KenL
Tour Rookie
Have the R&A actually said they are not returning to Turnberry due to travel issues or anything else?
Have the R&A actually said they are not returning to Turnberry due to travel issues or anything else?
Wolf
Well-known member
Why do I need to draw the line on something that's purely hypothetical and highly unlikely to ever happen. Trump may be a crappy human being in some peoples eyes but the way he made his money and his reputation is hardly comparible to what El Chapo has done and been previously convicted for.
By the same token of stupid hypothetical questions should we not allow any course with the name Royal to host it as by name they're associated with a family that over the years has been associated with scandals. Both scenarios are equally as stupid as each other.
Hypothetical questioning is irrelevant in any debate. We should stick to facts and my opinion won't changed based on the facts.
Last edited:
howbow88
Hacker
You put a fairly sweeping statement that it shouldnt make any difference as to who owns a golf club when selecting a tournament venue, and I'm asking if that applies for you in any case. I used the hypothetic example as a way to make it easier for all of us to understand.
But ok, I'll just ask outright with no example: Do you genuinely think that whoever owns a course should not at all be part of deciding whether it hosts a tournament or not?
I think there's always a line, and I don't think ownership of a venue should be ignored myself.
But ok, I'll just ask outright with no example: Do you genuinely think that whoever owns a course should not at all be part of deciding whether it hosts a tournament or not?
I think there's always a line, and I don't think ownership of a venue should be ignored myself.
Wolf
Well-known member
It wasn't a sweeping statement it was my actual opinion on it. You think there's a line that's fair enough. I honestly don't particularly care who owns a golf course nor think it should factor in to the tournament. That a simple enough answer, I'll likely be vilified by some for such an answer but as I've stated previously it doesn't bother me. I've said all along I stand by my opinion on this thread.
Should the 2022 PGA Championship change venue because Trump owns that course . Imo no it shouldn't its been chosen based on the course and facilities and thats what matters the most.
2blue
Journeyman Pro
So......the protests, against him, would be enormous, & IMO rightly so despite the fact there may be a few 'loons' in there. You'll find that 'loons' produce 'loons'..... it's that simple.
howbow88
Hacker
I'm surprised that ownership wouldn't bother someone, but fair enough.
Wolf
Well-known member
Why should it bother me though if i were playing the course I'd be there to savour the surroundings and enjoy the course not rub shoulders with the owner and thats same way I view the ownership of staging the event. We're all different i guess.
2blue
Journeyman Pro
AGREED...... hard to understand when it's likely to become a massive security issue? It's rather naive to think otherwise.
howbow88
Hacker
Playing the course - your money goes to that person. If you have a belief that the person is fundamentally making the world worse, I wouldn't want to effectively contribute towards that if I could avoid it.
Hosting an event - the same person would profit massively financially, and also possibly use the event to try and peddle their poison.
The above would bother me.
Wolf
Well-known member
Neither bothers me nor comes into my thinking when I play a course. With the exception of people knowing who Trump is and what he owns because of his status I'd be willing to bet most golfers don't know who owns the clubs they pay Green fees at so could still be contributing to those people they would be morally against without knowing it.
Anyway this is detracting from the thread, I stand by opinion from the beginning and you do yours so fair enough we agree to disagree and let the thread get back on track.
Jacko_G
Blackballed
I think you must lead a shallow life if you think that it's only golf tournaments that are effected by "criminals" or illegal money. What about the coffee shops in your high street or the tyre place that launders a wee bit extra every week for criminals. The houses in your streets/village/town that are bought with drug money. What about the pubs funded through criminal activity, second hand car garages etc etc. Where do you draw the line?
Having morals is great but it's maybe something to keep to yourself instead of forcing them on others.
Should the R&A be forced out of running the game for its long standing association with Prince Andrew who may or may not be guilty of worse than what you accuse Trump of?
howbow88
Hacker
Where possible, I do try to spend my money at places I consider to not be morally bankrupt. Does that make me perfect? No of course not. Does it mean that I try to do what I think is right? Yeah, I do sometimes. As an example, I live a 5 minute walk from an Asda. Since those shenanigans with changing staff contracts whether they liked it or not though, I haven't set foot in the place. (This is also made easier by the fact that their own food stuff is quite dreadful!)
I am quite aware that there are several places I do shop at though that may well be pretty dodgy morally. If i were to find that out though, I may well stop using them too.
I'm not sure why you think I lead a shallow life based on a few posts I've made on an internet forum though? I've not made any assumptions about you or anyone else on here, so it seems a bit strange to leap to such conclusions.
And I am certainly not pushing my way of thinking/living on to others on here. Please can you show me where I have done this?
With regards to your question; I don't know enough about it to form any opinion. My understanding is that Prince Andrew has been involved with the R&A in the past in some sort of ambassadorial role? I would find it odd if this continued to happen now, but I think that is highly unlikely considering he has withdrawn from public life.
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
This is possibly the main argument the R&A could use..
Trump would be over for all 4 days plus the practice if Turnberry got the Open..naturally, it's his course and he wants to revel in the whole thing - who wouldn't
But there would be hundreds of security people all over the place, mostly armed I suspect, and if Big D wanted to take a walk around following Tiger then nobody else would be allowed within 100 yards of him
It would disrupt the whole atmosphere of the Open
Add to that the almost certain protesters who won't worry about running across a green and kicking a ball into a bunker if it gets their message out.
It's just too big a risk..
Wolf
Well-known member
Not to mention the golf clothing people wear often made in sweatshops , along with many other products in their daily lives they own. The mobile communication devices they use to view this forum, or GPS device's to measure distances whose battery products are mined in Africa often by children suffering from extreme poverty, paid a pittance whilst the manufacturers make billions so we can have the latest gadgets. But nobody knows these people so guess that's ok. Yet people will boycott a golf course because they know its owned by Trump, that's just one of the reasons I find all pathetic. There really is nothing more hypocritical than people stating their morals but then ignoring them daily. We have far bigger issues to address as humans morally than we do about which golf course we play.
Grant85
Head Pro
Completely agree and ultimately while Trump owns Turnberry it is a risk that the R&A stage the Open there. He is such an abrasive figure and it is inevitable that a lot of people just won't bother - even if it's not a formal boycott. A huge chunk of people attending the Open are travelling for a day, taking a week off work, spending thousands of pounds, perhaps building summer holiday plans around the event. There's an Open every year, so just wait and go to Birkdale / Carnoustie / St Andrews the following year.
And it doesn't help that there are capacity and infrastructure problems - so there isn't actually anything to gain.
As I said, I wouldn't be surprised if (assuming Trump loses the election or stops being president, realistically Jan 2025 if he wins this year) he does a deal behind closed doors and underwrites the revenue to a certain degree with the R&A and they have 1 Open there. Perhaps he sells it soon after. While he is President.. no chance.
I really don't see that at all. This year sold out in record time. I'm sure people would miss it, but that would simply mean others would take their place. It being in a remote location may affect it, but if for example he owned Birkdale it wouldn't make a difference as its easier to get too.
Jacko_G
Blackballed
Are you implying that the R&A are corrupt?
Grant85
Head Pro
Not at all. Not uncommon for a venue to pay money to fund or sponsor an event in order to gain the prestige / publicity of being host.
But not something that is publicly discussed.
Grant85
Head Pro
That might be the case, but as I've said, there's nothing to gain by taking the risk. Low maximum capacity, poor access, possibly increased costs in terms of infrastructure, shuttle busses, helicopters etc.
If it was Birkdale, Hoylake, RSG he owned etc. then clearly more of a decision to make.
And I'm sure the R&A did not enjoy being the firing line when the issue of woman members was raised at every press conference for years. They absolutely don't want that issue again with Trump, as it would be raised at every press conference. Players would be asked about it as well, and some may feel pressured to boycott.
Ultimately it's just a golf course. It will almost certainly outlive Trump and may well change and evolve in the future to become more suitable for an Open again. Remember Portrush built 2 new holes to stage the 2019 Open.
sunshine
Well-known member
Yes Martin Slumbers said: "It's the primary problem for Turnberry trying to get the infrastructure sorted. We are working with the government and tourist board to see what can be done but that's a long-term point."
