Jump to content


Established Member
  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

33 Plays from the Tips

About FarawayFairways

  • Rank
    Dedicated Member

Your Golf Game

  • Handicap Index
  1. "up to me" You're quite right, I'll take that decision, and I see you've been interefering with posts again Any board depends on its contributions and what its membership wants to talk about. It is the contributors that define the board not its moderators. Officious moderators who seek to become the centre of attention will usually do more damage than good. If you'd looked back at the thread in question you'd realise it was full of suggestions about how America might improve it's Ryder Cup performance (plenty that don't include box quotes too as if that makes any any difference
  2. Even though the proceeding post was about reforming or removing the Presidents Cup from the roster and mine a resposne to that. I trust you moved that as well? No - didn't think so So someone block quotes me in the previous post, turns the issue (legitimately) into an open question about how America might like to use the Presidents Cup, by way of preparing for the Ryder Cup. I respond to it, (legitimately) and you remove it and create a new thread! Very poor moderating I'm afraid
  3. Just for context, this was posted a couple of hours ago in the Fred Couples thread where the issues of the Presidents Cup was being questioned, but for some reaosn has shown up here as a new thread
  4. I think it's a mischievous journalist trying to play to a nationalist crowd by drumming up on an old American hate figure and putting words into his mouth with a misleading headline. Where in the attributable quote(s) has Colin said "better than Woods ever was" that has been used as the headline? He hasn't What he's said is that he's got to come back at a level higher than he was at, as in he's coming back to something , from the point at which he left it (as in returning), and not at some high point from over a decade ago. Colin's probably right. If the 2014
  5. I read it differently, given that even Woods hasn't been able to get back to his own levels of dominance I read it to mean that Montgomerie was commenting on where Woods was say a couple of years ago when he regained the top spot, and Montgomerie is saying that he'll need to come back at a level beyond that, because that's where Rory is today. I'm not so sure that's unreasonable? I think he's saying in effect that Rory's 2014 game is better than Tigers in 2013 The article looks as if its been subjected to a bit of mischievous spin I reckon by the author. I doubt Montgomeri
  6. I'm not an advocate of doing the thing that makes the most short term money. I'm not even an advocate of doing the thing that makes the most money, even if I happen to think that's winning, so in this case would be a mutual benefit by coincidence !!! But I'm curious .... What event would have the largest commercial appeal A North versus South match featuring 24 American players and 2 captaincy teams of Americans or The US versus Australia and few Southern Africans I ask becuase Europe has the 'Seve Trophy' where the UK & Ireland play continental Europe. It's low ke
  7. McGinley has been fullsome in his praise and bold in his predictions for Super Joost. You can only conclude he would pick him today. In fact he seemed to be intimating within a week or so that he'd made a mistake and should have picked Joost. Europe made errors too, it's just that McGinley's players got him out of trouble. Incidentally, did you see McIlroy interviewed after Dubai about his seasons highlights? Two big ones are obvious he explained. The Open was a tournament he'd grown up watching so to win the claret jug at Hoylake for the first time was a dream come true ,and that topped his l
  8. We've certainly seen complaints, most recently into the hacking of mobile telephone voice messages of course (God alive knows how Tiger would react to that!), but this type of article is pretty much run of the mill tabloid newspaper material and wouldn't provoke a response normally. We see examples of it almost daily, or to qualify that, comment pieces with a bitchy edge to them. It would really be a non issue lost in the swamp of articles competing for the same readership. Probably register 2 out of 10 on the tabloid Richter Scale (if that). A vast majority of respondents wouldn't get sucked
  9. Magic wand picks Masters - Rory US Open - Fowler The Open - Watson (Tom not Bubba) USPGA - Well..... it has to be 'Super Joost'
  10. You're right, I've got more pressing things to push on with rather than indulging a conversation about how America wants to duck out of playing the Ryder Cup as soon as it starts to lose, which I personally doubt very much a majority of American golf fans want to do incidentally. The Australians would have ripped the piss out of us mercilessly for being "cowardly/ chicken poms/ limeys" if we'd ever dared suggest inviting South Africa in to play for the Ashes. It would have been too humiliating to be honest, they'd have crucified us, and thank God we never did As for "being with @rb7
  11. In fairness, I did leave that possibility open "I can understand it I suppose if he genuinely feels cheated and wants to right a wrong as a matter deeply held principle" I'm struggling to think that his game will benefit, but sometimes in life you have to set professional considerations aside and trust that things will come back to themselves
  12. I'm sorry, but if anyone sounds "entitled" it's the original suggestion which sadly reinforces the idea that the world has to revovle around America. If you don't believe me, just lets go over what was posted, but more revealingly perhaps, the rationale behind it. "Modify the "Ryder Cup/Presidents Cup" and bring the internationals into the system. Start 2016 with the Americans vs the Europeans. The loser sits out 2018 and the winner plays the Internationals. Continue onward. This allows the American stars to get off the big deal each and every year. They do not want t
  13. So you understand money and legal, but not a matter of principle ........ urm Let me have one last attempt then Why should Europe accept this new format? What have they done to justify having it imposed upon them, other than win? Why does't anyone suggest that America plays the Rest of the World for the right the challenge Europe every two years? This new proposed format is purely a reflection on the way that recent results have gone is it not? thats' a simple yes or no answer. Well the answer has to be yes. If matches were being traded equally with wins and losses, someth
  14. I'd agree with you McIlroy recently said that he no longer plays golf for money. Well after signing his sportswear contract he certainly doesn't need to, but by extension this lawsuit is really about money. It doesn't really add up. I can understand it I suppose if he genuinely feels cheated and wants to right a wrong as a matter deeply held principle, but I can't think of many sports people whose games improve when they're distracted, and especially in a field like this. Tony Lema played better once he was free of his agreement, but that was of a completely different nature. McIlroy's
  15. You're obviously not understanding it The genesis of the idea (a team sitting out every two years) has seriously been put forward by an American, as a solution to a perceived problem. That problem being the increasingly one sided nature of these matches. By any reasonable definition, Europe are therefore being successful, and by association, America unsuccessful? Havign established this we also need to recognise that now and then America will win, in which case Europe will get penalised for a probelm that has its roots in their success. Europe shouldn't have to lower themsleves to Ameri
  • Create New...

Important Information

Welcome to TST! Signing up is free, and you'll see fewer ads and can talk with fellow golf enthusiasts! By using TST, you agree to our Terms of Use, our Privacy Policy, and our Guidelines.

The popup will be closed in 10 seconds...