91Èȱ¬

Nice to see him doing well. I hope Harrington goes from Strength to Strength, there will always be detractors if he does mind you. The will say that Woods Knee finished him...however I don't care, delighted to see Pat doing so well.

Devalued? Like, is the success of U2 devalued by the death of Elvis Presley? Is the result of the Second World War devalued by the neutrality of Franco's Spain?

Brilliant summary of a great championship; the champion golfer is a true champion and was humbling in his victory. As for Woods, such was the quality and dram aof the back 9 that his name was barely mentioned, nor needed to be.

Well done Harrington! unbelievable finish - he blew everyone else away. a few guys finished with double-pars just before him but he played superbly - as if there was no pressure on him (which must come from having won it last year). anyway, who knows what tiger would have done but I'm pretty sure he would have struggled to keep up with Harrington!

Can we please remember that away from St Andrews giant fairways, Tiger has played twelve Open Championships and won only one. That was over 4 days of brilliant sunshine with not a breath of wind. Obviously the American press in particular appear to have forgotten Tiger shooting an 81, several mid to high 70's and losing a ball when he has been exposed to both narrow fairways and brutal winds when his one real weakness (his driving) has come to haunt him on the narrower links courses.

Tiger would almost certainly not have won this week had he been fit. And lest we forget Harrington won the Open last year When Tiger played in conditions far more favourable to the great man.

#5 has it spot on. Woods struggles on Links courses when the weather isn't perfect. For all this talk of "devaluing", Woods didn't win last year.

Next time the Open is in Sainty, don't play it on the Old, play it on the New. FAR tighter, far harder.

When the second-best score is +7 you have to question how fair a test it has been, and whether Birkdale was set up properly in the best interests of golf as a spectator sport.

They couldn't forecast the weather, though as Alliss said, it has been windier before without creating the havoc this course did. Undoubtedly the R and A were determined that players were not going to "murder" the course, but did they go overboard in changing and lengthening holes, and in particular in setting pin positions?

Anyone with half a brain could see after Thursday that luck was going to play a major part, at least in determining who couldn't win. The R and A is fortunate that 2009 will see a return to Turnberry, which will probably reduce the number of Americans who decide not to bother coming, but they are playing a dangerous game.

The two who seemed to benefit from more then their fair share of breaks in the first three rounds were Norman and Harrington, though both undeniably played well, and made the most of their good fortune, but I have to say that good though Harrington's play eventually was on Sunday, Poulter more than matched him, given that he could only have one game plan, to attack, where it was really only Harrington's to lose once he headed Norman.

For once Poulter was sensible enough not to say it, but if the breaks had been handed out evenly all week, he would probably have been the champion. Never a favourite of mine, he has now taken a huge step towards his first major.

To believe the tournament should be asterisked for not having Tiger involved is utter lunacy. The game is bigger than him, and he doesn't exactly have a 100% record in the majors anyway.

Would he have been a contender? Even with the playing conditions, I imagine so. But he was also a contender at the Masters earlier and lost to an inspired Immelman by three comfortable strokes, and he almost didn't win the US either (though full respect to him for pulling it off with the injury). He's not unbeatable when he plays, he's just very good.

The Open missed him, but it didn't need him.

I'm an Irish guy living in California, obviously a fan of Harrington but over the last few days I've heard so much negativity about the open especially the fact that TW was not around and if was not for Greg's performance the tournament would have been a joke. It seems to me that they have lost interest given that TW was not playing and they have no faith in the rest of there American PRO golfers which leads me to believe that a lot of Americans now believe that the professional game of golf is now about 1 man, TW.
Strangely enough they also though that the weather was so bad that Golf should not have been played.... Golf was invented in Scotland in those conditions and not the manicured fairways and greens and of course the conditions of California where they play is not indicative of any of the roots of this game.

I firmly believe a European is more rounded in the sport and thus the Open will remain the No. 1 Major weather or not that Americans like it or not. Go Europe, bring on Valhalla.

Believe all you want about the "European" player being more rounded in the sport, but don't use the British Open as your guide. Look at what one country has dominated that event for the past 10, 15 or 20 years. It's America. And Europeans have been all but absent in every other Major played in the states.

Ben Curtis, Todd Hamilton had virtually no links experience, but they were left holding the Claret Jug. Euro-superstar and links veteran Monty meanwhile remains without his jug (and won't ever get one) IMO. So much for the "European" advantage.

I am by no means casting aspersions on Harrington's feat. No asterisk needed. He won last year with TW in the field and won again this year against the best golfers in the world. I put him below TW (who wouldn't?) but after that he's as good or better than anyone else playing the game.

I can't see America winning the Ryder Cup. Europe just plays that event better.

Hey, just started my own Golf blog and my first post is on the open so if anyone wants to have a look, have a click...