LIV Golf

[Deleted member 29109]

If you are talking about Tigger then he is no longer the best player in the world....for a while now.
if the Majors do not accept the best players then they become what ???? exhibition games due to invite only
a bit like the Masters was for long period of time.

Or The Open which often has a club pro or two that has made it through regional qualifying.

The Players will still have the strongest field even if it’s missing 3 or 4 good players that have gone to LiV.

 

[Ian_George]

If you are talking about Tigger then he is no longer the best player in the world....for a while now.
if the Majors do not accept the best players then they become what ???? exhibition games due to invite only
a bit like the Masters was for long period of time.

LIV has it in its power to provide an environment for it's players, not already qualified, to qualify for the Majors! LIV players should be demanding that LIV does that, not that the Majors should modify their criteria! But, as a disrupter, that's not what LIV is all about imo! So I have no sympathy for them! And FWW, there are plenty of LIV players qualified for Majors! DJ, Cam, BdC, Bubba, Sergio et al! So absence of a couple won't affect my interest in, nor enjoyment of, them!

 

[Deleted member 1418]

Who are they stuck with that’s rubbish?

Phil will be a non playing captain the minute his team has 4 players that exceed his own ability, his role will be to act as a representative of his team, and LIV.

The money spent on recruiting these players isn’t based on their value as golfers, it’s based on their value to LIV.

Has anyone at LIV told Phil that's the plan for him? He comes across as the kind of guy who thinks he'll still able to compete at the highest level late into his 50s! Or will his team just be a crap Phil, and 3 even worse than him?!!!

"It's my team and I'm playing"!!!!

 

[Depreston]

Has anyone at LIV told Phil that's the plan for him? He comes across as the kind of guy who thinks he'll still able to compete at the highest level late into his 50s! Or will his team just be a crap Phil, and 3 even worse than him?!!!

"It's my team and I'm playing"!!!!

they’d probably just drop him and he can take his cash home

 

[Ian_George]

Who are they stuck with that’s rubbish?

Phil will be a non playing captain the minute his team has 4 players that exceed his own ability, his role will be to act as a representative of his team, and LIV.

The money spent on recruiting these players isn’t based on their value as golfers, it’s based on their value to LIV.

How will he make any money or get back into the team then? And how will they appoint a player to replace him? The 12 team 48 player member tournament format puts limitations on that side! Though I know not every player plays all tournaments. He still ended up 34th, so isn't really dropping precipitously (in LIV) though certainly hasn't had a great year! Oh and he's 52 now, so not long to his 'late 50s'!

 

[BubbaP]

DPWT announcements.

https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/dp...low&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social

 

[Deleted member 1418]

they’d probably just drop him and he can take his cash home

Depends if he has any left or if the bookmaker has it.........!!

 

[Mel Smooth]

DPWT announcements.

https://www.golfmonthly.com/news/dp...low&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social

This will be a welcome relief for a lot of pro's who know they are there making up the numbers a lot of the time. It must be incredibly frustrating reaching a level where you can play on an elite tour, but could potentially be out of pocket at the end of the year.

 

[doublebogey7]

What ????? so you don't want the best players to play in the Majors......

I'd love the best players in the world time playing in the majors. But if they choose not to not to try and meet the qualifying criteria I don't see why that criteria should be changed to suit them.

 

[Backsticks]

I'd love the best players in the world time playing in the majors. But if they choose not to not to try and meet the qualifying criteria I don't see why that criteria should be changed to suit them.

It isnt being changed to suit the players. It will be changed to suit the majors. The majors need the world's best players more than players need the majors. Without the best, they would no longer be majors.

 

[cleveland52]

It isnt being changed to suit the players. It will be changed to suit the majors. The majors need the world's best players more than players need the majors. Without the best, they would no longer be majors.

What player currently on the LIV Series is bigger than the game? Golf is like any other sport; you can only play against the ones that's there.....

 

[4LEX]

This will be a welcome relief for a lot of pro's who know they are there making up the numbers a lot of the time. It must be incredibly frustrating reaching a level where you can play on an elite tour, but could potentially be out of pocket at the end of the year.

That's professional sport though. Nothing is guarenteed which makes it exciting. No one forces them to do it, it's their choice. You're either good enough to make a living or you aren't and someone will take your place.

 

[r0wly86]

It isnt being changed to suit the players. It will be changed to suit the majors. The majors need the world's best players more than players need the majors. Without the best, they would no longer be majors.

absolutely not, completely wrong way around.

Many majors don't have some top players due to injuries. And you know what, no one cares they are still the majors. If 10-15 top players aren't available, the rest of the world will still be watching. The majors are the biggest tournaments in golf, and something far more drastic than LIV will be needed to change that.

On the other hand golfers are often ranked on their major success in terms of their overall standing and career greatness. If the LIV players do not play in the majors they will massively hurt their own legacies

 

[Beezerk]

If the LIV players do not play in the majors they will massively hurt their own legacies

Well not really, they’re all just over the hill and passed their best aren’t they, even Cam Smith is just a one season wonder ??

 

[LincolnShep]

Do you think a win in a major where LIV players were excluded (or couldn't qualify due to LIV not being eligible for ranking points) would have an asterisk against it? A bit like a gold medal at the Moscow Olympics? Yes, it's a gold medal, but the USA didn't attend so...

 

[r0wly86]

Do you think a win in a major where LIV players were excluded (or couldn't qualify due to LIV not being eligible for ranking points) would have an asterisk against it? A bit like a gold medal at the Moscow Olympics? Yes, it's a gold medal, but the USA didn't attend so...

No I don't. Every major in living memory would have had some top player(s) not attending for a multitude of reasons, doesn't mean their is an asterisk against them, or it would literally be on every major championship.

 

[Deleted member 29109]

Do you think a win in a major where LIV players were excluded (or couldn't qualify due to LIV not being eligible for ranking points) would have an asterisk against it? A bit like a gold medal at the Moscow Olympics? Yes, it's a gold medal, but the USA didn't attend so...

Not at all. Would you * any major that was won with Tiger not playing when he was injured?

 

[Beezerk]

Do you think a win in a major where LIV players were excluded (or couldn't qualify due to LIV not being eligible for ranking points) would have an asterisk against it? A bit like a gold medal at the Moscow Olympics? Yes, it's a gold medal, but the USA didn't attend so...

I recall DJ missed the Masters when he was a real hot streak, Tiger missed majors with injuries and self inflicted issues. I’m struggling to think of a major where 4 or 5 real contenders were missing for whatever reason.

 

[LincolnShep]

Yes, players miss majors, that's a given, but in such numbers?? Lets do a thought experiment:

Scenario A: Rory wins the Masters but all the other competitors are outside the Top 100, people will remember it for the time that Rory was unopposed, they will consider it a lesser achievement.
Scenario B: Rory wins the Masters but Jon Rahm is missing through injury, pretty sure nobody will consider that "lesser" because, as has been pointed out, there is always someone missing.

Logically, there has to be a sliding scale between A and B. At some point, the win goes from being celebrated, to being asterisked. I'm just wondering where that point is. How many of the best golfers in the world need to be missing before the achievement of winning is downgraded? I don't know the answer but there must be one - and the major championships are going to need to come to their own conclusions about what it is.

 

[Mel Smooth]

Doesn’t matter what people on here think.
If the worlds best golfers are refused entry to an event (because that’s the scenario that we’d have to be facing) - then it devalues that event. There’s a few already on the PGA tour where the current winners can’t play, and the Ryder Cup is facing the same fate.