golfrewind.com

Greetings ..

Well, Well, Well - Isn't THIS Special !!

It turns out that Michael Campbell's restricted status is not as restricted as many may have first thought - including this author!

According to this 1-13-2006 GOLFWORLD News Article, Campbell does have the opportunity to become a Special Temporary Member in 2006, and thus be eligible for unlimited sponsor invitations. And he will also have the opportunity to join the PGA Tour as a bona fide full-time member in 2007.

Now to gain Special Temporary Membership in 2006, Campbell must earn at least as much money as the 150th player on the 2005 Official Money List, which was Thomas Levet, with $485,343. Campbell's off to a very good start in this regard, having earned $287,500 at the season-opening Mercedes Championships. The next PGA Tour stop for the Kiwi is the Accenture Match Play in late February, where the first immediate goal is to get as far as the quarterfinals. A finish that high is worth at least $240,000, and that would "seal the deal".

Maybe now he'll put his clubs to work......instead of his mouth.

He is too busy missing cuts. I think he will rank alongside Andy North in the US Open HOF.

Hey now! Andy won two US Opens and Campbell is only halfway home!

Aww, cmon, he's only missed 1 cut this year hasn't he? Cambo had a sensational year last year, especially considering the difficulties he's had with his game in recent years. It wasn't just the US Open, he did well at the other majors too, and won the world match play event, as well as leading most of the way in the Tiger Challenge. We're very proud of Cambo down here in Kiwi land, we haven't had a major winner since Bob Charles (Brithish Open) in 1960-something.

He grew up playing at Titahi Bay, just up the road from me. Man that course is a ******. A real goat track.

Greetings ...

To refresh your memories --

As a non-member in 2002, Michael Campbell earned well in excess of the 125th player on the Regular Members' Official Money List. He was therefore eligible to join the PGA Tour as a full regular member for 2003, and he did so.

Unfortunately, Campbell couldn't quite fit the minimum 15 official PGA Tour events into his schedule, so at the end of 2003 the PGA Tour imposed a five-year restriction penalty.

As an absolute pure non-member (as opposed to a Special Temporary, or a full-time member) , Campbell was restricted to 10 official events (IE, any event where the victory and the money is deemed official) per year from 2004 thru 2008.

For 2006, Campbell is playing these 10 "official" events - the four Grand Slam Majors, the Players Championship, the three official World Golf Championships plus two "Regular" PGA Tour Events -- the already-played Mercedes Championships, where he tied for 3rd and earned $287,500; and the upcoming Bay Hill Invitational.

To set the record straight, Campbell isn't complaining so much that the PGA Tour imposed the 10-event limitation on him in the first place. He's more upset that his US Open win doesn't grant him entry into two or three more events.

And Campbell has not asked for the Sun, Moon and the Stars. He's asked ONLY for the right to play at Jack Nicklaus' Memorial Tournament and the Barclays-Westchester Classic, both of which occur right before the 2006 US Open. That's All!

Let me add my 2 cents here --

(1) I take issue with the 10-event limitation because it includes events that are not under the PGA Tour's control - specificly the four Grand Slam Majors. If at the very least the PGA Tour had elected to leave the Majors out of the 10-event equation, Campbell would had have the two events he wanted plus, if he elected, two extra events. And no complaints whatsoever!

(2) Even with this restriction in effect, Campbell still has the opportunity to achieve Special Temporary Membership in 2006, which would allow him to add more events to his schedule. Furthermore, he can do in 2007 or beyond what overseas commitments have prevented him from doing in 2006 - join the PGA Tour full-time, using his 2005 US Open win for exempt status.

So, what good is the restriction if there are ways out of it ??

(3) Even if the restriction were not in effect, and Campbell had not elected to join the PGA Tour full-time for 2006, he would have started the year off just as he actually has - as an absolute pure non-member. The only difference being that he would have been eligible for at least five more PGA Tour events thru sponsor invitations. That's really just about all the "Restriction" has cost him.

(4) If Campbell played 2006 as a non-member with or without restriction, but decided not to join the PGA Tour full-time in 2007, then he'd start from scratch again!

He's still whining for the right to play in more events that he's entitled to.

Never, he too wants to spy for golf rewind!!

Frank o sport,

If you are intending to produce intelligent ,informed opinions, calmly stating accurate facts, you are in for a rough ride here. Leaguegolf will bombarde you with posts.

When did you emigrate to USA, and whereabouts in England are you from?

MrSooty,

I'm still sore about the Lions ,so don't expect any balanced view on any NZ golfers!

Two posts, and counting, to Frank-O-Sport's informative thread. Both of which are short, truthful, and to the point. Perhaps you should hide under your "chip" for protection, if you consider that a bombardment.


Frank-O-Sport,

I don't understand why Campbell feels he's entitled to play in more events just because he won the US Open. Why wasn't he complaining at the end of 2003 when he failed to meet his PGA Tour obligations and the 5 year restriction was first imposed? I'd be more apt to side with Campbell if his complaint hadn't occurred after the fact. I credit Campbell with his fine play in winning the US Open but this just sounds to me like he wants to cash in on his good fortune and should be allowed to do so simply because he won the US Open. He knew the rules, and the consequences for not complying with those rules, back in 2003. There's procedures in place to change the rules (and this particular situation could stand some looking at) but whining isn't one of them.

I have more sympathy with Els than Campbell, but having just won your first Major, it seems stupid that the USPGA start telling you you are not eligble to play in a tournament you want to play in. Who is being arrogant?USPGA or a Major winner who wants to play in a tournament?

I don't think it's being "arrogant" to uphold the rules. I'm not saying those rules shouldn't be changed, but Campbell isn't doing himself any favors by going about it this way.

I have to believe the PGA Tour Policy Board and the PGA members that are part of that board are, or will be, addressing this issue. As well they should.

If the rules are arrogant, then it is arrogant to uphold them.

Restrictive? Maybe. Arrogant, no.

If you restrict a Major winner from playing in your tournaments, you are being arrogant.

Any other tour in the world would welcome a MAjor winner , only USA get sniffy.