Menu
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Help Support The Rugby Forum :
Forums
Other Stuff
All Other Sports
British Open
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Hazey" data-source="post: 130392"><p>No-one is 'masturbating over him suddenly catching up', don't exaggerate. The BBC commentators don't choose the feed they receive, they commentate on the pictures - he is the best, and the most famous player in the World, and if he has any chance at all then he is obviously going to get some coverage isn't he?? It would be completely stupid any other way. Even when he is 6 shots behind, he can still pull of minor miracles such as the chip out of the rough, over the bunker, to within 3 inches on the 16th - those things are worth watching.</p><p></p><p>I think you are confusing what you regard as a 'fixation' on a certain 'favourite' of the commentators with genuine coverage of a major contender, and someone who is UNDENIABLY the most dominant person in his sport for the best part of 2 decades.</p><p></p><p>Secondly, your point about the limelight being on Woods doesn't allow any other US players to come through is completely wrong. There are a number of other US players, Mickelson, Furyk, DiMarco, Weekly, Zach Johnson, to name just a few off the top of my head, who receive a large amount of interest and many which have come through during the 'Woods era' (a prime example being Johnson). Aside from that, golf has had a MAJOR cash and publicity injection not only in the US but all around the world since Wood's emergence, not only because it had received greater television coverage (i.e. not only the Majors) but because (and similar to the Lewis Hamilton situation now) Woods is black.</p><p></p><p>Wood's dominance has been so complete that in a recent report filed (and then published in The Times, if anyone saw it) to the PGA, Tiger Woods was found to be the single most important thing, person or organisation in golf, ahead of the President of the PGA, the R&A and the committee that runs and organisers all of the majors. I do understand how you find it strange that Woods receives so much coverage when he isn't only one or two shots off the lead, but that is how important he is to (the public perception at least) of golf, and the impact he has had.</p><p></p><p>Edit: A quote from Peter Alliss, a man who really has seen ALL of the greats play over many years; 'the 69 from Tiger Woods... He really battled, showed us what he was made of, but a lesser man would have been 80-odd.' I think that just demonstrates how highly his skill is revered.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Hazey, post: 130392"] No-one is 'masturbating over him suddenly catching up', don't exaggerate. The BBC commentators don't choose the feed they receive, they commentate on the pictures - he is the best, and the most famous player in the World, and if he has any chance at all then he is obviously going to get some coverage isn't he?? It would be completely stupid any other way. Even when he is 6 shots behind, he can still pull of minor miracles such as the chip out of the rough, over the bunker, to within 3 inches on the 16th - those things are worth watching. I think you are confusing what you regard as a 'fixation' on a certain 'favourite' of the commentators with genuine coverage of a major contender, and someone who is UNDENIABLY the most dominant person in his sport for the best part of 2 decades. Secondly, your point about the limelight being on Woods doesn't allow any other US players to come through is completely wrong. There are a number of other US players, Mickelson, Furyk, DiMarco, Weekly, Zach Johnson, to name just a few off the top of my head, who receive a large amount of interest and many which have come through during the 'Woods era' (a prime example being Johnson). Aside from that, golf has had a MAJOR cash and publicity injection not only in the US but all around the world since Wood's emergence, not only because it had received greater television coverage (i.e. not only the Majors) but because (and similar to the Lewis Hamilton situation now) Woods is black. Wood's dominance has been so complete that in a recent report filed (and then published in The Times, if anyone saw it) to the PGA, Tiger Woods was found to be the single most important thing, person or organisation in golf, ahead of the President of the PGA, the R&A and the committee that runs and organisers all of the majors. I do understand how you find it strange that Woods receives so much coverage when he isn't only one or two shots off the lead, but that is how important he is to (the public perception at least) of golf, and the impact he has had. Edit: A quote from Peter Alliss, a man who really has seen ALL of the greats play over many years; 'the 69 from Tiger Woods... He really battled, showed us what he was made of, but a lesser man would have been 80-odd.' I think that just demonstrates how highly his skill is revered. [/QUOTE]
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Other Stuff
All Other Sports
British Open
Top