One of the keys is getting the team to quit worrying on how Tiger Woods performs. He only accounts for 5 of the 32 points. Whether it is a Tiger point or not, every point is just as valuable.
I also believe it is important for the guys to just relax and have fun...not get too uptight about the whole thing. They need a captain who brings the proper perspective to the proceedings. Tom Lehman ain't the guy.
Although I too have my doubts about Lehman, he can't be any worse of a captain than Hal Sutton or Curtis Strange. I do think that good strategy helps, and both Sutton and Strange bombed big-time, especially with the pairings.
I would also agree with droogy about relaxing and trying to have fun. But then again, it's kinda hard to do when Saturday afternoon comes and you're already needing a miracle to even have a chance Sunday.
Ultimately, it does come down to players stepping up. Regardless of who they're playing with, or against.
But front loading the top 2 players in the world in a make-or-break afternoon match that carried every ounce of momentum for team USA, just because (and I quote:) "Tiger needed it. Phil needed it. The world needed it." was nothing less than a bonafide flop that ended up taking a nice, messy doo doo in Hal's lap.
The most important credential a captain can have is inspiration. The second most important thing is common sense. I haven't seen a whole lot of that the last couple of Ryder's. Maybe Lehman will surprise me. I hope so.
We have historically had issues with team events in this tournament. I don't lay all of the blame on the captain and his pairings, because much of the time the captain defers to the players and who they would like to be paired with. But I have a hard time believing that Phil and Tiger genuinely wanted to play together that day. Maybe I'm wrong, but that's my gut feeling.
And I don't buy it that the world "needed" it. I think the world wanted to see a competitive Ryder Cup event that was decided on Sunday, not Saturday. ;)
The golfing public wanted to see Tiger and Phil play together - in the hopes of seeing some scintillating golf. Theoretically those two together would have been raining birdies in all day long. No one could have expected them to be so bad together.
If Tiger and Phil had played to their potential Sutton looks like a genius... the only upside is that Lehman doesn't face a similar temptation this time around.
Clearly the big lesson is that both sides need to find pairings that work together well. For example, a Mickelson/Couples pair looks like a winner (assuming they both make the team).
To be honest, going back to start of this thread, although the USA clearly want Tiger in the team, it might not be the worst thing in the world if he didn't come, for whatever reason.
Pairing Tiger and Phil together was the best thing Europe could have been given. If they won, it was only one point and who expected anything different? If they lost , it was a hole below waterline and completly moved the momentum behind Europe. The whole world wants to see a lot of things, but will be disappointed. The time ,if any, to play Tiger and Phil together was on the second day after one side had establihsed a lead , either to finish off Europe or start a fightback.
The dumb hat was the cherry on the top.
Lehman was interviewed in the Sunday Times this weekend and made a lot of sense. He clearly will not take any prima donna garbage but will emphasis the team aspect to 'non team' players.
The big advantage of the Europeans is that they are used to playing away from home for most of their golf ,and spend a significant amount of time with one another 'on the road'. They all play a minimum of 75 % of their tournament golf outside their own country.
They wouldn't have that "big advantage" if they didn't play on the PGA Tour so much!
Wrong , as usual. Europe is not a country ,it is a continent. So when Darren Clarke and Jose Maria Olazabal play in the French Open ,they are visiting a foriegn country that speaks a different language. They will stay in a hotel and eat out at a restaurant together. The most events held in one country is the UK which has about 15 % of the tournaments.
Do they teach geography in USA ,if so, do they look at the rest of the planet?
Wrong , as usual. Europe is not a country ,it is a continent. So when Darren Clarke and Jose Maria Olazabal play in the French Open ,they are visiting a foriegn country that speaks a different language. They will stay in a hotel and eat out at a restaurant together. The most events held in one country is the UK which has about 15 % of the tournaments.
Do they teach geography in USA ,if so, do they look at the rest of the planet?
How's your geographical knowledge? When someone lives in Florida and plays a tourney in California or Hawaii, there are several time zone changes (brings jet lag into the equation) as well as the hotel/restaurant scenario. Some even say there is a language difference between different regions! Traveling golfers in the US have it no easier or harder than the Euro players. They all have to leave home, board planes or other transportation, live out of a suitcase, eat at restaurants, etc.
When you consider the distances the US tour covers during a season and compare that with what the European tour covers, I believe you'll find the US tour is longer. But the only golfers with any room to bemoan the distances they must travel are those from places like Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. No matter which tour they play, they are in for some heavy air miles!
The big advantage of the Europeans is that they are used to playing away from home for most of their golf ,and spend a significant amount of time with one another 'on the road'. They all play a minimum of 75 % of their tournament golf outside their own country.
All Europeans ,including those who do not travel to USA ,play 75% of their tour in foriegn countries. When Darren Clarke plays in the Irish Open ,he is visiting a foriegn country, as does Padraig when he plays in the Scottish Open.
Quote:
When you consider the distances the US tour covers during a season and compare that with what the European tour covers, I believe you'll find the US tour is longer.
It takes a lot of trips from Florida to Hawaii to cover London to Australia,South Africa,China,Singapore,Thailand,New Zealand . Check the first quarter of the European Tour,get a globe and think again.
How's your geographical knowledge? When someone lives in Florida and plays a tourney in California or Hawaii, there are several time zone changes (brings jet lag into the equation) as well as the hotel/restaurant scenario. Some even say there is a language difference between different regions! Traveling golfers in the US have it no easier or harder than the Euro players. They all have to leave home, board planes or other transportation, live out of a suitcase, eat at restaurants, etc.
When you consider the distances the US tour covers during a season and compare that with what the European tour covers, I believe you'll find the US tour is longer. But the only golfers with any room to bemoan the distances they must travel are those from places like Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. No matter which tour they play, they are in for some heavy air miles!
The Eueopean tour will travel to something like 26 countries this year. Whereas the PGA Tour goes to just 2. The Europeans have it much harder as every week it's different country, language and culture. Moreover, lots of the pGA Tour events are played within close proximity of each other (West coast and Florida swings)
It takes a lot of trips from Florida to Hawaii to cover London to Australia,South Africa,China,Singapore,Thailand,New Zealand . Check the first quarter of the European Tour,get a globe and think again.
That whole South Pacific swing they do (I actually didn't know that they went down there until this year), trumps the traveling of most US Pros.
on the first couple of days, the other plays don't need to worry about what Tiger does. They only need to be focused on their matches. It may be batter not to lead off with Tiger, so that the U.S. could be in more of a nothing to win situation.
April 23rd, 2006, 08:28 PM
Linear Mode
Similar Threads
