LIV Golf (Saudi PIF), "Mergers," and More

[TourSpoon]

2 hours ago, TourSpoon said:

Get the popcorn out. I can't wait to see how he responds. 

Brandel actually did ok. When asked if he lost the fight, he responded by saying it wasn't about him. Popcorn not required. 🍿

[chspeed]

1 hour ago, saevel25 said:

It looks like a Cartel type of system. Where these guys are banding together to unify a market to eliminate competition.

Good point- merger may be challenged legally as forming a monopoly.

[PatrickMurtha]

15 minutes ago, eich41 said:

I'm fine if that's your stance.  Here is the problem with that.... You can't have selective virtue.  You can't condemn SA and anyone who associates with SA, then turn a blind eye to the PGA Tour pushing partnerships with China, who certainly has plenty of their own human rights issues.  So if you're going to go down that road, go all the way down that road.  You should have bailed on the PGA Tour 5 years ago and this LIV situation wouldn't even matter.  

Oh crap. Here is the problem with THAT…Everyone’s virtue is selective to a certain extent; no one does, or can, pick a fight on every issue. The implication here is that if you’re not 100% clean, you might as well be 100% dirty. I have taught ethics, and that is ridiculous. It is perfectly OK to make more of an issue of the Saudi money than the Chinese. I’m not especially keen on the Chinese money either, but they didn’t form a rival league, nor have they bought the existing one. I’m sure that if they did try to take over the PGA Tour, there would be PLENTY of questioning / critical voices. 

The essence of whataboutism is to demand a consistency of your opponents that you don’t demand of yourself.

Edited June 6 by PatrickMurtha

[eich41]

1 minute ago, klineka said:

Only if the winning score is over par, right!!??

I don't think it's your place to gatekeep what someone does/doesn't care about though.

Maybe someone has a personal reason to condemn SA so that means more to them than what is happening in China. Maybe someone already disliked the PGA tour because of their ties with China but the SA connection became the final straw. 

That's not up for you to decide for someone else.

AFAIK China didn't fund a massive terrorist attack against the US on our own soil. 

You're saying to go all the way down that road, where does that road end? It would literally never end if you truly went "all the way down that road" Just because China is doing bad shit doesn't mean what SA is doing is acceptable. You can find bad shit in just about every single large company, organization, and country that exists.

Anyone can care about whatever they want.  However, I can certainly call out the dissonance in caring about SA and its issues, while happily ignoring others.  

 

You're correct that if you go far enough down the rabbit hole you can find anything.  For me personally, I choose to simply view this through the lens of golf as everything else becomes a slippery slope.  

[boogielicious]

53 minutes ago, eich41 said:

Meh, you're hoping that we continue to have two watered down versions of professional golf, with only 4 true tournaments a year?  There is no denying that the PGA Tour in 2021 was far more compelling than LIV or PGA Tour in 2022 and beyond. 

Disagree. I think it was better this year. 

[saevel25]

13 minutes ago, eich41 said:

I'm fine if that's your stance.  Here is the problem with that.... You can't have selective virtue.  You can't condemn SA and anyone who associates with SA, then turn a blind eye to the PGA Tour pushing partnerships with China, who certainly has plenty of their own human rights issues.  So if you're going to go down that road, go all the way down that road.  You should have bailed on the PGA Tour 5 years ago and this LIV situation wouldn't even matter.  

Yes, I can condemn them for the SA thing only because that is the only thing I have been following and it is relevant right now. 

I have no clue what you mean by going all the way down that road. 

5 years ago, I didn't know that they had this issue with China. It clearly didn't blow up in their face like this has. So, sorry, I couldn't bail on the PGA Tour back then. Your actions are only based on the information you have and the experiences you lived to that present moment.

[turtleback]

I'll wait to hear details, but I'm 99% sure I am completely done with pro golf.

Now it is definitely time for Tiger to retire rather than colluding with this.

Edited June 6 by turtleback

[klineka]

2 minutes ago, eich41 said:

You're correct that if you go far enough down the rabbit hole you can find anything.  For me personally, I choose to simply view this through the lens of golf as everything else becomes a slippery slope.  

So if you get to define how you view things, why are you calling someone else out for how they choose to view things?

What if someone else is choosing to view this only from the perspective of the fact that the competing league was started and is funded by SA money? China didn't start a competing league and fund it with government money. 

Personally I have always hated the "what about X" takes that always seem to come up on here, on twitter, etc. They distract from the primary issue that is at hand/being discussed. There can be a separate conversation about China, but that's not what today/this topic is about.

[ChetlovesMer]

6 minutes ago, boogielicious said:

Disagree. I think it was better this year. 

You and me both.

[eich41]

7 minutes ago, PatrickMurtha said:

Oh crap. Here is the problem with THAT…Everyone’s virtue is selective to a certain extent; no one does, or can, pick a fight on every issue. The implication here is that if you’re not 100% clean, you might as well be 100% dirty. I have taught ethics, and that is ridiculous. It is perfectly OK to make more of an issue of the Saudi money than the Chinese. I’m not especially keen on the Chinese money either, but they didn’t form a rival league, nor have they bought the existing one. I’m sure that if they did try to take over the PGA Tour, there would be PLENTY of questioning / critical voices. 

The essence of whataboutism is to demand a consistency of your opponents that you don’t demand of yourself.

The implication is that SA's human rights issues have been one of (if not THE) weapon to attack LIV and all those who made the jump by the PGA Tour, the media (in an effort to keep their golden goose happy), and players/fans who have gobbled up that narrative.  While I appreciate where you're coming from and your point, it's not black or white.  Where do you draw the line? I'm not sure, but it's not a stretch to say if you have a problem with SA and human rights, you would certainly have to have the same issues with China.  There may be a line but it's not between SA and China. 

[PatrickMurtha]

23 minutes ago, eich41 said:

Anyone can care about whatever they want.  However, I can certainly call out the dissonance in caring about SA and its issues, while happily ignoring others.  

 

You're correct that if you go far enough down the rabbit hole you can find anything.  For me personally, I choose to simply view this through the lens of golf as everything else becomes a slippery slope.  

Well, that is certainly convenient for you.

Your argument is weak. Treating the Saudi and Chinese issues differently is not especially dissonant. The form of sportswashing that the Saudis are engaged in here is more aggressive in the golf context than anything the Chinese have done in that same context. The Saudis have made themselves the story in golf. Now, if you want to talk about the Beijing Olympics, fine, there the Chinese WERE the story, but that is getting into another narrative. 

“Happily ignoring others” assumes facts not in evidence, and again, demands complete consistency of an opponent in order for them to have standing to say anything at all. A debate judge (I’ve been one many times) would rule this out of order.

Edited June 6 by PatrickMurtha

[chspeed]

Considering how rushed this announcement was, it seems unlikely to me that this was simply a financial decision that was beneficial to both parties. Will be interesting to unpack over the next few months.

I'm starting to feel like this will fall apart.

[Elmer]

13 minutes ago, turtleback said:

I'll wait to hear details, but I'm 99% sure I am completely done with pro golf.

Now it is definitely time for Tiger to retire rather than colluding with this.

Who runs the Champions tour and LPGA? Maybe that is what I watch from now on, on the the rare occurrence that I watch pro golf!

22 minutes ago, klineka said:

 

AFAIK China didn't fund a massive terrorist attack against the US on our own soil. 

 

China, unlike SA, also did not murder Jamal Khashoggi

[PatrickMurtha]

7 minutes ago, klineka said:

So if you get to define how you view things, why are you calling someone else out for how they choose to view things?

What if someone else is choosing to view this only from the perspective of the fact that the competing league was started and is funded by SA money? China didn't start a competing league and fund it with government money. 

Personally I have always hated the "what about X" takes that always seem to come up on here, on twitter, etc. They distract from the primary issue that is at hand/being discussed. There can be a separate conversation about China, but that's not what today/this topic is about.

Very true. What he is doing here is “If you care about this issue, then you must care equally about all issues that are closely or even remotely similar, because if you don’t, then you’re hypocritical and don’t get to say anything.”

That is fallacious, in part because anyone could make that argument against anyone else at any time. The line of attack needs to be much stronger to be worthy of consideration. I don’t think he is over that bar. 

[Beastie]

It’s lot cheaper to buy up a few administrators than a whole raft of talent.
A smart move by the Saudis. Can or will the players sack JM, and kill the deal. I expect the money will be too much to turn down, but not necessarily the sort of figures that Phil and others got.

Edited June 6 by Beastie

[eich41]

9 minutes ago, klineka said:

So if you get to define how you view things, why are you calling someone else out for how they choose to view things?

What if someone else is choosing to view this only from the perspective of the fact that the competing league was started and is funded by SA money? China didn't start a competing league and fund it with government money. 

Personally I have always hated the "what about X" takes that always seem to come up on here, on twitter, etc. They distract from the primary issue that is at hand/being discussed. There can be a separate conversation about China, but that's not what today/this topic is about.

Do you think it's a coincidence that this has been the main criticism put forth by the PGA Tour and the media and everyone is here has gobbled it up?  Prior to Spring/Summer of 2022, were all of you adamant opponents of Saudi Arabia and their human rights issues?  We're literally all here posting about this right now because the entire argument was proven today to be complete farce as the PGA Tour does a 180 in less than a year. You've all been caught up in an argument produced to protect the moat around the PGA Tour and still don't even realize it.

[PatrickMurtha]

3 minutes ago, eich41 said:

Do you think it's a coincidence that this has been the main criticism put forth by the PGA Tour and the media and everyone is here has gobbled it up?  Prior to Spring/Summer of 2022, were all of you adamant opponents of Saudi Arabia and their human rights issues?  We're literally all here posting about this right now because the entire argument was proven today to be complete farce as the PGA Tour does a 180 in less than a year. You've all been caught up in an argument produced to protect the moat around the PGA Tour and still don't even realize it.

I can’t vouch for everyone HERE, but come on, millions of Americans have had serious issues with the Saudis for a long time, over 9/11, women’s rights, Khashoggi, etc ad infinitum. I would agree that, on the basis of what is happening now, the PGA Tour’s USE of the moral argument was hypocritical, but that doesn’t make the ARGUMENT invalid. 

[chspeed]

7 minutes ago, eich41 said:

Do you think it's a coincidence that this has been the main criticism put forth by the PGA Tour and the media and everyone is here has gobbled it up?  Prior to Spring/Summer of 2022, were all of you adamant opponents of Saudi Arabia and their human rights issues?  We're literally all here posting about this right now because the entire argument was proven today to be complete farce as the PGA Tour does a 180 in less than a year. You've all been caught up in an argument produced to protect the moat around the PGA Tour and still don't even realize it.