Mickelson vs Watson: Was Phil Right to Be Critical of Watson at the Press Conference?

[dzjc]

It appears that the team meeting on Saturday night was a cluster; if you believe what's coming out now.  If in fact Mr. Watson was as disrespectful as it appears then it's no wonder the team collapsed on Sunday.  However, Phil was STILL out of line in making his comments at the press conference.  He should have had a private conversation with Tom Watson before the press conference.

Dale

[Mr. Desmond]

Quote:

You think that letter reads like a PR wrote it? Seriously? Watson's letter says he and Mickleson spoke over the last week about what went on - that's a PR stunt as well?

Yes, I write this stuff for people ... and I am better than that ... First, Second ... how impersonal and businesslike ... that may be Tom, but his heart was not in it.

I assume Tom had input .. you can tell, but the bullet points and the outline... have someone else's hands on it.

I would have done a much better job at coming from the heart. After they read what I would have written, Tom would have had his reputation fully intact...

Take this for what it's worth, which may be little -- from feedback on other forums, even Tom's dad thought he was a prick growing up...

[misty_mountainhop]

Seems reasonable. I doubt Watson typed it without any assistance.

Not really. At least, not in the sense that someone else wrote it, which is what @Mr. Desmond seems to be saying. I'm sure Watson would have run it by someone to make sure there was nothing even more inflammatory etc - but that's about it.

Yes, I write this stuff for people ... and I am better than that ... First, Second ... how impersonal and businesslike ... that may be Tom, but his heart was not in it.

I assume Tom had input .. you can tell, but the bullet points and the outline... have someone else's hands on it.

I would have done a much better job at coming from the heart. After they read what I would have written, Tom would have had his reputation fully intact...

Take this for what it's worth, which may be little -- from feedback on other forums, even Tom's dad thought he was a prick growing up...

Ah. Do I take it that you write the type of thing that is cringingly insincere and shallow, but that is, sadly, all too common these days? That sort of baloney is what is obviously PR. Your self-publicity, above, does gel with writing that sort of thing.

Maybe Watson doesn't buy into that sort of saccharin nonsense? From what you and everyone else are so happy to trumpet re. his character, that letter is exactly what one might have expected Watson to come out with.

It seems you know Watson's dad as well I see. You do move in rarified circles. Or is it that you're buying into what's effectively a Chinese whisper heard I-don't-know-how-many-hand? Backed up by zero? You argue against those that think Mickleson is a phoney, based on chat on fora like this and yet you're happy to take the same approach when the target's someone you don't fancy? Even if Watson's dad did say that sort of thing, you, as a lawyer(did I read you say that you were, elsewhere on here?) are happy to take that at face value? Maybe Watson is how he is because of how his father was during his childhood? Who knows? One thing though, neither you nor I do.

Never mind. You have your bias here (that's obvious) and, it appears, you were on the right side of the argument re. Mickleson/Watson-gate (someone had to be) so well done on the fact the coin toss landed in your favour. Done and dusted. More importantly, there's hopefully some conversations going on to clear the air, in private, between Watson and those others involved in the U.S. Ryder Cup setup that he feels he owes an apology to. Hopefully, that'll lead to the U.S. team being stronger in future (although not too strong hopefully!) and a better event. Whatever, we don't need to know do we, although I'm sure many will still go around trumpeting conspiracies and rumours...

[newtogolf]

So maybe you (all) are correct and Phil didn't ruin his chances to be captain of one of the future USA Ryder Cup teams.  I certainly don't have a crystal ball so don't know for sure.  But I do know that in most of Corporate American being publicly critical of someone in a position isn't always well received by the folks put that individual in that position and the criticism can even be taken personally. So being openly critical of the performance of the individual in a position you would like to have is not a good way to enhance your chances of being selected by the folks that do the selecting and in fact selected the individual you just criticized.

BTW I hope you are all correct and Phil gets the job someday.  I am a fan of his.

Phil didn't work for Tom and to my knowledge Phil didn't criticize the PGA he criticized Watson which is not the same as your business analogy.

[newtogolf]

Yes, I write this stuff for people ... and I am better than that ... First, Second ... how impersonal and businesslike ... that may be Tom, but his heart was not in it.

I assume Tom had input .. you can tell, but the bullet points and the outline... have someone else's hands on it.

I would have done a much better job at coming from the heart. After they read what I would have written, Tom would have had his reputation fully intact...

Take this for what it's worth, which may be little -- from feedback on other forums, even Tom's dad thought he was a prick growing up...

If it came from the heart you'd know that Tom didn't write it.  Tom in his heart thinks the players on his team were soft and a bunch of whiners.

It appears prior to and during the RC Watson showed little respect or support for his team.  I don't know if he's jealous of all the money his players make that he didn't or if he expected them to salute or bow in his presences but whatever it is, he didn't show he had much of a heart.

[ghalfaire]

Phil didn't work for Tom and to my knowledge Phil didn't criticize the PGA he criticized Watson which is not the same as your business analogy.

Maybe I didn't say it well but I believe it is exactly the same.  In being openly critical of Tom Watson, Phil was also questioning the judgement of those that selected Tom to be Captain.  These are the same people that will select the future Captains of the USA Ryder Cup teams.  Of course this depends upon how open minded these folks are.  But in business there was a saying that "if you want to be promoted make sure you're not identified as one who might piss in the punch at the party".   That may not always seem fair, it didn't to me, but that is the way it is most of the time and you can either learn to deal with it or you can try change the culture.

[rehmwa]

It was a gesture by the team and he acted like an ungrateful, belligerent old man.

I'm not a fan of any position that says the players or TW did anything that wasn't done with winning in mind.  I'm a bigger proponent that mistakes and miscalculations or not doing enough homework hurt the cause.  Not intentially.

I think the most positive spin possible is that he calculated that being tough on the teammates would get them to 'step up'.  This would also match up with with the era of his upbringing.  tough love rather than constructive team building.

Funny enough that it did work with Michelson who took the challenge right there in the room and then again out on the course.  Michelson being from much closer to TW's generation that most of the rest of them.  (how did Furyk do?)

I'll go with this and consider that Watson was just very poor in his idea of what psychology would work with this team, or any contemporary team.

[Fourputt]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ghalfaire

So maybe you (all) are correct and Phil didn't ruin his chances to be captain of one of the future USA Ryder Cup teams.  I certainly don't have a crystal ball so don't know for sure.  But I do know that in most of Corporate American being publicly critical of someone in a position isn't always well received by the folks put that individual in that position and the criticism can even be taken personally. So being openly critical of the performance of the individual in a position you would like to have is not a good way to enhance your chances of being selected by the folks that do the selecting and in fact selected the individual you just criticized.

BTW I hope you are all correct and Phil gets the job someday.  I am a fan of his.

Phil didn't work for Tom and to my knowledge Phil didn't criticize the PGA he criticized Watson which is not the same as your business analogy.

Phil criticized the process, and since the process owner is the PGA, he did criticize them.  In fact he was much more critical of the process which put Tom in that position than he was of Tom himself.

[mvmac]

So impassioned that he picked Simpson, only to quickly sour on him at Gleneagles, as Jim McCabe writes in a follow-up to add texture, contrast and some general warm-fuzziness to Bob Harig's report on Captain Tom Watson's bizarro inspirational tactics.

Watson met Mickelson, Bradley and Simpson in the lunchroom and told them that they would be on the bench for the afternoon foursomes, too. (It meant that Simpson, who had played in Friday morning’s four-balls, would sit out three straight sessions and play just twice in this Ryder Cup.)

Several sources said the news was enough of a blow to Mickelson, Bradley and Simpson; what made it worse was how blunt Watson was, disparaging the way the three of them had played Friday. To Mickelson, the captain had crossed the line.

“Phil’s a leader,” said a source who was in the locker room all week. “His fatherhood came out. He’s a protector. He was angry with the way Watson had talked to Keegan and Webb.”

[turtleback]

Maybe I didn't say it well but I believe it is exactly the same.  In being openly critical of Tom Watson, Phil was also questioning the judgement of those that selected Tom to be Captain.  These are the same people that will select the future Captains of the USA Ryder Cup teams.  Of course this depends upon how open minded these folks are.  But in business there was a saying that "if you want to be promoted make sure you're not identified as one who might piss in the punch at the party".   That may not always seem fair, it didn't to me, but that is the way it is most of the time and you can either learn to deal with it or you can try change the culture.

As I understand it the PGA president makes the decision and Bishop will not be around making a decision when Phil is up for it.

Phil criticized the process, and since the process owner is the PGA, he did criticize them.  In fact he was much more critical of the process which put Tom in that position than he was of Tom himself.

And well he should. On the one hand we have an orderly logical progression and on the other side we have an organization that puts the decision in the hands of someone new every time, someone with almost no contact with the world of professional competitive golf - which risks a Bishop who decides to go with his "gut" and select a guy more suited to be a Marine drill instructor than the captain of a team of successful professional millionaires.

If it was up to me the PGA Tour would take the Ryder Cup away from the PGA of America.

[cubdog]

If it was up to me the PGA Tour would take the Ryder Cup away from the PGA of America.

I don't know the legalities of this but I doubt the Tour take the RC away. We're talking about a property worth millions of dollars. I'm pretty sure the PGA of American has safeguards in place to prevent any sort of takeover.

cubdog

[turtleback]

I don't know the legalities of this but I doubt the Tour take the RC away. We're talking about a property worth millions of dollars. I'm pretty sure the PGA of American has safeguards in place to prevent any sort of takeover.

cubdog

Sure they would have to call it something else.  But if all of the players on the PGA Tour refused to play I'm not sure what recourse the PGA of American would have.

Eventually, as the game continues to be more and more global I will not be surprised if we get to the point where there are 4 teams, US, Europe, Asia, and Rest of the World.  A champions match gets played every 2 years between 2 teams while in the off year the other 2 teams play to see who plays the winner of the champions match.  And if we can lose the PGA of America along the way so much the better, IMO.

[iacas]

Eventually, as the game continues to be more and more global I will not be surprised if we get to the point where there are 4 teams, US, Europe, Asia, and Rest of the World.  A champions match gets played every 2 years between 2 teams while in the off year the other 2 teams play to see who plays the winner of the champions match.  And if we can lose the PGA of America along the way so much the better, IMO.

That's a bit weird isn't it?

Year 1: USA beats Europe (Ryder Cup)

Year 2: Asia beats ROW (B Bracket)

Year 3: Asia beats USA (Ryder Cup)

Year 4: Europe beats ROW (B Bracket)

Year 5: Asia beats Europe (Ryder Cup)

Year 6: USA beats ROW (B Bracket)

Year 7: Asia beats USA (Ryder Cup)

Year 8: Europe beats ROW (B Bracket)

The gaps aren't normal there. Look at the USA: they have two-year, one-year, and zero-year gaps. That's weird. Meanwhile, by losing each time, the ROW team plays every other year.

Plus, the PGA and European Tour LOVE the Ryder Cup. They're not going to let go of it lightly. They make a lot of money from it.

[turtleback]

Quote:

Plus, the PGA and European Tour LOVE the Ryder Cup. They're not going to let go of it lightly. They make a lot of money from it.

Sure they love it because it gives them cash.  But unlike the situation in Europe, where their team is controlled by the players tour, in the US the team is controlled by an organization that really has very little to do with the players.  But for that exact reason they have very little leverage should it come to any kind of power play.

[mvmac]

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2014/10/9/brandel-digs-in-phil-did-not-tell-truth-about-captain-watson.html

Brandel:

[Golfingdad]

Sure they would have to call it something else.  But if all of the players on the PGA Tour refused to play I'm not sure what recourse the PGA of American would have.

Eventually, as the game continues to be more and more global I will not be surprised if we get to the point where there are 4 teams, US, Europe, Asia, and Rest of the World.  A champions match gets played every 2 years between 2 teams while in the off year the other 2 teams play to see who plays the winner of the champions match.  And if we can lose the PGA of America along the way so much the better, IMO.

That's a bit weird isn't it?

Year 1: USA beats Europe (Ryder Cup)

Year 2: Asia beats ROW (B Bracket)

Year 3: Asia beats USA (Ryder Cup)

Year 4: Europe beats ROW (B Bracket)

Year 5: Asia beats Europe (Ryder Cup)

Year 6: USA beats ROW (B Bracket)

Year 7: Asia beats USA (Ryder Cup)

Year 8: Europe beats ROW (B Bracket)

The gaps aren't normal there. Look at the USA: they have two-year, one-year, and zero-year gaps. That's weird. Meanwhile, by losing each time, the ROW team plays every other year.

Plus, the PGA and European Tour LOVE the Ryder Cup. They're not going to let go of it lightly. They make a lot of money from it.

I think it would work well with just the three teams we have now.  Dump the Presidents Cup and include the World Team in the Ryder Cup.  Instead of every other year, make it every year, and the Cup holding team plays the "challenger," while the "loser" has to sit out a year.  So next year, instead of crappy USA team versus the World in the PC, we'd have the Champion Euros against the hungry World in the Ryder Cup.

USA spends the year regrouping and pointing fingers, and then hopefully comes back strong in 2016.

I'm sure lots of people would disagree, but that sounds intriguing to me.

[turtleback]

I think it would work well with just the three teams we have now.  Dump the Presidents Cup and include the World Team in the Ryder Cup.  Instead of every other year, make it every year, and the Cup holding team plays the "challenger," while the "loser" has to sit out a year.  So next year, instead of crappy USA team versus the World in the PC, we'd have the Champion Euros against the hungry World in the Ryder Cup.

USA spends the year regrouping and pointing fingers, and then hopefully comes back strong in 2016.

I'm sure lots of people would disagree, but that sounds intriguing to me.

I just think that in about 20 years Asia will be too big to include in the rest of the world.But I could go for the idea.  In fact, I'd put it under the same organization that runs the WCGs, since that includes all top-level tours.

[HankL]

What Tom did on Saturday night at the team meeting was essentially throw the first punch.  You don't throw a punch unless you expect one to come back at you.  Tom's attitude was uncalled for and did nothing to inspire team unity.  I applaud Phil to be the one to stand up and defend the team.  That is what a team player does.  Screw reputation.  It does not give one a pass on being rude & ignorant.