Roger Maltbie's interview with Stewart Cink

[iacas]

how about changing the situation a bit then....let's say your Wife is having a affair on you, and (only stating the facts) is it ok if someone would come ask you...gee dude how does it feel that your Wife is boning another guy?

I'm not sure where you're going with that. Neither of those would offend me. If my wife was 400 lbs, I'd obviously be aware of it and have made the choice to be married to her, so... why would that be offensive? And if she cheats, that's hardly offensive to me.

You seem to have confused "personal" with "offensive." Asking Stewart Cink how he felt knowing that he was playing against a better player (and not just a better player by a small margin) isn't a "personal" question. It's not an offensive one, either, but that's the discussion.

and anyways I didn't hear this question being asked to Holmes, Baddeley, Stenson whom Tiger is better then as well......

Their matches came out with different results. They weren't beat down. Tiger struggled. And so appropriate variations of those question WERE asked. JB was asked how he felt almost beating the world's #1, Baddeley was asked about the two puts that would have sent shockwaves... and Stenson was asked, too.

They weren't asked the same specific question because their situations were different. And JB was asked similar questions to Stewart Cink a week BEFORE he played Tiger.

[Striper]

Maltbie's phrased his question in such a way that it was in poor taste. It was a good question, one that most of us have thought about, he just picked the wrong words. He made himself look bad while Cink responded as a true gentleman.

How would Tiger have reacted if he'd been asked that same question, in the same situation? My guess is that Maltbie would have been met with Tiger's famous stare.

Cink battled his way to the match play final. He played especially well on Saturday. Maltbie chose to diminish those accomplishments with the way he phrased the first question.

[JaY_B]

You seem to have confused "personal" with "offensive." Asking Stewart Cink how he felt knowing that he was playing against a better player (and not just a better player by a small margin) isn't a "personal" question. It's not an offensive one, either, but that's the discussion.

It is an offensive question, how can you say that question would not upset someone who has just played their heart out, and beaten a number of top class players to get to the final, and Cink never gave up in the final, the question was unnecessary, just because people are thinking it does not mean it needed to be brought up, Matlbie should maybe learn to think about what he is saying. Surely if I said I think there are people on this forum that would be much better moderators than you, and every one knows it you would be annoyed (in fact... you would probably ban me

) I don't really understand how you can say this would not offend or upset Cink, the way he reacted doesn't always represent the way Cink would of felt, lot of respect for the way Stewart Cink handled it, Roger Maltbie acted like a tit.

[illmadden]

Seriously, I don't understand how someone doesn't find that question offensive. I mean, that's like asking any player on the tour..."You know Tiger is playing in this tournament, right? Why did you even bother showing up?"

[iacas]

It is an offensive question, how can you say that question would not upset someone who has just played their heart out, and beaten a number of top class players to get to the final, and Cink never gave up in the final, the question was unnecessary, just because people are thinking it does not mean it needed to be brought up, Matlbie should maybe learn to think about what he is saying.

And you should learn how post-round interviews work. I can practically guarantee you the question was approved by Stewart prior to its televised asking. That's standard behavior. Unless you see the guy walk over and get interviewed right away, they've usually gone through a pre-flight checklist.

I still don't think it's an offensive question. It's a truthful question. It might dent the pride or ego a little, but FAR less than losing 8&7 would. If you get beat by Tiger Woods and I ask you how it feels knowing you were going to lose going in, is that offensive? I wouldn't be offended if that question was asked of me. If you agree with that, then it's about degrees. How good would Stewart Cink have to be for the question to be inappropriate? Top 10 player in the world? Top 5? Top 2? Even Phil has lost to Tiger more than he's won. I think asking him would be a little bizarre and perhaps offensive, but Stewart Cink? C'mon... Tiger's already won as many tournaments this _year_ as Stewart Cink has won in his career... (if we count Dubai). Tiger isn't just a little better than Stewart - he's a LOT better - and everyone - including Stewart Cink - knows it. Or put it this way: if a PGA Tour pro can't handle a QUESTION like that, how in the hell will they ever actually PLAY against Tiger? My god, it's just a question, and an honest one, truthful one that might stand a chance of providing some insight rather than the boring, lame-ass questions that normally get asked.

Surely if I said I think there are people on this forum that would be much better moderators than you, and every one knows it you would be annoyed (in fact... you would probably ban me

That's not even relevant. First off, that'd be an opinion. Second, it's not even relevant: you're stuck with the moderator team you've got. Bad analogy.

[rudygu]

Seriously, I don't understand how someone doesn't find that question offensive. I mean, that's like asking any player on the tour..."You know Tiger is playing in this tournament, right? Why did you even bother showing up?"

I don't think it's the same thing. Maltbie asked the question after Cink had played and gotten whipped by Woods. Saying "Why did you even bother showing up?" Would just be presumptuous. Everyone knows that it is possible for Cink to beat Tiger in match play. Not likely, but possible nonetheless.

[sonicblue]

I don't think it's the same thing. Maltbie asked the question after Cink had played and gotten whipped by Woods. Saying "Why did you even bother showing up?" Would just be presumptuous. Everyone knows that it is possible for Cink to beat Tiger in match play. Not likely, but possible nonetheless.

Even after everyone lost to Tiger, to say to any of them, even the guy who finished 20 strokes back, "c'mon, man, you should have stayed home..." would be disrespectful. BUT, Maltbie said, "what's it like

standing on the first tee, knowing... " To me, that's akin to saying, "what was it like knowing you STARTED THE DAY not having a shot?" I say again, see "Nick O'Hern" - anyone can beat someone on any given day. Yes, we all know that Tiger is in perhaps his greatest form this year, but he will lose a tournament (at least I think he will...) this year, and that tournament could have been this one. Stewart Cink had as much of a chance as anyone, and to flat out say, essentially, "before you hit a ball, you didn't have a chance" is awful journalism at a minimum. Erik: you are no doubt from the school of "suck it up," and I am a fellow attendee, but I think you went for your graduate degree. I don't believe in sheltering people's feelings, but I don't believe in haplessly treading on them, either. Let me make this point, too: Tiger had two VERY tough matches. If he had trampled everyone, it'd be one thing, but being taken to length by Holmes and Baddeley - not Singh or Phil or Furyk - opens the door very widely that he's not an unstoppable force. IMO, some very feasible options to convey the same idea: Q: You're standing on the first tee with the world's #1 who has bested every field he's taken on in the last X weeks. Does that ever leave your mind, or are you able to maintain a mindset of, "I can do this"? Q: In retrospect, I don't think any of us are surprised that Tiger won this match or this tournament, given the streak he's been on and all the evidence of just how in tune his complete game seems to be. Before the start of the match, though, do you feel you were still able to be confident and play your best game? Just a couple....

[TourSpoon]

I tend to agree that it did make Maltbie look a little pompous. Like I maintain, he could have done the same thing with "How does it feel to be the underdog"...

[rudygu]

Even after everyone lost to Tiger, to say to any of them, even the guy who finished 20 strokes back, "c'mon, man, you should have stayed home..." would be disrespectful. BUT, Maltbie said, "what's it like

Maltbie said "I'd like to know, what's it like standing on the 1st tee when you know your opponent's better than you, he knows he's better than you, and everyone else knows he's better than you?". While it may not have been nice and it probably isn't how I would phrase the question, it most certainly isn't the same thing as saying "Why did you even show up?". That would be assuming that there was no chance of him winning. Everyone knows that Woods is better than Cink. Everyone also knows that a better player can lose in match play.

What Maltbie said was more akin to saying "No one thought you were going to win."

[Craig Mac]

Cink gave several interviews the night before, and the day of his match stating how Tiger was "the best player in the world". He even said how "fun" it was to watch him as a golf fan. That doesn't sound like a guy who has much faith that he is gonna win to me. As far as the question, Cink rolled with it, answered the question and moved on. I think this shows more of Cink's good natured character than RM's pretty obvious, stupid question of the day.

[iacas]

Even after everyone lost to Tiger, to say to any of them, even the guy who finished 20 strokes back, "c'mon, man, you should have stayed home..." would be disrespectful. BUT, Maltbie said, "what's it like

Let's be accurate. He didn't say "What's it like standing on the first tee knowing you're going to lose?"

He said "What's it like standing on the first tee knowing you're playing a guy who's better than you?" Tiger is not just a little bit better, an "any given Sunday" better, than Stewart Cink. He'll beat Stewart 9 times out of 10. And yet the question didn't even ASK about winning or losing - it asked about the pressures, the mindset, the approach to playing someone that much better. It asked about that 1 out of 10 times Stewart might win.

To me, that's akin to saying, "what was it like knowing you STARTED THE DAY not having a shot?"

I don't take it that way. JB Holmes nearly beat tiger and Stewart's a better player than JB. But had JB won, Tiger would STILL be the far better player, overall, than either of them.

I say again, see "Nick O'Hern" - anyone can beat someone on any given day.

That doesn't change the question. Tiger's winning percentage is still orders of magnitude higher than anyone else he plays with. And 9 times out of 10 he'll beat Stewart.

But that's not what the question asked...

Stewart Cink had as much of a chance as anyone, and to flat out say, essentially, "before you hit a ball, you didn't have a chance" is awful journalism at a minimum.

That's not what he said. And I guess that's the fundamental difference. He didn't say that - you're putting words in his mouth and then deeming those "extra" words offensive.

[TourSpoon]

Cink was interviewed yesterday after a solid -6 round at the Doral and was asked in a nice way about his Sunday rounds (given that at the Pods [and other tournis] he had a hard time closing). In true fashion, he answered the question saying that he has to focus on getting in position and to let it happen. He is a real gentleman and even though he has crumbled on a few Sundays I am hoping that he will get past this obstacle. It must be getting old. Anyway, he is nothing short of a class act.

[Striper]

Cink IS a class act on the course and off.

His son has been in the same class at school as my oldest son for several years. I've had the chance to speak with him and his wife on many occasions. They are two of the most sincere, down to earth people I've ever met. Heck, the guy works carpool in the mornings during the off season. He opens car doors, for kids, in freezing/raining weather

No matter what happens on Sundays, he is already a winner in life.

[r7 425]

I think Roger Maltbie's question was a blemish. He went into unchartered territory by asking a sensitive question like that..I would not be happy if Roger asked me that..I don't want someone telling me that somebody else is better than me. Stewart plays to win the game...he doesnt accept 2nd place consolations

[golf_junkie27]

I have no problems with Roger's question. He's asking what everyone is thinking.

What separates Tiger from the rest of the field is that attitude that "I'm playing the course" as opposed to "I'm playing X player."

If Stewart had answered "All those things are true. However, we've seen how tough it's been this week. If I play to my strengths and not worry about Tiger, I have a chance."