Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

Tom Watson Gets Another Shot at the Open Championship

7 posts in this topic

Pretty nice of the R&A;


Tom Watson will get one more chance at St. Andrews in the British Open.

The R&A; on Tuesday extended the exemption of Watson, allowing him to play one more time in 2015 when golf's oldest championship returns to the Old Course at St. Andrews. Watson holds The Open record for winning on five links courses — Carnoustie, Turnberry, Muirfield, Royal Troon and Royal Birkdale.

But he has never won at the Home of Golf.

"I'll be there if I have to drag myself," Watson said.

Watson was tied for the 54-hole lead with Peter Oosterhuis in 1978 at St. Andrews and closed with a 78 as Jack Nicklaus won his third claret jug. His best chance at St. Andrews was in 1984, when he was tied for the lead with two holes to play. He made bogey behind the road on the 17th, while Seve Ballesteros made birdie on the 18th in the group ahead to capture the title.

Former champions are exempt until they are 60, though the R&A; created a new exemption after Watson was runner-up at Turnberry in 2009 when he was 59 and lost in a playoff to Stewart Cink. Past champions who finish in the top 10 are exempt for five years.

Watson's exemption was to run out this year at Royal Liverpool.

Michael Tait, the executive director of The R&A;, announced the special exemption for Watson at The Greenbrier in West Virginia, where Watson is playing this week. He presented Watson with a solid silver player's badge for 2015, which has five claret jugs on it.


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Want to get rid of this advertisement? Sign up (or log in) today! It's free!

Don't always say nice things about the R&A;, but they've got this one right, as indeed they have with Portrush. Two decisions in the space of 2 weeks, what's going on!

A bit of me wants to claim responsibility for this one though and perhaps in my imagination I'll do so.

I rang them a few months ago about final qualifying and the conversation drifted round to Tom Watson and how inappropriate Hoylake might be (in my eyes) for what was likely to be his last appearence. They told me they had previously had an issue with Gary Player who was prepared to try his hand in final qualifying but they persuaded him not to (or something like that). It was considered a slightly undignified end to a glittering career to be eliminated on a low key windswept links midweek. So what if Tom decided to try and qualify I asked? Well there's nothing to stop him, but they clearly weren't comfortable with the notion. Use your discretion then I suggested given that 2015 is St Andrews, and give him a wildcard. You know he'd take it, the man has been faultless throughout his association with the Open, and if America ever needs to appoint an Ambassador to an independent Scotland, then Tom is the perfect choice (ok I'm sure there are career diplomats better qualified, but you know what I mean). The conversation continued for about 5 minutes and then drifted into something else

So there you have it, my lobbying paid off, even if Alex Salmond refuses to create the title 'Lord Turnberry' (not necessarily within Salmond's power to do, and it was never a serious email I sent to them anyway)

And just in case anyone is in any doubt..... No I'm not seriously suggesting that I'm responsible for getting Tom his wildcard, only recanting that I did speak to someone at the R&A; about it in passing, but then so too will plenty of others, and these things are decided by committee and thought through more deeply then a speculative telephone call from me!


Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites

That's nice. He'll get his moment.

Share this post

Link to post
Share on other sites
Awards, Achievements, and Accolades

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Want to join this community?

    We'd love to have you!

    Sign Up
  • 2016 TST Partners

    GAME Golf
    PING Golf
    Lowest Score Wins
  • Posts

    • I'm good friends with a number of college coaches, particularly women's college coaches, and while I have no doubt that some likely care about height, most will take the player with the good scores so long as their game is commensurate. You're making a big assumption that a 5'5" girl is going to be bumping hybrids all day long. Jamie Sadlowski is only 5'10". Sadena Parks is 5'3". Kim Sei-young is 5'4". Brooke Henderson? 5'4". Randomly chose players from the top 20 on the LPGA's Driving Distance list. Distance is an, absolutely, but there's a big world between "bumped hybrids that roll onto greens" and "spinning the ball with irons." Height correlates to distance, but we're not talking about an R2 value of 0.89 or something. Now, before this gets too far off topic… let's leave it at that. P.S. Off topic because we're talking about how to get noticed by college coaches, not generalities of height and distance and impact on scoring in the vague, non-specific sense.
    • There are two ways he could reasonably respond to this… A) How would he know?
      B) The current rule does just that. I think you're misreading what he wrote. And you have no idea what the "primary cause" is, particularly since you're not even discussing a specific situation right now. I can see how soling your putter near the ball could be more likely to cause a ball to move than walking in and stopping a foot+ away from the ball. A ball overhanging the hole is not deemed at rest until the time has elapsed (or the player taps in). The situations are not alike. You, too, seem to be reading this incorrectly. Re-read 18-2/0.5. There's no presumption of guilt or innocence. The facts are simply weighed, and the most likely cause determined. The player is not guilty until proven innocent. Kindly stop just making stuff up. On that we agree.
    • I have a daughter playing D1 golf.  While the competition isn't as severe, D1 and high D2 coaches do have stereotypes for their golfers.  They want them a certain size and a certain build.  They will take a kid that is 5'9" that averages a 78 over a girl that is 5'5" and averages 75 .  They know that the 5'9" hasn't maxed out their potential and can grow in the distance department just on size alone.  They want girls going into greens with irons and spinning the ball, not a bumped hybrid that rolls onto the green.  Heard this from several coaches in the process.
    • I'm curious if Phil had found a setup edge with putting if he'd share it so openly with his fellow pros? He's rather competitive, but has been open about some of his strategies in the past. It probably depends on the individual stroke tendencies.
    • Did they ever look at just an exception to this rule for obvious external causes like wind and gravity? To a large extent though the hovering of the club was only relevant to actually causing the ball to move off the greens. Just stepping in to the ball and standing there (esp. on fast greens) is likely the primary cause - absent wind. Why is a putt that comes to rest on the edge of the cup and then goes in when a player walks toward it to mark it not treated the same under this rule. It's at rest and then it moves. Treat like situations alike, right? Why make an exception because it's on the green or near the hole? The player walking in is the likely cause and aren't extra heavy footsteps not allowed, because they are likely to tip the balance? Might not be 'opposite', but I do think your idea is a bit like shifting of the burden of proof from the defendant to the plaintiff. If done this way you could stick with the existing 51% threshold to be tighter on latitude. It just seems that way with a few of the rulings as applied. To a large extent though the hovering of the club to avoid a penalty was only relevant to actually causing the ball to move off the greens. Just stepping in to the ball and standing there (esp. on fast greens) is likely the primary cause of movement - absent wind. I personally like that the wind moving the ball regardless of whether or not the club was grounded does not result in a penalty now.
  • TST Blog Entries

  • Images

  • Today's Birthdays

    1. billymo2
      (24 years old)
    2. bostonboy9416
      (16 years old)
    3. kpaulhus
      (29 years old)
  • Blog Entries