2012 Ryder Cup Discussion Thread

[MSchott]

Originally Posted by Nosevi

Wow read it start to end and I've finally found someone who is my complete opposite, thinks of everything in reverse of me...... Only I'm not talking about the author of that article. Joakim, you strike me as a slightly angry man but I'm struggling to see what your problem is. I mean, clearly the RC and the loss means more to you than to Jim Furyk, and clearly DL3 was doing a shockingly bad job when you guys ended the team games 10-6 up. Phil lost his match because by applauding his opponent me helped him sink one on 18 and the US team to a man didn't play as a team (which is why they were so far ahead after the team matches). Gotcha.

Truth is, over in Europe we were seriously worried before the singles. The only guy I saw that said the US should calm down, thought it would be close and Europe may even clinch it was Jack Nicklaus on British Sky TV who, when Butch Harmen said the US would win "easily", told him he disagreed, we had more stars (more class I think he said) and it would show through in the singles. He said he wanted the US to win, but wasn't sure they were going to. Guessing you know more about coming down the stretch than Jack, though, what does he know?

The Ryder Cup is over, you guys are a tad disappointed (ok, understatement) but at the end of the day you got out played on Sunday. Pure and simple. The boys put huge pressure on your team by playing great golf and it was too much. How could they be back to 10-8, 10-9, all square ?!? We could loose this !!!!!!! They sewed the seed of doubt and the pressure eventually got to your guys.

Only thing I would've done differently to DL3 would be to throw the first few matches and load the second half of the draw with my form players so they were taking on the weaker European boys. Still would have been wrong, mind, as the effect of the momentum swing would have taken the wind out of your second half players (as it did). Oh and I wouldn't have cut down all the rough, again something Jack and I see eye to eye on. He basically said he didn't agree with it, was within the rules but hardly in the spirit of the competition.

Very well put. Thank you for the reasoned and calm perspective.

[phan52]

Originally Posted by Nosevi

Wow read it start to end and I've finally found someone who is my complete opposite, thinks of everything in reverse of me...... Only I'm not talking about the author of that article. Joakim, you strike me as a slightly angry man but I'm struggling to see what your problem is. I mean, clearly the RC and the loss means more to you than to Jim Furyk, and clearly DL3 was doing a shockingly bad job when you guys ended the team games 10-6 up. Phil lost his match because by applauding his opponent me helped him sink one on 18 and the US team to a man didn't play as a team (which is why they were so far ahead after the team matches). Gotcha.

Truth is, over in Europe we were seriously worried before the singles. The only guy I saw that said the US should calm down, thought it would be close and Europe may even clinch it was Jack Nicklaus on British Sky TV who, when Butch Harmen said the US would win "easily", told him he disagreed, we had more stars (more class I think he said) and it would show through in the singles. He said he wanted the US to win, but wasn't sure they were going to. Guessing you know more about coming down the stretch than Jack, though, what does he know?

The Ryder Cup is over, you guys are a tad disappointed (ok, understatement) but at the end of the day you got out played on Sunday. Pure and simple. The boys put huge pressure on your team by playing great golf and it was too much. How could they be back to 10-8, 10-9, all square ?!? We could loose this !!!!!!! They sewed the seed of doubt and the pressure eventually got to your guys.

Only thing I would've done differently to DL3 would be to throw the first few matches and load the second half of the draw with my form players so they were taking on the weaker European boys. Still would have been wrong, mind, as the effect of the momentum swing would have taken the wind out of your second half players (as it did). Oh and I wouldn't have cut down all the rough, again something Jack and I see eye to eye on. He basically said he didn't agree with it, was within the rules but hardly in the spirit of the competition.

DLove was the Captain and he needed to act the part. His problem is that he still plays on the tour and he is a peer. They needed a Captain who was retired or playing exclusively on the Senior Tour so that he could go out to Phill to tell him he is playing and not be intimidated. The US effectively lost the RC on Saturday afternoon by allowing the Euros to gain confidence and momentum, while Phil and Keegan were waving pom-poms and Tiger was once again being dragged down by Stricker. A Captain has to be able to be adaptive and DLove was far from that. At the very least, Stricker is the one who had to sit Saturday afternoon.

As a result, Olazabal went with his four best players to start the day on Sunday and DLove had to know that. Bubba Watson? Please. I would have put Tiger in the #1 match instead of leaving him to play what ended up as a meaningless match.

[Nosevi]

Kudos mate, Honestly, I can't put all the blame on Phil. Just seeing the partisan European Ryders makes me jealous. You have a fantastic crowd over there, great enthusiam. But none of their players would applaud one of our players over there. Obviously this didn't lose the Ryder cup for us. Furyk, Sobel GC article mentioned two choked events, it was actually 3, again slanted reporting. More importantly he had the lowest points .5 in 2010 Ryder. The lowest point producer in points total should not be a captain pick. [URL=http://www.rydercup.com/2010/usa/scoring/individualpoints.cfm]http://www.rydercup.com/2010/usa/scoring/individualpoints.cfm[/URL] DL3- To many mistakes to mention. Everyone states well he was 10-6 going into Sunday, that just shows how many good players he had not how he managed. If he was 11-5 it would have been a different story.  You don't lead the final round with inexperienced players. When you do things that have never been done in Ryder history (and he did many) you are taking a chance. He's the manager with on paper a better team, a course you set up and home field advantage. Sorry but blame goes to DL3. He's a nice guy and nice guys finish last. Poulter said before Ryder he wants to kill us and have a beer after the match. Great attitude, that's why he is a winner. Tiger's points. Again bad management, What's the defination of stupidity is doing the same thing that didn't work. He was 3-1 in 2010 and tied for most USA Ryder. Congrats, bottom line I'm a big fan and this one really hurt.

Fair enough. I do wish some (not you, speaking generally) would calm down a tad. It was a golf tournament. I'll scream at the telly as much as the next guy but when all's said and done, how important is it that some bloke I don't know knocked a small white ball into a hole in less shots than some other bloke I don't know. Enough for people like that pratt of a Journalist who asked Jim Furyk about how it felt to let his team mates down? I think not. Big fan myself but some of the flak being thrown at your guys is uncalled for. They did their utmost but came up just short. Yes learn the lessons but you don't have to flog your guys in the process. I'm pretty sure they'll be feeling it enough without anyone else's help. Just the way I see things.

[Nosevi]

DLove was the Captain and he needed to act the part. His problem is that he still plays on the tour and he is a peer. They needed a Captain who was retired or playing exclusively on the Senior Tour so that he could go out to Phill to tell him he is playing and not be intimidated. The US effectively lost the RC on Saturday afternoon by allowing the Euros to gain confidence and momentum, while Phil and Keegan were waving pom-poms and Tiger was once again being dragged down by Stricker. A Captain has to be able to be adaptive and DLove was far from that. At the very least, Stricker is the one who had to sit Saturday afternoon.  As a result, Olazabal went with his four best players to start the day on Sunday and DLove had to know that. Bubba Watson? Please. I would have put Tiger in the #1 match instead of leaving him to play what ended up as a meaningless match.

I've said I don't agree with all DL3 did, I really don't, but I don't think he did that bad a job. Realistically the most difference a captain can make is right up until the start of the singles. At that point you had a commanding lead. Yes we won those last two team matches but that was only to square the session rather than going even further down, in essence they 'stopped the rot'. Yes I'm surprised Phil wasn't able to plsy a fourth match but I also respect him for being up front about it. Yes the plan should have been more flexible but it wasn't and on Saturday evening it had appeared to everyone outside the European team room, evidently, that it had worked. What DL3 did not bank on is the European players coming out and winning match after match after match. He may have said not to be complacent to his team but I just get the feeling that no one foresaw this happening - I know I didn't. When the chips were down and your guys started seeing defeat was possible, then very possible, then extremely possible, they didn't play the golf they had been playing. If they had this whole thread would have a slightly different tone. Bottom line is your guys, and ours, did their best. Someone had to win and we nicked it by a point. Roll on Gleneagles, wish it was next year!

[phan52]

Originally Posted by Nosevi

I've said I don't agree with all DL3 did, I really don't, but I don't think he did that bad a job. Realistically the most difference a captain can make is right up until the start of the singles. At that point you had a commanding lead. Yes we won those last two team matches but that was only to square the session rather than going even further down, in essence they 'stopped the rot'. Yes I'm surprised Phil wasn't able to plsy a fourth match but I also respect him for being up front about it. Yes the plan should have been more flexible but it wasn't and on Saturday evening it had appeared to everyone outside the European team room, evidently, that it had worked. What DL3 did not bank on is the European players coming out and winning match after match after match. He may have said not to be complacent to his team but I just get the feeling that no one foresaw this happening - I know I didn't. When the chips were down and your guys started seeing defeat was possible, then very possible, then extremely possible, they didn't play the golf they had been playing. If they had this whole thread would have a slightly different tone.

Bottom line is your guys, and ours, did their best. Someone had to win and we nicked it by a point. Roll on Gleneagles, wish it was next year!

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree. Love was on the team in '99 so he should know better than to be complacent. He needed to be adaptive and he wasn't. I noticed that Olazabal broke up McIlroy and McDowell on Saturday afternoon and went with a stronger team, with McIlroy/Poulter (first time ever McIlroy played with somebody else). Stricker was playing poorly and needed to sit, just like McDowell. But being a peer (and not a Captain), Love couldn't pull the trigger and shoot down his buddy.

[zipazoid]

Originally Posted by sean_miller

Sorry, what in his comment proves Seve wasn't a jerk? He sure was when I was young(er). At least that's how I recall the Ryder Cups playing out pre-1991.

Seve would suddenly get a cold every RC that apparently required him to cough a lot...especially when his opponent was putting. He was the king of the psyche job.

[Golf Man]

Originally Posted by Joakim

Kudos mate,

Honestly, I can't put all the blame on Phil. Just seeing the partisan European Ryders makes me jealous. You have a fantastic crowd over there, great enthusiam. But none of their players would applaud one of our players over there. Obviously this didn't lose the Ryder cup for us.

Furyk, Sobel GC article mentioned two choked events, it was actually 3, again slanted reporting. More importantly he had the lowest points .5 in 2010 Ryder. The lowest point producer in points total should not be a captain pick. http://www.rydercup.com/2010/usa/scoring/individualpoints.cfm

DL3- To many mistakes to mention. Everyone states well he was 10-6 going into Sunday, that just shows how many good players he had not how he managed. If he was 11-5 it would have been a different story.  You don't lead the final round with inexperienced players. When you do things that have never been done in Ryder history (and he did many) you are taking a chance.

He's the manager with on paper a better team, a course you set up and home field advantage. Sorry but blame goes to DL3. He's a nice guy and nice guys finish last. Poulter said before Ryder he wants to kill us and have a beer after the match. Great attitude, that's why he is a winner.

Tiger's points. Again bad management, What's the defination of stupidity is doing the same thing that didn't work. He was 3-1 in 2010 and tied for most USA Ryder.

Congrats, bottom line I'm a big fan and this one really hurt.

I think its all been said and done at this stage but I have to respond to this

The Furyk selection was aarguable - I think he wanted some older heads (the kind that you are saying he should have had leading out on Sunday. There was definitely an arguement that he should n't have gone for Stricker and Furyk

The captain is in an awkward position - likely to get the flak for losing and no credit for winning. That said people need to acept that being "only" 10-6 up on Saturday night was not the reason that US lost. Any captain, player or fan of either team, at any of the Ryder Cups would have bitten your hand offif offered 10-6 at the start of play - it was a great performance by the US and we were lucky to be only 4 down.

He deserves some flak for not being flexible over the first two days - but 10-6 speaks for itself. While 3 of the first 5 were rookies two of them were major champions and had won respectively 2/3 and 3/3 during the week, and the other was the Fed Ex Cup champion. Watson is a current Masters champion and Mickleson is hugely experienced. He was in a difficult position in that his experienced players were actually those in the worst form (with the exception of Mickleson). His form players were Watson, Simpson and Bradley (and arguably Johnson and Kuchar who had gone 2-2). US had strength and experience running through their line up

On how it set up the course I think he took a risk - he essentially made it a putting competition - it was one that didn't pay off.

On Tiger - he probably picked Stricker specifically to play with Tiger - which was probably flawed - Tiger isn't the easiest to play with (look at his pairs record in the RC) but maybe giving him one of the rookies or someone like Fowler would have been an idea

Simple fact is that one or two putts being slightly different on the Sunday would have made all the difference - its difficult to dismiss Love when teh margins are that small. Worst captain ever - not even close (try Sutton, Lehman, James or Faldo in the last couple of years alone)

On another point I don't see US players lining up to be captains (maybe with the exception of Couples) - I don't think it matters if they are playing regular tour or not - Olazabal and all his vice captains are all playing regular tour - you need someone who is passionate about the Ryder Cup. We have a pretty good succession planning in place for our captains

2014 - McGinley (vice captain this time, captained at Seve Trophy 3 times, great Ryder Cup player, really well respected)

2016 - Clarke (vice captain twice, major winner, great Ryder Cup experience, will come over well in the US)

2018 - Jiminez/Bjorn (both been vice captains, well respected, good Ryder Cup records - more suited to a home cup, particularly this one as its in France

After that you will probably be into the next generation of Captains - Westwood, possibly Harrington etc

We have a definite trend since teh disaster of 1999 to pick the captains particularly suited to the US (Langer, Faldo, Olazabal) and to Europe (Torrance, Woosnam, Montgomerie)

I don't see this kind of thought and planning going into the US selction

[Nosevi]

Well, we'll have to agree to disagree. Love was on the team in '99 so he should know better than to be complacent. He needed to be adaptive and he wasn't. I noticed that Olazabal broke up McIlroy and McDowell on Saturday afternoon and went with a stronger team, with McIlroy/Poulter (first time ever McIlroy played with somebody else). Stricker was playing poorly and needed to sit, just like McDowell. But being a peer (and not a Captain), Love couldn't pull the trigger and shoot down his buddy.

I don't think we differ all that much tbh. I do think DL3 could, and perhaps should, have been more flexible. I don't necessarily think he was being complacent I just think your guys were riding on a wave of hype which ultimately helped us. Kind of the higher you are, the further you have to fall. When it started to turn, doubt crept in, the crowd was taken out of it and as our guys confidence grew the opposite was true of your team. Maybe your comment about the captain not being a peer shows a little of why we do pretty well in the Ryder Cup at the moment. The guys on the team want to win it for their team mates but also for their captain. I'm not completely convinced the same is true of your team, at least not to the same degree. I don't think the captain has to be someone who the players are afraid of, more someone they desperately want to win the cup for. I was a little harsh on Tiger earlier in suggesting he shouldn't have conceded the Molinari putt that 'relegated' DL3 to the list of loosing captains - who knows what was going through Tiger's mind by then. I'm not sure our boys would have done it and taken a half off Olli, though.

[phan52]

Originally Posted by Golf Man

I think its all been said and done at this stage but I have to respond to this

The Furyk selection was aarguable - I think he wanted some older heads (the kind that you are saying he should have had leading out on Sunday. There was definitely an arguement that he should n't have gone for Stricker and Furyk

The captain is in an awkward position - likely to get the flak for losing and no credit for winning. That said people need to acept that being "only" 10-6 up on Saturday night was not the reason that US lost. Any captain, player or fan of either team, at any of the Ryder Cups would have bitten your hand offif offered 10-6 at the start of play - it was a great performance by the US and we were lucky to be only 4 down.

He deserves some flak for not being flexible over the first two days - but 10-6 speaks for itself. While 3 of the first 5 were rookies two of them were major champions and had won respectively 2/3 and 3/3 during the week, and the other was the Fed Ex Cup champion. Watson is a current Masters champion and Mickleson is hugely experienced. He was in a difficult position in that his experienced players were actually those in the worst form (with the exception of Mickleson). His form players were Watson, Simpson and Bradley (and arguably Johnson and Kuchar who had gone 2-2). US had strength and experience running through their line up

On how it set up the course I think he took a risk - he essentially made it a putting competition - it was one that didn't pay off.

On Tiger - he probably picked Stricker specifically to play with Tiger - which was probably flawed - Tiger isn't the easiest to play with (look at his pairs record in the RC) but maybe giving him one of the rookies or someone like Fowler would have been an idea

Simple fact is that one or two putts being slightly different on the Sunday would have made all the difference - its difficult to dismiss Love when teh margins are that small. Worst captain ever - not even close (try Sutton, Lehman, James or Faldo in the last couple of years alone)

On another point I don't see US players lining up to be captains (maybe with the exception of Couples) - I don't think it matters if they are playing regular tour or not - Olazabal and all his vice captains are all playing regular tour - you need someone who is passionate about the Ryder Cup. We have a pretty good succession planning in place for our captains

2014 - McGinley (vice captain this time, captained at Seve Trophy 3 times, great Ryder Cup player, really well respected)

2016 - Clarke (vice captain twice, major winner, great Ryder Cup experience, will come over well in the US)

2018 - Jiminez/Bjorn (both been vice captains, well respected, good Ryder Cup records - more suited to a home cup, particularly this one as its in France

After that you will probably be into the next generation of Captains - Westwood, possibly Harrington etc

We have a definite trend since teh disaster of 1999 to pick the captains particularly suited to the US (Langer, Faldo, Olazabal) and to Europe (Torrance, Woosnam, Montgomerie)

I don't see this kind of thought and planning going into the US selction

I totally disagree. The problem with the US Captaincy at this point is that the choices they are coming up with are guys who had OK careers, but do not stand out. Guys like Lehman, Love and Corey Pavin (yes, Corey Pavin) do not demand the respect from their peers that guys like Montgomerie and Olazabal do. There is too much competition on the US Tour for anybody to stand out and have the necessary  singular voice .Who on the Euro team is going to question Monty or Olazabal? I'm not talking fear, mind you, I'm talking the requisite respect. The last time the US had any Captains with any real credibility were Crenshaw, Wadkins and Watson.

I really think the US Captain has to be a guy who isn't playing the PGA Tour any longer.  Hell, Davis Love is playing this weekend in Las Vegas. I would pick a guy like Ray Floyd for the next one. Sorry, Fred, Jay and Mark.

[Chas]

So many pansies on this thread, people who can't face the reality of what happened to their beloved golfing heroes on Sunday.  How many of you second-guessers seriously believed, after play was over on Saturday, that the Europeans had a strong shot at retaining the cup?  Treat the question as rhetorical because I'm not expecting an honest answer from people who can't be honest about what caused the demise of their beloved team.

The Euros started to believe in their chances after they won the first few matches on Sunday, understandably; some of the americans started to get nervous and lost confidence on the back nine, particularly around the green.

DL3 must feel pretty disappointed in the performances of some his men on the final day, particularly Furyk.  "On paper" they were the winners in the situation they were left on Saturday - and what happened?   COLLAPSE.  Of course he's too much of a gentleman to say so and he will focus on the brilliance of some of the europeans in the clutch.

Furyk, who is a man that I admire, played on Sunday in the manner that you would expect from his recent Sunday performances.  I don't know what exactly is happening upstairs but clearly there's a problem.  I hope he gets over it.

Boycotting the Golf Channel?  That says it all ......... I think they'll do just fine without viewers like that - but I strongly suspect it's all bluster.

Monte:  don't make the mistaken assumption that certain posts in this thread are typical of the american view.  Most sensible yanks know when their sportsmen are underperforming and don't run around looking for excuses and blaming the manager.  I've lived half my life in the U.K. - the majority of golf fans, the more thoughtful ones anyway, are not so different.  Perhaps there are more bad losers in the U.S. when it comes to golf.  Perhaps that has to do with "loss of Empire" .... something that you guys in the U.K. know something about

Ask Jim Furyk why they lost the RC.  I'm sure he will say that his performance on Sunday was a significant part of the reason.  If any of the U.S. players openly blame DL3 for the loss they will lose my respect.   For sure you won't be hearing that from Tiger Woods - a man who can take his lumps like the tough competitor that he is.

[WWBDD]

Originally Posted by phan52

I really think the US Captain has to be a guy who isn't playing the PGA Tour any longer.

John Daly?

[Chas]

The Furyk selection was aarguable - I think he wanted some older heads (the kind that you are saying he should have had leading out on Sunday. There was definitely an arguement that he should n't have gone for Stricker [U]and[/U] Furyk On how it set up the course I think he took a risk - he essentially made it a putting competition - it was one that didn't.

Agree in general, though Stricker was the greater underperformed. He must feel just terrible. Furyk was a risk going in based on recent performances in the clutch, but historically he's been pretty reliable. These sorts of decisions can always be questioned; DL's rationale was reasonable. Personally I would have included Mahan. That guy has fire in the belly.

[Nosevi]

Golf Man, agree with your thinking on the Euro side, think we've read the same article, was pretty good. I had Paul McGinley down for the next one a while back. Has to be, doesn't it.

Originally Posted by WWBDD

John Daly?

Oh please do it US! Would make for an entertaining cup if nothing else.

[Nosevi]

Originally Posted by Chas

So many pansies on this thread, people who can't face the reality of what happened to their beloved golfing heroes on Sunday.

They won. Oh sorry, you weren't talking to me.......

[phan52]

Quote:

Originally Posted by WWBDD

Quote:

I really think the US Captain has to be a guy who isn't playing the PGA Tour any longer.

John Daly?

Which would be belied by his 7:09 tee time at TPC Summerlin tomorrow .

[Nosevi]

Originally Posted by phan52

Which would be belied by his 7:09 tee time at TPC Summerlin tomorrow .

Or confirmed? No you're right, belied it is......

[Chas]

Nosevi: LOL I have to admit to divided loyalties, but only because the brits were so bally awful much of my time in England (60's and 70's mostly) that I still need to see them winning sometimes. Well, this RC will put an end to that silliness. I get off the fence. We yanks will scuttle you guys the next time and no mistake ... :-)

[Nosevi]

Originally Posted by Chas

Nosevi: LOL

I have to admit to divided loyalties, but only because the brits were so bally awful much of my time in England (60's and 70's mostly) that I still need to see them winning sometimes.

Well, this RC will put an end to that silliness. I get off the fence. We yanks will scuttle you guys the next time and no mistake ...

Look forward to it mate. As long as your boys don't get terrified by those jungles of rough at Glaneagles, you've got a chance. Not much of one, but a chance none the less