Molinari - Page 5

I believe you Ray. Yes, who better than TW to carry the flag on the last hole? He may have misplaced some of his genius but he's lost none of his grit - on the contrary actually. And his putting confidence is much improved.


.... holds up skull in dramatic gesture ....

"Alas, poor Furyk!"

The idea that Tiger was pulling Stricker around that course is utterly hilarious. Go watch their first match - Woods didn't hit a decent shot on Friday morning until he go to the 16th. His driving put Stricker in so many terrible positions. Montgomery picked Woods absolutely correctly when he said he should have been pulled off the course after 9 holes.

 

One other thing - I'm pretty sure that Olazabla didn't want the draw. He wanted a win. He wanted to go back to Ballesteros's grave with the pot and say ''there ya go, beat them." Good on him - he had a mission, he achieved it.

 

So the six and seven birdie runs by Tiger - while Stricker was contributing bubkus - mean nothing?

 

Tiger played well and was saddled with a lousy partner. That's what people I trust said.

Hi all. Got to say I find this whole discussion just a little odd. The rules under which the Ryder Cup was played did not allow Molinari to concede in the fairway. He asked to, he wasn't able to. No, I don't think Olli would have let him anyway, in fact he told Molinari to play for a team win, but that's beside the point. The only thing they could do was concede a putt.

Fast forward to the third shots of each player. Where's that Italian chap you're all ragging on? Where's Tiger? Within the rules Tiger could have conceded Molinari's putt, Molinari couldn't concede Tiger's chip. Not arguing right or wrong here, that's just the way it is. Molinari is now closer to the hole and Tiger has not yet putt. Tiger could have conceded Molinari's putt but chose to not do so. Again not criticising, just stating a fact.

What I fail to get is people wringing their hands and saying why didn't he concede coz it didn't matter. If it didn't matter, guys, why in the blazes do you care if Molinari conceded the putt or not?!? He chose (or was told) to play for a Europe win. Fine. You don't care, remember?

And Tiger played well? Exactly which Ryder Cup were you watching? Tiger did not play well, at least nothing like how well he can play. "Stroke play, he did ok." Hate to say it but it wasn't stroke play. He got beaten in every match bar his singles which he drew with a chap I actually like a lot, but a chap Tiger would have beaten 99 times out of a hundred. Tiger didn't bring his A game. I know that because his A game beats our guys most of the time.

So why did he apologise for his poor play in a press conference in Turkey yesterday?

What 6 and 7 birdie runs. Been through each of Tiger's cards, that just plain didn't happen. Tiger's first match was a foursome ie he made no birdies, his second he contributed 10 holes stricker 8 (ie his score counted 10 times as it was better than Stricker), next match Tiger 9, Stricker 9. At no time did Tiger have a 6 and 7 birdie run. Just plain didn't happen.

Sorry, I think Tiger is a great player, I just hate it when people exaggerate everything he does. He didn't play that well, especially for him. Let's not pretend he did.

 

Wasn't Tiger -8 in the match against Colsaerts (-10)? That's probably what Erik meant. But having said that, Tiger was poor in the other matches he played and Stricker not much better.

Not quite. Tiger scored 8 birdies (only 7 recorded), but his score was not counted on 8 occasions because Stricker out scored him. On 6 of those occasions Stricker only scored par so Tiger may have been par, may have been boggie or worse. Anyway, not to worry, just thought he played worse than normal by a fair margin.

 

That was also my impression watching the Ryder Cup.

 

Sorry, not runs. But I heard he made six and seven birdies (and five on the back nine in one of the matches) while Stricker could barely be counted on to par.

 

And Tiger's score not "counting" does not mean that Stricker "out-scored" him. More often it means they got the same score, but two pars is the same as one par, so it doesn't matter and the second player just picks up.

 

From everyone I've talked to they said Stricker played horribly and Tiger played okay to good.

 

And you can concede a hole or a match at any point in match play. There's no "rule of the Ryder Cup" which can prevent it.

Agree. Not very credible IMO. He may have lost this and that but he hasn't lost any of his will-to-win.

You are right about the 5 birdies on the back 9 one day, in fact Tiger played the back 9 better than the front pretty much the whole Cup but he was seriously out of position on several holes that he picked up on, didn't always match Stricker's score and Stricker had at least one boggie that were the counting score. What was more telling was that on the two 4 ball matches, Tiger was out played by Colsaerts on one and Donald (just) on another. In his Foursomes match he really didn't play too well. I'm not saying he was awful, just not up to his usual standard which is extremely high. He's the world number two and only scored a half point all Cup when playing against Molinari. That has to tell you something.

Only other thing was there was actually a rule about playing out all the matches. The captains had to decide it before the cup started and it's mentioned on several betting sites where they give odds on the outcome of both individual matches and the overall score. All about the money, these days, isn't it?