or Connect
New Posts  All Forums:

Posts by shaun

"Consistent" is an ordinary English word. There's really no need to define it. My dictionary says that "consistent" means conforming to a regular pattern. Hitting the fairway once or twice out of three of four attempts doesn't constitute consistent accuracy. I think it's fairly obvious what I meant by "close", but I'll play along. A 2.0 index is getting close to scratch, a 4.0 has quite a long way to go, and an 8.1 is nowhere near it. What does that mean? I wouldn't be...
Yeah, I agree. I've actually never seen anyone that could accurately drive the ball anywhere near 300 yards consistently that wasn't close to playing off scratch. It's pretty obvious why that should be the case. Despite what guys might say on the internet, few golfers consistently hit the fairway, let alone consistently hit the fairway 300 yards from the tee; and it's a fairly safe bet that the overall game of a golfer that's able to do so would be such that he or she...
Free speech has had a rough time in Canada since the adoption of the Charter of (so-called) Rights and Freedoms, hasn't it? Right to be offended? Careless lack of censorship? Sheesh.
Ha ha. Exactly. I'd still pick Tiger, by the way. His matchplay record is phenomenal -- and a bad hole or two in that format won't hurt him too much either.
I'm a little surprised that this is being taken at all seriously. It's your job, as a parent, to teach your kids how to act; it's not the responsibility of the pros playing golf on TV. If you're really concerned about the pros' language, you should explain to your kids why (you say) it's wrong "to use use the Lord's name in vain." While you're at it, you might try to explain to them that this is an area in which people's views can reasonably differ, and that, in such...
Yeah, that's why it's called a forum. More importantly, all of the criticising, critiquing and "advising" about which you complain -- let's just call it "public interest" -- is part of what makes the world of professional sports go round.
No, that didn't happen. But even assuming that you're right -- which takes a lot of effort and makes me feel idiotic -- there would be nothing 'classy' in Watson gifting the Open to Cink by deliberately losing the playoff. If Watson had done that, he wouldn't be congratulated; he'd have irreparably tarnished his legacy.
You could've said that at the beginning and saved me the trouble of reading the rest of your post. Anyway, to say that McDowell "won" the US Open by Johnson (or Woods, Mickelson or Els, or anyone else) "losing" it is equally absurd. Leading after three rounds means just that -- you have the lead after three rounds, with a further round to go. It doesn't make any sense to say that someone should have won a tournament shooting 71, 70, 66, 82! A final round in the 80s --...
Special exemptions shouldn't exist.
The driver does not have to pay to fix his car. The damage was caused by the negligence of either, or both, the golfer or the club. In this situation, assuming the golfer behaved relatively normally, the club will generally be liable for its failure to erect an adequate security barrier to protect drivers on the nearby road from errant golf shots. The golfer's liability may be more complicated. He would certainly owe a duty of care to passing motorists, but whether...
New Posts  All Forums: