The Round Table: Final thoughts on the Presidents Cup
Each week, we ask our panel of writers, PGA members and golf industry experts to weigh in with their views on the hot topics of the day.
Team USA mounted a brilliant comeback in singles play on Sunday to defeat the Internationals 17-13 at the Presidents Cup. What are your thoughts on the outcome and what turned the tide for the Americans?
Jim Deeks, Fairways Magazine (@jimdeeks): I was so disappointed that the Internationals couldn’t hang in and claim even a very close victory. But the Americans’ putting, more than anything, won the day for them. I’ve never seen so many 8–20-foot putts go in the hole, almost all of them by the Americans. That, plus the loud, obnoxious, and totally unsportsmanlike conduct of the fans sealed the deal for the U.S. side. But at least this event indicated that the gap is closing between the Americans and Internationals.
Craig Loughry, Golf Ontario (@craigloughry): The Internationals had momentum early (they needed it), but depth ultimately won out in my opinion. The U.S. team entered Sunday with more proven closers and, once they started grabbing early points in singles, well that was it, everyone could feel it. What impressed me most was their resilience, the US never looked rattled despite trailing. The Internationals played inspired golf all week, but singles match play you need stars to deliver, and Team USA’s top players did exactly that on Sunday.
Michael Schurman, Master Professional / Hall of Fame Member, PGA f Canada: First, let me wipe the ‘egg’ off my face. The matches were exciting and a great show. The International Team ran out of gas or the hole got smaller on the back nine on Sunday. None of them made a significant putt. The match turned when Cantlay made a 50 ft putt around #14 or 15.
Hal Quinn, Freelance Writer, Vancouver: The outcome was, as always but once, expected. The tide turned when they decided to go through with the charade again. There were funny moments thanks to Captain America as when he credited the Cheater in Chief for the win. That was delicious.
Peter Mumford, Fairways Magazine: On Sunday it seemed that Americans were pouring in long putts with regularity and the good guys weren’t. Hard to explain the ineptness exhibited by Team USA in foursomes play, but fortunately for them, they can recover in singles.
It was reported that American captain Brandt Snedeker was upset with himself for making bad decisions, although his team eventually prevailed. In your opinion did either captain make crucial errors?
Deeks: That’s very noble of Snedeker, but I have no idea what he’s referring to. But in the end, it’s the players who put/putt the ball into the hole, so the Captain can’t really blame himself for a loss, or a victory, in my view. Keep your head high, Brandt.
Loughry: Captains always second-guess themselves after the fact, that inevitably comes with the job. Snedeker’s comments show accountability, which players probably appreciate. Looking back, both sides could point to pairings they might have handled differently, but I’m not sure there was one glaring mistake that decided the Presidents Cup. The Americans won because their players performed when it mattered most. The Internationals put themselves in position to win, in general the result comes down to who played better (or poorly) and not so much to captaincy.
Schurman: No, both did what they needed to do. Snedeker ‘front’ loaded his team which he should have done and Ogilvey ‘back’ loaded his. The Americans performed and the International guys didn’t. It sure helped that Koivun played great! The International Star was Nick Taylor.
Quinn: Ogilvy did what he could given the hand he was dealt. Captain America just had to pick out the shirts. He didn’t do a great job at that. And we were led to believe, repeatedly, that unlike the rest of us, he holds himself to an incredibly high standard.
Mumford: Benching the #1 player in the world looked suspect at the time but otherwise I don’t know of anything either captain could have or should have done differently. They both employed the accepted strategy on Sunday. Snedeker’s team just outplayed Ogilvy’s.
One of the defining moments of the competition was when a fan yelled during Nico Echavarria’s backswing on the 14th tee on Sunday causing him to slice his drive. His opponent, Scottie Scheffler, was incensed and let the offender know his displeasure. In the end, Scheffler conceded a 32-foot putt for par to Echavarria which halved the hole. Scheffler ultimately won his match, but the concession could have backfired. Such displays of sportsmanship are rare. Can you think of another that was as significant?
Deeks: That fan, and the other cave-dweller who shouted, “GO IN THE WATER!!” on two occasions that I heard (after an International player had struck his ball) should have been immediately ejected from the grounds, if not pummeled to death by fellow spectators. Scheffler’s gesture was kind, fair, and demonstrative, although it’s kinda too bad that the rules don’t award an automatic loss of hole to the player whose spectator transgressed good sportsmanship and mature behaviour. You’d think the American fans might have learned something from the last two Ryder Cups, and modified their behaviour for this competition, but clearly not. Unfortunately, this is the Trump Era, when all sense of respect and fair play has gone out the window. But in answer to your question, I think of Nicklaus conceding a two-footer to Tony Jacklin to tie his match in the ’69 Ryder Cup, and Captains Nicklaus and Player agreeing to a draw in the 2003 Presidents Cup. The spirit of the game.
Loughry: Scheffler’s concession was a great example of protecting the integrity of competition. It sort of reminded me of Jack Nicklaus conceding Tony Jacklin’s famous two-foot putt at the 1969 Ryder Cup. Nicklaus knew the gesture could affect the outcome, but he chose sportsmanship over gamesmanship. Those moments endure because they reflect golf’s unique character and tradition (which has been lacking in some fashion of late). Scheffler’s decision may not have carried quite the same historical weight, but it sent the same message: fairness matters, even when a trophy is on the line. I really loved seeing this.
Schurman: Easy question; the best was Nicklaus giving Jacklin his short putt in the Ryder Cup called The Concession. It didn’t show on TV, but it looked like Scottie approached the idiot. Scottie’s a pretty big guy. I don’t think I’d want him coming after me. He did the right thing even though I wonder what he’d have done if he didn’t have such a big lead. Organizers must put Security people in the stands, removing these idiots physically might stop it. Or maybe the players have to take charge and do what Scottie did. Simply concede holes when fans disrupt play. It wouldn’t take very long to stop if the idiot’s team lost the event because of them.
Quinn: As the real cup competition, the Ryder, has already shown America is not civilized enough to host any players not wearing red, white, and blue. It doesn’t help to have Drumpf exciting the mouth breathers, but just as there should be an IQ test for voters down there, one should be conducted at the Cup spectator gates. It was Scottie’s best move of the week.
Mumford: Scheffler’s grand gesture looked all the more magnanimous in light of Wyndham Clark’s refusal to concede a slam-dunk two putt to Tom Kim when Clark was clearly out of the hole. On a broader scale, the Nicklaus concession seems to be top of the list, but a couple of displays of sportsmanship are worth mentioning. Nicklaus walking with his arm around Tom Watson after their Duel in the Sun, even though Jack had lost the Open Championship. And at the end of the 1999 Ryder Cup at Brookline, Payne Stewart conceded the final putt and the match to Colin Montgomerie since the US had already clinched the Cup, and the fans were becoming hostile to Monty.
