Tom’s rough treatment as Lefty chips in
What goes on tour stays on tour, the unwritten law in all sport. Unless you’re Phil Mickelson.
Lefty has been copping it from colleagues, media and fans after what many saw as a brutal hatchet job on his Ryder Cup captain, the great Tom Watson. At the press conference following Europe’s demolition of the US challenge, Mickelson effectively threw Watson under the bus by comparing him negatively with winning 2008 captain Paul Azinger’s game plan and inclusiveness. Watson, by implication, had neither the plan nor the player support, depicted as a stubborn individualist.
Golf, of all sports, has the greatest emphasis on fair play, discipline and respect for the game’s greats. It is the only sport where players call penalties on themselves. Mickelson has since been criticised by many famous golfers; most believe he should have kept his mouth shut and raised the issues in private.
Really? Mickelson may not have the finest judgement — last year, he became the Tea Party’s darling when he complained that, after earning US$48 million in prize money, federal and state taxes had increased and may cause him to leave his native California for a lesser tax regime in Florida. Many recoiled; nearly US$50m and he’s worried about taxes? He was left out of Watson’s playing team at a key point during the Cup, even though he was a senior player; he felt his advice had gone unheeded. Most interpreted his remarks as revenge.
That was amplified by the dynamics of the press conference. Mickelson sat furthest right from Watson — not so much a right-hand man, more a right arm’s-length man. When Mickelson made his pointed remarks, Watson sat motionless, a tight smile playing on his lips, his eyes glinting cold.
Mickelson’s team-mates said nothing; some were obviously embarrassed and others upset with Mickelson but, tellingly, no one said anything. No one spoke in defence of Watson. In its own way, that was as sharp a knife between the ribs as anything Mickelson said.
Phil Mickelson dumps on Tom Watson.
Why do we bother having press conferences if all we receive is cliches? As Somerset Maugham once said: “She plunged into a sea of platitudes and, with the powerful breast stroke of a channel swimmer, made her confident way towards the white cliffs of the entirely obvious.”
That benefits no one except PC sportspeople. Fans, sponsors and media play a huge role making an event like the Ryder Cup what it is and the beast needs feeding, or it can descend into the pit of lethargy.
How do we know Mickelson hadn’t already tried to right the ship in private? He may have tried and failed. He was clearly chunked off that he and playing partner Keegan Bradley were dropped at the business end of the Cup; they have a fine record together. Watson dismissed Mickelson’s criticism, saying players had to be in shape — a dig at Lefty’s waistline.
Sometimes a jolt is required for real change. The soothing balm of a private conversation often only reinforces the status quo. The selection of Watson (only five men have won more majors; he is a fivetime Ryder Cup winner) was designed to bring the team together under an icon. But modern team management demands more than a big name and gentle hand on the tiller. Europe captain Paul McGinley, nowhere near the golfing royalty Watson is, was called wonderful and meticulous by Rory McIlroy; Sergio Garcia (in six Ryder Cup teams for Europe) said: “Paul thought of everything this week. He has been so methodical. Every single aspect he needed to touch on, he did.”
Watson made mistakes. He selected out-of-form Webb Simpson to make the tournament’s first drive; the unnerved player duffed his drive and didn’t play again until late in the piece. Watson rested rookies Patrick Reed and Jordan Spieth after a big win. He did the same with inform Bubba Watson, asking Jimmy Walker and Rickie Fowler to do the job when they were recovering from a dramatic match against McIlroy and Ian Poulter. They lost heavily.
Great players do not always make great coaches or managers. And what’s worse — public airing of dirty linen or unwillingness to face facts?