the Tour tweaking its mysterious algorithms so Woods no longer has a stranglehold on the top spot, freeing up money to keep more current superstars happy but still funneling to Tiger a multimillion dollar annuity more or less forever.
This is not a good look for the Tour, regardless of its perceived necessity.
With your crystal ball what will be the biggest story golf in 2023 that we didn’t see coming? Well, besides you. @SonofaFitch46
I am hoping to recede into the background in ’23, although it is a Ryder Cup year and that always leads to a certain amount of banter. I’m not great at forecasts but my hopeful answer is that we will see a return to civility, in which a normally genteel sport reclaims its soul. Who could see that coming?
Yeah, gotta admit that I didn't have civility on my bingo card... Does that mean we can't still call the Saudis scary mofos?
That's it for today, laddies. Will be back as circumstances require.
