91Èȱ¬

Why should Montgomerie "be relieved that Casey could not force the win in Atlanta"?
Such off the wall thinking aloud says more about the writer than the subject.
Shame on the 91Èȱ¬ for that.

#1

The reason being that it would have shown Casey being in good form, and as a consequence, make Montgomerie look like he'd made the wrong decision in not picking him. I think your comment shows you didn't read it through properly before jumping in with both feet and making a slightly irrational comment. Its not brain surgery if you read it through a couple of times, whilst remembering the kerfuffle around the wild card picks.

Why on earth you think "shame on the 91Èȱ¬ for that" is beyond me.

To paraphrase yourself, I think your comments show more about you, than they do about this article.

Can someone remind me how Poulter managed to qualify for the team, automatically.

Given his recent slide down the world rankings, it appears that the bulk of his earnings/points were due to his sole WGA event win earlier this year, with attendant double counting of points for both Euro & US Tour....

The fact that Casey could have won the Fedex Cup without winning a tournament suggests that the PGA still haven't got it right....

#2
You are correct in your slaying of #1 - one would have thought it is obvious.
Can't wait for the weekend - does anyone know what price a 14-14 tie?

I think #1's point was merely that it's wrong to suggest that Monty would be so ignoble as to be relieved that Casey, a fellow Englishman, didn't win just so that his Ryder Cup selection doesn't look bad. I'm sure Monty would in fact agree. All of us, including #1, understood Iain's logic, it's just that, shocking as it may seem, some people hold a different opinion to you.

#2 and #4:
Of course I read Iain Carter's piece, and of course I know the "pick" circumstances.
But it's not difficult to feel the British Press makes an absolute meal out of what they think about Montgomerie, exactly as they did when they crucified Faldo at Valhalla.
(And that exhibition by the British Press in Faldo's team news conference was utterly grisly stuff - hope you both saw it.)
If you want idle speculation casting aspersions on Montgomerie's character and captaincy, this is clearly the article for you.

Iain

With the main event on the horizon I was wondering if you could give us your thoughts on the potential pairings for the opening foursomes/fourballs? Although some pairings looks very certain it is quite interesting to look at the relative strengths and weaknesses of the players (especially on the American side) and try to work out which players would work well together.

For the record my predictions are:

Foursomes

Europe

Molinari/Molinari
McIlroy/McDowell
Kaymer/Westwood
Donald/ Harrington

USA

Mikelson/D.Johnson
Woods/Stricker
Furyk/Mahan
Cink/Z.Johnson

Fourballs

Europe

Fisher/Poulter
McIlroy/McDowell
Donald/Jimenez
Kaymer/Hanson

USA

Mickelson/Fowler
Woods/Stricker
Cink/Watson
Furyk/Kuchar

#5 I have no problem if #1 holds a different opinion to me, but his short comment seemed to indicate he hadn't grasped the point that was being made at the end. I guess it depends how cynically you think of Montgomerie and the image he would like to portray from his wild card choices. I don't necessarily believe Montgomerie would have been bothered had Casey won, but then I don't know Colin Montgomerie, so who's to say.

#6 Surely so much discussion about sport, or any other subject matter, is due in no small part down to speculation, particularly when "we" are not privy to all the discussions behind closed doors, and Montgomerie's own thoughts. Its not unreasonable to speculate that he might be relieved in feeling that his wild card choices have been vindicated further by Casey not winning - its surely human nature to want to feel you made the right choices over something so important to you? As I say, whilst Montgomery may not have been bothered either way, you couldn't necessarily blame him for having a secret thought that Casey not winning makes it a bit easier for him in justifying not picking him.

#5 - Montgomerie is Scottish, so Casey can't be "a fellow Englishman", even though Scotland has been part of England since the Act of Union 1707.

Playoffs??? Playoffs eliminate participants who play poorly....no such thing here. You can miss the cut in the first 2 events and still win.
Pathetic attempt at corporate greed, made for TV farce.

Monty is already having a nightmare - I can't believe he has written a loser's speech ( and admitting it) and also telling the Press which players in the US Team he would like to have in the European Team .

Would Seve have ever done anything like this ??
I think not .

If we win back the Ryder Cup it will be achieved despite Monty as Captain .

#9 - You are half right...........the Kingdoms of Scotland and England joined form one larger country with the "Act of Union". Scotland, so far, has never been part of England.

Now to the golf, Casey has conducted himself very well since finding out he wasn't to be picked for this Ryder Cup team. Had Monty had the US system available to him or had Molinari not produced his great finish to win at Gleneagles, Casey, I am sure, would have made the team. Time will tell if Monty got it right.

Who cares what Seve would or wouldn't have done, he isn't Captain this time and there was plenty of criticism for him at Valderamma for being to involved and not leaving the players alone to play their own games.

Every Captain has there own style. Jacklin, Seve, Gallagher, Torrance, Woosie, Langer have all been very different in their approach yet seemed to get the job done.

A bigger deal if Furyk were to hole the winning putt at Celtic Manor than winning close on 7 milion quid?
Are you living in the real world?
Rose, Casey and Harrington made their priorities clear by playing in the Fedex Cup ahead of Mickey Mouse tournaments in Europe, regardless of whether they made the Ryder Cup team or not.
The Ryder Cup has become a biennial bore, over hyped by Sky as usual,and is well down the list of priorities for the top bracket of players.

Am I the only one who thinks £7m for winning a golf tournament is quite repugnant?..more so at a time when 1 in 7 Americans live under the poverty line and where the deep recession for most people continues to cause misery.

Perhaps I'm alone in thinking that the entire European Team (Captains and Vice Captains included) would have welcomed a Casey victory (or a win from Donald, Laird or Rose) at East Lake. So be it!

Let's face it, if there was a mistake, it was in the qualifying criteria and timing; Montgomerie was certain to be second-guessed who'd ever he'd've picked.

Re
Gus wrote:
Am I the only one who thinks £7m for winning a golf tournament is quite repugnant?..more so at a time when 1 in 7 Americans live under the poverty line and where the deep recession for most people continues to cause misery.

Not only do I believe that the money being ploughed into golf, which is, after all, a game, rather than a sport, has exceeded the boundaries of common sense, but I am also aggrieved by the US TV-driven practice of having the winner's family run to him at the end. Thank god this stupidity doesn't extend to this side of the Pond (yet). However, are golf's WAGs going to be part of the Ryder Cup, to placate the US viewers?

Good old Monty, getting it right again!!

Casey again proves he has a complete lack of 'bottle'. Give me a pumped up Molinari any time, Casey would crumble under the pressure. How many times has he had the opportunity to close out events and stalled.
How many tourney wins this season for smug, up himself Casey?
How many for self effacing Molinari?

Well done Monty, you're a legend!!!!!

#15 & #17 I don't disagree with what you say, most people wouldn't, but I was moved by Jim's speech last night when he recalled how his parents worked extra jobs to fund his Golf development which led to him getting into College via a scholarship. (I presume as they could not afford to pay for him to go)

Good stuff, that's the american dream and if it acts as a spur to other young people out there its a good thing.

After all, lets face it, if this cash was not put into Golf or other sport, it wouldn't suddenly be used for good causes, it would just vanish into a dark hole somewhere in the corporate balance sheets.

Also, anyone else notice Poulter's video tweet about the fire alarm last night has been deleted from his timeline. Has he has his collar felt by the twitter cops that are enforcing a ban this week?

I must admit I can easily see why, lets say the Celtic Manor owner would not want anything like this to show his investment in a bad light, but it is what it is and if Poults did not delete it on his own accord, that just makes it worse.

I would always prefer to play Golf than watch it.
For me, the Ryder Cup is the only Golf I can enjoy watching on TV. This is partly because of the relative freedom from the (apparent) obsession with how much money is up for grabs. I believe some players have gone on record as saying they think it ought to have prize money. Well, that's their opinion.

Personally, if I got a thrill from watching someone earn a lot of money, then I would watch Bill Gates, not Tiger Woods.

How many of the winning Spanish football team were merely playing for money in the recent World Cup? I have my own thoughts and opinions on the matter, but I don't really know. They have their reasons for playing, and I have my reasons for watching.

The biggest monetary prize for a single match in British football, is said to be the play-off final for promotion to the Premier League. Does this make Blackpool the best team in the land? They were not even second best in the Championship. (But they certainly do have the most entertaining coach, in my opinion).

As the first post, and the responses, highlight, many different motivations and interpretations (of players AND spectators) can co-exist side by side. I often wonder about the motivations behind articles in "The Press", but I'll certainly give Iain the benefit of the doubt in this instance.

#1 is SPOT ON. Mr. I. Carter is known for not letting facts get in the way of a good story. Most of the 91Èȱ¬ editors are the same in this. Whether it's Peston, Robinson, they often go for the "maybe, might could & can" scenarios, rather than stick to what is known.
Even in this article, Mr. Carter claims, "...and the fact that Paul Casey didn't finish in second place on his own - enabled the American veteran to claim the massive bonus on offer for winning the play-offs - a series that had ironically begun with the disqualification of Furyk for missing his pro-am tee-time".

Really? The last time I had a look, Luke Donald did finish on his own in second. Retief Goosen finished in 3rd also on his own and Casey was tied for 5th with Nick Watney.

So, are we expecting a correction and an apology from Mr. I. Carter? I certainly won't be holding my breath...

The wierdest swing on tour wins the biggest prize - encouragement for hackers everywhere. "It's not how it's how many"!

#3

You're shortsighted my friend. Poulter has had a very good year and has finished solidly.

If you look at his record since this time last year he has had:

2 Wins
3 Top Fives
5 Top 20's

Not bad and has become a proven winner. Apart from that he played a blinder at the last RC. Don't worry about Poults, but try commenting a bit more fact based and less about what happened over the last 2 weeks.

Poster #18. A few examples of Casey being 'up himself' would be illuminating.
How many tournaments has Molinari won? Surely that means he 'bottled' every single other tournament right? Couldn't close it out right?
Wow, I never had Molinari down as a staller. Shows how little I know about these sportsmen.

#22. Er, Ian Carter is EXACTLY correct. Did you watch the coverage and the scenarios of the Fedex at all?
Additionally do your maths. If there was one player for positions 1 to 3, Casey and Watney share 4th. Not 5th. It's NOT DIFFICULT.

#10

I agree, the fact that anyone of the 30 players who qualified for the Tour Championship could have won the big prize makes a mockery of the preceding tournaments. The USPGA should make their minds up: Is the FEDEX Cup a points scoring system over 4 tournaments (where winning tournaments doesn't actually matter) OR is it a 3 Tournament Qualifying system with a grand final where all enter equal.

In it's current hybrid form, it's just confusing and not that exciting really.

@#22 - It pays to be cautious when making such bold statements of so called facts. Two glaring errors in your post would normally be glossed over, but when declared with such confidence, can lead to you looking foolish beyond belief.

@#28 - I found it very frustrating that half of the coverage from NBC last night was taken up by Mr Sander working out various scenarios (of which all but one were always guarenteed to be a total waste of time) on a school whiteboard. Any chance we could watch some golf instead?

I would like to see far less weight on the fedex events points - keep them slightly higher than regular season points but make performance all year very important. A player like Martin Laird who has been poor all year should not get to the tour championship courtesy of losing a playoff in one tournament. Thats bordering on a farce.

Excuse me the last post was directed at number 27 not at myself!

#26 & 28 - I'm happy to admit that the Case & Watney in 5th WAS a typo. But both ended up in 4th. Even 3rd wouldn't have won the Fedex Cup for Casey. The BOTTOM LINE is that Casey was not 2nd.

As for Iain Carter (please note the spelling), he was lousy as a tennis correspondent and equally bad at golf.

#29 & 30 - shows that some people even have trouble seeing their own blog posting !

Fedex Cup is a bore. Contrived points system that confuses and offers vast rewards for someone who plays well in 3 or 4 tournaments. Finchem may think finding a company daft enough to put up this huge sum adds some interest to the tail end of the season; for me, it doesn't achieve anything beyond lining the mult-millionaires' already bulging wallets. The old tour championship when the top 30 players over the whole season teed up made more sense, but problem was that the top players like Woods & Mickelson might give it a miss.

here lies another article proving to me ian carter doesn't "get it" when it comes to golf...or maybe he does but can't express it????

#32 - Thanks and whilst I appreciate that you've a)bothered to reply b) corrected yourself, I'm afraid you're still wrong.
Had Matt Kuchar or Charlie Hoffman or Dustin Johnson, finished 3rd, one of them would have won the Fedex Cup even if Casey had finished 2nd.
In other words, the only way Casey could have guaranteed himself winning the Fedex Cup would have been by winning at East Lake. Second MIGHT have been good enough but only if Messrs. Kuchar,Johnson and Hoffman didn't finish 3rd.

Call me greedy but I enjoyed the play-offs and I'm planning on enjoying the Ryder Cup too. Both events have their own appeal and the attractions of one does not detract from the other.

The play-offs may need a bit more tweaking to make them perfect but qualification for the final event is by doing well in the regular season OR by doing well in the early stages of the play-offs (for which you have to qualify in the first place). That seems reasonable to me. All duel winners in the regular season (Mahan, Rose, Stricker, Els and Furyk) made it, despite variable early-stage play-off performance, as did the three winners of the play-offs (Johnson, Hoffman and Kuchar).

The arithmetic did get tricky and that is the biggest drawback; the performance of two golfers having bad days (Van Pelt and Stricker) is a distraction from the main focus but in the end none of that mattered. Furyk added to his two regular season wins with incredible nerve to win a big stack of cash. He'll probably make as much as the top 20 Premier League player from earnings alone now... but he'll be the only one that does!

#18, i could not agree more.

I'm afraid the US Tour has made people like Casey and Donald who they are. Only bothered about finishing Top 10, pick up $100,000 and move to the next tournament. Jeff Overton hasn't won a Tournament all year yet is now a millionaire. Fair enough give the winner his $1,000,000 but then dramatically reduce money from there. Casey along with Westwood and Donald with never ever win anything of any real substance, yes give Westwood his 2 OOM but he'll never win a major, Casey for sure will never win a major and donald will see his name at the Top of a major and say to his caddy, in a very girly voice, "another top 10 guaranteed, yippee!!".

Come on Rory/Graeme, best 2 players on our team by a long way.

#38
What total bilge. So Westwood hasn't won anything of 'real substance' right? McDowell would still be bracketed with Luke and Casey if he'd have missed a couple of putts in the US Open?
Where do you armchair warriors get off in labelling and criticising these great players?
Their time will come. It will for Westy, it will for Luke, Casey and Justin. I think Poulter has the minerals too. And good luck to them.

Armchair warrior?? haha. do you actually play golf primitive pants? you've just answered your own stupid-ness, if, and its a massive if, mcdowell had missed those putts? that is my point, he didn't miss those putts. Westwood would have missed and casey and donald would have dunked it in a bunker and made 7!!!
i play off plus 2 and actually play some steady golf, so mr 21 handicapper primitive pants, now go!!!