The R&A

[Doon frae Troon]

Why does this 'gentlemans' club have so much influence on golf.

Prestwick, HEGC and Mussleburgh had much more influence on the amateur game in the early days so how come the R&A are handling the bucket loads of cash that The Open now generates.

Logic states that the Euroupean Tour should run The Open and that amateur golf should be run by that nations national body.

 

[BTatHome]

I'm sure logic is correct if everything was just reallocated now, but the R&A are the ones that have pushed and pulled all these years. Hardly seems fair that someone comes along and reaps all the benefits now.

 

[duncan mackie]

because Prestwick wouldn't pay out for a 'new belt'

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Stingy Westcoasters.
As there was only about 20 caddy/professionals playing I don't blame them.

 

[Foxholer]

Why does this 'gentlemans' club have so much influence on golf.

Prestwick, HEGC and Mussleburgh had much more influence on the amateur game in the early days so how come the R&A are handling the bucket loads of cash that The Open now generates.

Logic states that the Euroupean Tour should run The Open and that amateur golf should be run by that nations national body.

Can't agree with your 'logic' either.
As the European Tour has managed to 'lose' a number of British events (British Masters, English Open) I'm happy that 'The Open' is actually in rather 'safer' hands. I think The Masters would lose its excitement if run by the USGA.

HCEG, which nearly folded once, has always been a small private club, and Musselburgh is really only a course that 4 or more clubs, including HCEG, used to/still do play at (as happens at St Andrews and quite a few other Scottish courses.

 

[pogle]

Why does this 'gentlemans' club have so much influence on golf.

Prestwick, HEGC and Mussleburgh had much more influence on the amateur game in the early days so how come the R&A are handling the bucket loads of cash that The Open now generates.

Logic states that the Euroupean Tour should run The Open and that amateur golf should be run by that nations national body.

The Open Championship has existed for over 100 years longer than the European Tour. The US Open is run by the USGA, not by the US PGA tour.

What is the logic in the European Tour running the Open?

 

[chrisd]

My only complaint having been to St Georges the last two times is that the tented village, the second time, was all "open" stuff and no manufacturers, so that we didn't get to see any equipment etc and the food was (expensive) total pants. The R & A do run a good competition though

 

[Doon frae Troon]

The Open Championship has existed for over 100 years longer than the European Tour. The US Open is run by the USGA, not by the US PGA tour.

What is the logic in the European Tour running the Open?

Seems more logical to me for the EPGA to run a tournament for the worlds top professionals than a small private male only Scottish amateur golf club.

 

[DCB]

Seems more logical to me for the EPGA to run a tournament for the worlds top professionals than a small private male only Scottish amateur golf club.

Not bad that a wee "private male only Scottish amateur golf club" can do all this,

"Although The Open is the obvious public focal point each year of The R&A's involvement with championship golf, in reality it is only one of 11 championships and international matches which come under its administrative umbrella. These events include the Junior Open Championship, the Boys Championship, seniors championships and the Walker Cup."

You really need to look back at what happened when golf was in it's infancy to get a full flavour of how it developed the way it did. It's certainly worth reading into.

 

[MashieNiblick]

I think the emergence and evolution of all the old sports governing bodies (All England Lawn Tennis Club, Football Association, Rugby Football Union, MCC etc) seems strange now in these highly commercial, regulated and organised times but in their day they were the ones who actually got on and did it, mostly a bunch of amateur enthusiasts doing it in their spare time. Same with the R&A.

Sometimes this means that these bodies can seem to have outdated structures and priorities, and may no longer be the right people to run what have become complex commercial operations rather than Victorian pastimes.

However the R&A seem to be doing a good job. They ran the Open for almost 100 years before it was the huge success it is now, and have moved with the times to run it successfully as a global event. Why should it now be handed over to some other organisation? Is there any suggestion that they are making a bad job of it?.

Just had a quick look on the R&A site and it says that in 2004 the actual Golf Club side was separated from the running of the Open, Rules etc.

 

[MashieNiblick]

Seems more logical to me for the EPGA to run a tournament for the worlds top professionals than a small private male only Scottish amateur golf club.

But the point is that The Open is just that. Open to everyone. It isn't an event for professionals only.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

I think The Open being 'the huge success it is now' is more down to Arnold Palmer than The R&A

 

[MashieNiblick]

I think The Open being 'the huge success it is now' is more down to Arnold Palmer than The R&A

Yep there's some truth in that no doubt, but there must be a reason why he came in the first place and didn't say, "what a waste of time that was, I'm not going back there again" after his first visit. You can't really give no credit to the people running it.

 

[Doon frae Troon]

He came back because first time round he got dusted by a little known Australian called Kel Neagle.
There is little to credit the R&A in their running of the event up to 1962, it was more or less a non event.

 

[sweatysock41]

So you are saying that there is some credit for the last 50 years. If so then there has been some major improvement so why drag up ancient history, it's something the current setup had nothing to do with?

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Not really knocking the R&A who have done a fairly decent job in the last 30 years.
More to do with the system and how they got to be where they are.
Not exactly democratic. There are many fine people in British golf who have done a lot more than most of the privilaged R&A comittee members. They don't get the free tickets and games at Augusta etc.

 

[USER1999]

I think The Open being 'the huge success it is now' is more down to Arnold Palmer than The R&A

I thought it was more down to Tigers caddy?

 

[MashieNiblick]

There is little to credit the R&A in their running of the event up to 1962, it was more or less a non event.

That's a tad harsh. I've seen old footage of the Open in the thirties and there are large crowds of people there. Henry Cotton winning in 1934 after US domination was a top sports story.

http://www.theopen.com/en/History/PreviousOpens.aspx?venue=Royal+Lytham+%26+St+Annes&currentyear=2001&view=year&eventid=1934000

Jones, Hagen, Sarazen all came over to play and win when that represented a huge cmmitment of their time.

http://www.theopen.com/en/History/PreviousOpens.aspx?eventid=1927000&view=

Not bad crowds and amaziing to see Jones being carried on their shoulders.

Yes it did lose some lustre in the years between WW2 and the arrival of Palmer but that had a lot to do with the prevailing social and economic situation in Britain in the post war years rather than the R&A.

By the way Doon it's great to have a chance to debate a bit of golf history. Not that common a topic. :thup:

 

[Doon frae Troon]

Just looked up the refs and Neagle won in 1960 at St Andrews [not 62] Sorry about that. I should know because 'I woz there'.
Thompson and Locke monopolised the Open for many years at a time when the Americans decided to stay at home. [Pre Palmer] Great players like Snead and Hogan would win once so they had that notch on their belt and not return. Mind you in those days it was a three week trip with Atlantic boat crossings.
On that basis you could say that trans Atlantic flight probably did more for The Open than The R&A!!

Pre television golf crowds were huge. In my time there would be 500 spectators watching the final of the County Cup. Exhibition matches would pull in over 3000 spectators.

 

[Foxholer]

I think the emergence and evolution of all the old sports governing bodies (All England Lawn Tennis Club, Football Association, Rugby Football Union, MCC etc) seems strange now in these highly commercial, regulated and organised times but in their day they were the ones who actually got on and did it, mostly a bunch of amateur enthusiasts doing it in their spare time. Same with the R&A.

The All English Tennis Club actually runs 1 tournament a year, but it does it rather well - rather like R&A/The Open.

European Tour is a body associated (set out by) the PGA (only). As The Open really is open to all, including members of other Tours and amateurs, there is absolutely no logic to changing the The Open is run. The PGA/European Tour runs its major - The PGA , at Wentworth. The Masters is set up virtually the same as The Open - except that it's played at a single venue. The US Open is run by USGA (not the USPGA). The USPGA runs its own major tournament. So quite a good 'balance' of setups for the majors.

Absolutely no need/logic to change!