Hardluckster
-
Posts
136 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Everything posted by Hardluckster
-
Have they been dropped? I know that both sides agreed to drop them but didn't realize that had actually taken place already.
-
From what I’ve read, there seems to be a distinct possibility that this never comes to fruition If that is the case, do both sides agree to drop the litigation and thus the discovery aspect?
-
Rory knew that talks were occurring, by his own admission. You are correct though in that this article, nor others that I have read, give specific facts to show that he knew of the merger/acquisition. I would guess that he (along with a select few other players) was privy to that knowledge but I don’t know that.
-
It seems as though Rory had previous knowledge that a deal may have been in the works. Newcastle chief Amanda Staveley's role in PGA Tour-LIV Golf saga after Rory McIlroy chat - Mirror Online The PGA Tour and LIV Golf have merged after a year of war between the two competitions, with the latter enlisting...
-
That is likely true, although I have no actual knowledge of whether he approached committee members or PGAT administration with concerns. Had this been the message posted, I would have had no issues with it.
-
I wasn’t offended at all. You were the one that said that Phil did nothing to bring about changes.
-
I expected better than this.
-
Without big name players (like Phil) signing with LIV, I highly doubt that any of these changes occur. I would say absolitely these players have affected changes to the PGAT by signing with the Saudi backed league Forcing change in the PGAT most likely wasn’t the reason they signed with LIV. That was most likely money, plain and simple. I would say that it’s possible (maybe even likely) that most of these defectors had issues with some tour policies. I don’t disagree with this at all. I don’t think I’ve ever suggested otherwise.
-
Yes, sir. How else is this statement to be interpreted? “He could have done this without being paid by Saudi Arabia.”
-
Your post above doesn’t specifically say it, but it strongly suggests that these changes could have been achieved without LIV influence. I’m not suggesting that Phil (and others that left) went for the money. I definitely think that they did. Having said that, I think that without LIV it’s more than likely that none of the changes we are seeing from the PGAT ever happen. Edit: I also can’t really say that I blame any of those players for taking the pay day that LIV offered.
-
I think that anyone who believes that the PGAT administration makes these moves without the influence and competition that LIV has provided is naive. Regardless, I feel that these changes are likely to improve their product and be a positive for golf fans. I’m in favor of that.
-
It seems that Phil and LIV have helped to bring about some positive change to the PGAT. 🤞🏻
-
From what I've read it seems that legality plays no role in the result of a TRO, but then again I'm no lawyer.
-
I agree. I think the reason that the TRO was denied was because there was no real basis for irreparable injury/damage. I'm no lawyer, and don't claim to be, but from what I've read that was the problem with the TRO as far as those 3 golfers were concerned. Temporary restraining order
-
This link was posted on the LIV thread in response to a question that I asked there. I felt that this might have been off-topic for that thread. What is the minimum number of PGA Tour events a golfer must play each season? What is the minimum number of PGA Tour events a golfer must play each season? The minimum is pretty low. A hypothetical situation: A PGAT player who does not have a win or lifetime exemption status plays in only 10 events during a season. In those ten events he earns enough points to qualify for a tour card for the next season. As I read the article, it seems to me that he would have to be ineligible for the tour card for the next season. He obviously loses his voting status for the next season, but does he get his tour card? I have also read tonight on another site that the 25 event requirement has been relaxed somewhat (that article is from 2018). Does anyone know if that is correct? If so, what is the new relaxed requirement?
-
I just read a post on another site which claimed that the 15 tourney minimum only applies to golfers who wish to have voting privileges on the PGAT. Does anyone know if that is indeed accurate? If that's true, could a player compete in less that 15 events and, if he earned enough points, still maintain their PGAT card for the next season and compete in the FedEx playoffs?
-
Thanks for the response, Fritz. I thought that players needed exemptions whenever they played events other than on the PGAT, regardless of whether it was opposite another PGAT tournament. You are wrong, on both counts. If you knew me you would know that. I'm most certainly not afraid of an argument, although it's an exercise in futility on internet message boards in almost all circumstances. Now, we could argue about which is more restrictive but I'll refrain from that debate as it would be fruitless. I can see both sides of this 'restrictive' debate and will leave it there.
-
To begin, I'm not trying to be argumentative (sometimes that is tough to discern simply from text). As I understand it LIV is very restrictive in that players must compete in every LIV event (8 this year, 14 next, and ??? after that). The PGAT requires 15 total events, but allows players the right to choose (at least to some degree) the events which they will participate. The point where the PGAT becomes more restrictive than LIV is in playing other events (at least as I read things). LIV, it seems, places no restrictions on where/when these players compete outside of the LIV event weeks. As we know, the PGAT must grant waivers for members to compete in most non-PGAT events. Am I missing something? I'm genuinely interested in understanding if I am ignorant of the facts.
-
My point is that it's all speculation at this point. I would like to know who actually has this type of contact, although its very unlikely that information will be released any time soon imo. I do think that this could have an adverse effect on LIV Golf receiving OWGR points. I've always felt that players, regardless of signing money, would still want to win and collect that $4M purse. I thought that they would still have a very good reason to remain competitive (especially if they are all indeed money-grubbing individuals as claimed by so many folks). If purse winnings are simply subtracted from the signing bonus, however, I think it changes that aspect completely. I would suspect that the OWGR committee might also be very interested in this aspect of the contacts.
-
It does say "some", though. It would be very interesting to know which players are covered by that type of contact.
-
I wonder what happened to all of the “extra” unused balls?
-
I suppose that you could view it in that regard. In my opinion when you deny certain players who have earned exemptions while allowing others with the same exemptions, you have become exclusionary. That, imo, would make it anything but an open tournament.
-
At that point it is no longer “The Open” and becomes “The Closed”.
-
Rory McIlroy's latest LIV comments suggest the discussion is changing As the PGA Tour, LIV tour and DP World Tour try to figure out the path forward, Rory McIlroy is somewhat softening his stance. 🤔
-
The Cejka Ruling Today on Champions Tour
Hardluckster replied to Hardluckster's topic in Rules of Golf
Thanks. It’s ok I think I’ve figured it out. At least the part that I was questioning.
