Did anyone catch Johnny Miller's comments on-air yesterday at the Northern Trust Open regarding the wedge controversy?
I can't find any video to post, but in essence he suggested that Karsten Solheim should write a letter to the PGA and close the loophole for the use of Eye 2 wedges to level the field for the sake of the game.
Johnny's rationale was that there was no commercial interest in this for Ping and therefore they should do the right thing and put this controversy to rest.
My initial reaction is that Johnny must have spent to much time on the beach in the last few months away from the broadcast booth. How is it Ping's responsibility to fix a controversy caused by an USGA ruling that knew in advance that such a loophole existed?
Moreover, a loophole caused by a long and acrimonious dispute with the manufacturer that eventually resulted (right, wrong or indifferent) in the grandfathering of these wedges?
If anything, Ping has been inadvertently dragged into a controversy not of its own making and has no responsbility, corporate or otherwise to bail out the USGA by sending a letter of waiver.
From: . (CAOTUBO) [#4] 7 Feb 11:11 To: halnorth [#1] 7 Feb 17:14
Lets start with the USGA and PGA Tour write a check to Ping to pay all costs associated with the lawsuit + the compounded interest over 17-20 years along with an apology, and I'm sure Solheim would be obliged to agree. Though the amount might bankrupt either/both.
From: Tincup (ROYMCAVOY) [#5] 7 Feb 11:14 To: halnorth [#1] 7 Feb 17:14
I agree with Johnny. Ping has not made that club for a long time, they don't see them and geez it has been 20 years. Close the loophole, plain and simple.
From: Tincup (ROYMCAVOY) [#7] 7 Feb 11:32 To: dlwarren [#6] 7 Feb 11:35
Funny how people when they agree with Johnny he "knows what he is talking about" (ex. comments about Tiger), but when you disagree he is "an idiot" LOL
Golf rules are simply dumb, outdated, and in a way pointless as at least 95% of the people who play golf do not bother with them.
Let the theater continue, and let everyone have an opinion about what is "the spirit of the rules". If you cannot write a coherent set of rules for a simple game, then you deserve these situations. And it is not one bit Ping's responsibility to sort out rules issues for everyone. That is what the governing bodies are there for.
From: 1-putt (PRESSELFAN) [#12] 7 Feb 11:40 To: halnorth [#1] 7 Feb 17:14
quote:
there was no commercial interest in this for Ping
First of all, I agree with everything you wrote except this.
Every time "Ping" is mentioned, it is a free advertisement.
Plus, it gives the impression that Ping made such an effective club that the USGA wanted it banned, but couldn't.
This aura spreads over the entire product line, casting Ping in a favorable light, good engineering, expertise, etc.
No way they should settle because the rule is arbitrary and bad for golf in general, as well as for TV golf.
Analogy with baseball: a no-hitter is a wonderful exhibition of skill, but it would be the most boring baseball game to watch. People want to see the long ball, and scoring. Same with golf.
From: Driveforshow (OUIMET67) [#13] 7 Feb 11:52 To: 1-putt (PRESSELFAN) [#12] 7 Feb 12:51
"a no-hitter is a wonderful exhibition of skill, but it would be the most boring baseball game to watch."
First of all, I agree with everything you wrote except this.
To a real baseball fan, watching (and experiencing) a no-hitter is one of the biggest thrills, simply because it is so rare, and requires both skill and usually a bit of good fortune. Who among us who saw it can ever forget Sandy Koufax's no-hitter in the World Series?