Have you ever wondered why Mark O’Meara and David Duval have never captained the US Ryder Cup team?
Both would have the right credentials, O’Meara is a two-time major champion, Duval was an Open winner in 2001 and a dominant world number one. Both are articulate and intelligent former team members and potentially excellent leaders.
However, neither of them took a second look. It’s surely no coincidence that in 1999 – along with Tiger Woods – they suggested that golfers should be paid to play in the Ryder Cup.
This thorny issue has resurfaced and is rumbling with renewed vigor, thanks to “hat-gate”; Patrick Cantlay’s apparent refusal to wear a team cap playing for the United States at the Ryder Cup in Italy last month.
It was initially reported by Sky Sports’ Jamie Weir as a protest by Cantlay over Ryder Cup players not being paid.
It is worth noting that following the 1999 protests, members of the American team were given $200,000 (£164,000) to donate to charities of their choice. And 20% of Ryder Cup media rights go to the PGA Tour and its pension fund – for the benefit of their players.
But there is no cost to participate from your country or continent, depending on which side of the Atlantic you represent.
Responding to Weir’s allegations, which included a rift in the U.S. team room, Cantlay told Marco Simone they were “the furthest thing from the truth.”
But that position is now being called into question by one of American golf’s most experienced writers.
Michael Bamberger of the Fire Pit Collective says numerous sources claim that when asked why he wasn’t wearing a cap on the first tee on opening day, Cantlay responded, “I’ll wear a hat when I will be paid to be there like him. »
Cantlay reportedly looked toward Julius Mason, media director of the PGA of America, who was standing nearby.
The 31-year-old, whose career earnings exceed $60 million, could hardly have predicted how the next few days would unfold as Europe regained the trophy by beating his American team 16½-11½.
After all, Cantlay is by no means the first player to show up to a Ryder Cup without a hat. The imperative to wear the usual sponsors’ headgear is absent and several stars on both sides have historically taken advantage of this to enhance facial tan lines.
So, was it a protest or not? If you’re making a statement, isn’t it better to be explicit? Or is it wiser to remain shy, especially on an issue as controversial as this?
The idea that these golfers want to get paid is anathema to so many fans who revel in the “purity” of the Ryder Cup.
As European captain Luke Donald said: “The Ryder Cup represents real sport. It’s the purest form of competition we have, and I think that’s why the fans love it . It’s purely sport. That’s what makes it so special.”
This seems particularly poignant at a time when the golf agenda is so dominated by monetary concerns. This is an era where $20 million tournaments are becoming the norm and standard Ryder Cup players enjoy fantastic levels of wealth.
The future of gaming is wrapped up in negotiations worth billions of dollars. The PGA Tour and DP World Tour are trying to turn a framework agreement with Saudi Arabia’s Public Investment Fund into a lucrative, long-term deal by the end of the year.
The LIV Separatist Tour continues to pay out $4 million to the winners of its 48-player tournaments at each of their stops. Players who signed up and received exorbitant membership fees have, in many circles, been labeled as greedy mercenaries.
However, they would say that as independent contractors, they simply make a living as best they can – just like the rest of us do. And major tours have no problem with the source of the money, despite Saudi Arabia’s much-criticized human rights record.
None of this matters. All that matters is the money. And counting all that at the top of men’s professional golf would take a very, very long time. It’s packed with stuff and seems to be almost the only thing that interests everyone in sports.
So yes, for one week every two years, it’s refreshing to see these star players compete for nothing other than sporting glory. This elevates the Ryder Cup to the ranks of the greatest sporting occasions.
And, in turn, the Ryder Cup becomes a vast cash cow – one that funds Europe’s DP World Tour and the PGA of America, the body that represents professional clubs in the United States.
We arrived early on Sunday morning at Marco Simone because my BBC producer wanted to buy a souvenir in the huge shop that greeted each spectator upon arrival. The queue was so long that we abandoned the project.
As thousands of credit cards tapped the store’s terminals, hundreds of millions of dollars flowed in from broadcast rights and ticket holders snatched up grandstand seats that cost more than a pretty penny.
We were among the thousands paid to be there; fulfill roles that help us earn a living.
But players, many of whom could earn sponsorship bonuses to qualify to play in the event, receive no pay stubs from the DP World Tour or the PGA of America.
Does this seem correct to you? The teams currently competing in the Rugby and Cricket World Cups are all paid and we don’t seem to mind. It’s professional sport.
Why should the Ryder Cup be any different? This seems like a reasonable argument.
But if a multi-millionaire player asks that question – either implicitly as Cantlay seems to have done, or explicitly as O’Meara and Duval did all those years ago – he provokes an eternal pile-on.
No one will forget the hat-tips Cantlay received in Italy, while the position of O’Meara and Duval is so clearly remembered that they are far from leading their countries in these biennial transatlantic jousts.
“To be honest, I don’t need to get paid to come here and play in front of people,” Masters champion and European talisman Jon Rahm said in Italy.
Some things are sacred.
For fans and the vast majority of golfers lucky enough to have played it, the Ryder Cup is one of those entities.
For what? Well, they would say it’s different. Gloriously different.