Golf at the Olympics

Chivito550

Justin Rose being casually interviewed by the swimming panel on BBC there. Really refreshing to see how much the Olympics means to him and how excited he is about the whole thing. Made sure he was there for the opening ceremony to soak in the whole experience and feel part of the greater GB team. Don't mind the naysayers on this thread.

Rikand

Rickie fowler snapchats the last couple of days showing around the venue have been cool enough too

Rikand

Kooch is right to think there should be a team aspect. There should have been.

markthespark77

is the golf on thursday morn.. any1 know times.

The Rape of Lucretia

Rikand wrote: »

Kooch is right to think there should be a team aspect. There should have been.

The could have gone for a golf triathlon even with individual, and per country medals for the best score in : real golf, pitch and putt, and crazy golf, to find the best overall golf nation. I would guess given that they did include Mickey Mouse Rugby, they did consider pitch and putt, and being the Olympics, probably Crazy Golf as well.

FixdePitchmark

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

The could have gone for a golf triathlon even with individual, and per country medals for the best score in : real golf, pitch and putt, and crazy golf, to find the best overall golf nation. I would guess given that they did include Mickey Mouse Rugby, they did consider pitch and putt, and being the Olympics, probably Crazy Golf as well.

Well at least golf is a world game

Rugby is a joke.

Birdie Num Num

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Well at least golf is a world game

Rugby is a joke.

Maybe as a pastime in a worldly sense. Rugby is pretty much a world sport but there are different tiers for National sides.

Seve OB

Jeysus lads. Rugby is far from a joke. And to call it Mickey Mouse! !!

Sevens is the best form of rugby to include IMO. It's fast, exciting and high scoring. Also no way could you have full games, far to much to squash in, sure the World Cup takes a good month. They can't play game after game at full tilt, but with sevens is no bother.

FixdePitchmark

Don't know Seve .

Last world cup wasn't a great advertisement for Rugby as a world game, where one half of the globe with less teams dominated.

Then to reduce it to 7s, a game we hardly take seriously. Even if it is entertainment when competitive.

Then to woman's 7s.

I watched the 7s the other night.

Was an absolute joke. USA versus Colombia.
I've watched sports and Olympics for all my life.

Golf shouldn't feel out of place when you see what is in this .

Golf as a world game is miles ahead of hockey
Female boxing
Judo
Rugby
Fencing
Dressage

Was nice to listen to Justin Rose last night , he gets it.
Padraig gets it.

Golf is a selfish game - but some golfers have a bit more to them.

Golfers are typically dull and self absorbed. This has shown that.

I look forward to it.
Fair play to boxers taking piss out of them.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Seve OB wrote: »

Jeysus lads. Rugby is far from a joke. And to call it Mickey Mouse! !!

Sevens is the best form of rugby to include IMO. It's fast, exciting and high scoring. Also no way could you have full games, far to much to squash in, sure the World Cup takes a good month. They can't play game after game at full tilt, but with sevens is no bother.

Sevens is mickey mouse.

It's a watered down version of the proper sport and it's boring as hell to watch.

The Rape of Lucretia

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Sevens is mickey mouse.

It's a watered down version of the proper sport and it's boring as hell to watch.

It is. Its the pitch and putt of rugby.
Pitch and putt would have suited the Olympics much better than golf: Mickey Mouse sport, clearly a sport that is inferior and a subset of the full game, played by almost no one, has no serious championship of its own with any renown, history, or viewer following. Rugby doesnt need the Olympics so, it sends its its training version of the game. Golf should have followed that good lead.

Birdie Num Num

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It is. Its the pitch and putt of rugby.
Pitch and putt would have suited the Olympics much better than golf: Mickey Mouse sport, clearly a sport that is inferior and a subset of the full game, played by almost no one, has no serious championship of its own with any renown, history, or viewer following. Rugby doesnt need the Olympics so, it sends its its training version of the game. Golf should have followed that good lead.

That's a fairly small minded view of Seven's rugby. It's a different game not an inferior version of a full game. It's sounds more like bitterness you are spouting rather than anything else. It's played by many nations, you may not have heard of the World Rugby Sevens Series but it is a serious Championship in it's own right and has been in existence since 1999. That's only 12 years on from the first Rugby World Cup in 1987.

FixdePitchmark

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It is. Its the pitch and putt of rugby.
Pitch and putt would have suited the Olympics much better than golf: Mickey Mouse sport, clearly a sport that is inferior and a subset of the full game, played by almost no one, has no serious championship of its own with any renown, history, or viewer following. Rugby doesnt need the Olympics so, it sends its its training version of the game. Golf should have followed that good lead.

I think you could actually use all above in the context of Rugby.

Rugby is a joke.

Sure look at the Irish scene - people went on as if Munster and Leinster was important a few years ago. You would struggle to fill any stadium in the country with them now.

Golf is a historical important and a world sport - all Rugby is a joke, and they go on as if it is actually important.

FixdePitchmark

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

I think you could actually use all above in the context of Rugby.

Rugby is a joke.

Sure look at the Irish scene - people went on as if Munster and Leinster was important a few years ago. You would struggle to fill any stadium in the country with them now.

Golf is a historical important and a world sport - all Rugby is a joke, and they go on as if it is actually important.

Dude step away you seem to have some bias to Rugby, there are loads of different sports in the olympics with different popularity and stature, all which differ from country to country and person to person. To call any sport a joke is doing it a massive disservice.

Unless its cricket I hate cricket (joke)

FixdePitchmark

Birdie Num Num wrote: »

That's a fairly small minded view of Seven's rugby. It's a different game not an inferior version of a full game. It's sounds more like bitterness you are spouting rather than anything else. It's played by many nations, you may not have heard of the World Rugby Sevens Series but it is a serious Championship in it's own right and has been in existence since 1999. That's only 12 years on from the first Rugby World Cup in 1987.

1999 - seriously.

We shouldn't be even putting sevens - or even Rugby in the same thread as golf.

Rugby is not a world sport.

Birdie Num Num

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

I think you could actually use all above in the context of Rugby.

Rugby is a joke.

Sure look at the Irish scene - people went on as if Munster and Leinster was important a few years ago. You would struggle to fill any stadium in the country with them now.

Golf is a historical important and a world sport - all Rugby is a joke, and they go on as if it is actually important.

Not sure Golf is a bigger world sport than Rugby. Or any more or less important (whatever that means or whatever you mean by 'a historical important') If you take Africa as example, both have developed along the same Colonial lines as each other. Outside of South Africa you could probably count on one hand golfers that come from other African countries yet there are probably National Rugby sides for most African countries.

FixdePitchmark

Deleted User wrote: »

Dude step away you seem to have some bias to Rugby, there are loads of different sports in the olympics with different popularity and stature, all which differ from country to country and person to person. To call any sport a joke is doing it a massive disservice.

Unless its cricket I hate cricket (joke)

Not at all - there is no place for Rugby, a game played seriously by 6 to 8 countries to be in the same conversation as golf.

Australia got to last final - and it isn't even a sport they take seriously .

Rugby is a minor sport - a joke to talk about it in a golfing context.

FixdePitchmark

Birdie Num Num wrote: »

Not sure Golf is a bigger world sport than Rugby. Or any more or less important (whatever that means or whatever you mean by 'a historical important') If you take Africa as example, both have developed along the same Colonial lines as each other. Outside of South Africa you could probably count on one hand golfers that come from other African countries yet there are probably National Rugby sides for most African countries.

Well sorry - but you are wrong.

Rugby players are about 5 million.

So relative to golf that is a joke.

Golf is at least 12 times that mathematically.

But in reality way more.

Just because a sport isn't massive though doesnt make it a joke it just makes it a smaller sport, I dont love or like every sport but I wouldnt refer to them as such. The olympics is(was) about celebrating amatuers and less liked sports. No need to compare IMO.

FixdePitchmark

Deleted User wrote: »

Just because a sport isn't massive though doesnt make it a joke it just makes it a smaller sport, I dont love or like every sport but I wouldnt refer to them as such. The olympics is(was) about celebrating amatuers and less liked sports. No need to compare IMO.

Ok fair enough - but when you have Rugby fans coming on taking the piss out of golf at the Olympics (calling it pitch and putt) - and I've actually had to watch 7s in it. It is hilarious.

Golf is another planet of sport.

We are going to be watching top level pros at the golf including multiple major winners - yet I have to sit here and give politically correct merit to some of the most embarrassing mismatches I've ever seen at the Olympics in the sport called "Rugby 7s".

We all know Rugby is a Joke as a World Sport - but we let them go on with their ideas.

Dirty Dingus McGee

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It is. Its the pitch and putt of rugby.
Pitch and putt would have suited the Olympics much better than golf: Mickey Mouse sport, clearly a sport that is inferior and a subset of the full game, played by almost no one, has no serious championship of its own with any renown, history, or viewer following. Rugby doesnt need the Olympics so, it sends its its training version of the game. Golf should have followed that good lead.

I really don't get your obsession with golf in the Olympics and running it down.

Getting a massive platform to show the sport off to countries where golf may not be big can only be a good thing for the sport.

The Olympic tournament may not be the pinnacle of golf but it's still a worthwhile event for all the publicity it can generate for the sport.

Jawgap

The Rape of Lucretia wrote: »

It is. Its the pitch and putt of rugby.
Pitch and putt would have suited the Olympics much better than golf: Mickey Mouse sport, clearly a sport that is inferior and a subset of the full game, played by almost no one, has no serious championship of its own with any renown, history, or viewer following. Rugby doesnt need the Olympics so, it sends its its training version of the game. Golf should have followed that good lead.

Sevens is the pitch and putt of rugby?

Seriously? - having played both there is nothing Mickey Mouse about sevens. Aside from the astronomical fitness levels needed to play sevens, it's distinguishable from the 15 and 11-a-side games on many levels relating to skill and tactics.

And if you think it's not serious or followed you've obviously never been to one of the tournaments that makes up the World Series or any of the regional tournaments. It does have it's own world cup, btw, separate to the World Series.

It doesn't register in Ireland because the IRFU made a policy decision not to devote resources to it because of the limited player pool we have here - drawing young players off to play sevens would potentially be a drag on the development of the 15-a-side squads (and it is very definitely a young person's game).

Jawgap

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Well sorry - but you are wrong.

Rugby players are about 5 million.

So relative to golf that is a joke.

Golf is at least 12 times that mathematically.

But in reality way more.

Maybe.

But I can tell you from first hand experience that the rugby club I coach at has a junior section (u-12s and down) that runs to over 300 kids - and in the golf club I'm a member of I doubt there's 10% of that number at that age group playing.

Plus rugby is a lot like golf in terms of sporting ethos and the requirement for the player to discipline himself or herself.

In sporting terms - speaking as a ref in both rugby and soccer - it is a far superior sport for young people to be involved in - you don't see a posse of players pursuing a ref around the pitch because they disagree with a decision, there's no diving or simulation, there's a very low tolerance for cheating, there's respect for the game, the ref, the team and the opposition......and there's the Haka!! Plus it's rare enough for a game to end in a turgid 0-0 draw!

And, it's one of only two sports you win by going backwards! (the other is rowing)

......and rugby coaches are the only adults who'll tell a kid that it's ok to run after another kid and drag him to the ground......and show them how to do it safely and properly!

Btw - I've checked the figures - there were 2.82 million registered rugby players in the world in 2014 along with 4.91 million non-registered......Ireland had 172,491 players (incl 96,880 registered players) - involved with clubs. The highest growth is in the female game with girls rugby growing at rates other sports can only envy

The figures for golf are about 4 to 5 times that because in the golf surveys they measure 'participation rate' which "....is based on the estimated number of people ages 6 and over who played golf, on a golf course, at least once during the survey year." In Ireland, there were 197,844 registered golfers (with clubs) in 2014, in 2015 it was 192,507 (2.7% drop).

Golf, while I love it as a sport, is still heavily dominated by older men (68% of registered golfers in Ireland are male) and rugby leaves it in the shade when it comes to diversity.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Jawgap wrote: »

Sevens is the pitch and putt of rugby?

Seriously? - having played both there is nothing Mickey Mouse about sevens. Aside from the astronomical fitness levels needed to play sevens, it's distinguishable from the 15 and 11-a-side games on many levels relating to skill and tactics.

And if you think it's not serious or followed you've obviously never been to one of the tournaments that makes up the World Series or any of the regional tournaments. It does have it's own world cup, btw, separate to the World Series.

It doesn't register in Ireland because the IRFU made a policy decision not to devote resources to it because of the limited player pool we have here - drawing young players off to play sevens would potentially be a drag on the development of the 15-a-side squads (and it is very definitely a young person's game).

Well he has a point there.It's a watered down version of the proper sport.

Jawgap

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

Well he has a point there.It's a watered down version of the proper sport.

Well that's like saying rugby is a beefed up version of soccer, or American Football is rugby after the health and safety officer arrived, or Gaelic Football is a mongrel version of all ball and team based sports prevailing in the latter part of the 19th Century, or that Aussie Rules is Gaelic Football for non-whingers

It is undoubtedly related to the 15-a-side game, but it's a huge misrepresentation to describe it as 'watered down' - that suggests you could take the skills, fitness levels and tactics prevailing in the 15-a-side game and apply them in Sevens......that being the case how do you think a team consisting of front and second row players would fare against a bunch of Sevens players, after all "forwards win matches (backs by how much)" so they should be fine

Dirty Dingus McGee

Jawgap wrote: »

Well that's like saying rugby is a beefed up version of soccer, or American Football is rugby after the health and safety officer arrived, or Gaelic Football is a mongrel version of all ball and team based sports prevailing in the latter part of the 19th Century, or that Aussie Rules is Gaelic Football for non-whingers

It is undoubtedly related to the 15-a-side game, but it's a huge misrepresentation to describe it as 'watered down' - that suggests you could take the skills, fitness levels and tactics prevailing in the 15-a-side game and apply them in Sevens......that being the case how do you think a team consisting of front and second row players would fare against a bunch of Sevens players, after all "forwards win matches (backs by how much)" so they should be fine

But all those sports are seperate sports of their own and grew up as their own sport, Sevens is just a spin off version of rugby.

Would any sevens player if they were good enough for the 15 a side version choose to play sevens? I doubt it.

The Olympics should be about the best of the best being able to compete.All the great rugby players play the 15 a side version.

Jawgap

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

But all those sports are seperate sports of their own and grew up as their own sport, Sevens is just a spin off version of rugby.

Would any sevens player if they were good enough for the 15 a side version choose to play sevens? I doubt it.

The Olympics should be about the best of the best being able to compete.All the great rugby players play the 15 a side version.

Rugby spun off from soccer, American football from rugby, Aussie Rules from Gaelic Football.

And 'good enough for the 15-a-side version' - what does that mean? If a player is 'good enough' to get a development or a professional contract he'll take it because there's no professional Sevens players - some younger players are put there by their clubs to sharpen their fitness and ball handling.

15-a-side rugby isn't at the Olympics because they'd never be able to accommodate a 15-a-side tournament - the intervals required between matches are too long.

.....and sorry to disappoint you, but since LA 1984, the Olympics have been about money as evidenced by the admission of professional sportspeople - and not just in golf - and the incredibly restrictive licensing and sponsorship conditions. Remember the row over Christie's Puma contact lenses, the withdrawal of the French women's football team because they were contractually obliged to wear Nike and would be fined if they swapped to the Olympics official sponsor adidas, etc?

Before that they were about politics (from 1936 to 1984) - but the first few were about sports.

Dirty Dingus McGee

Jawgap wrote: »

Rugby spun off from soccer, American football from rugby, Aussie Rules from Gaelic Football.

And 'good enough for the 15-a-side version' - what does that mean? If a player is 'good enough' to get a development or a professional contract he'll take it because there's no professional Sevens players - some younger players are put there by their clubs to sharpen their fitness and ball handling.

15-a-side rugby isn't at the Olympics because they'd never be able to accommodate a 15-a-side tournament - the intervals required between matches are too long.

.....and sorry to disappoint you, but since LA 1984, the Olympics have been about money as evidenced by the admission of professional sportspeople - and not just in golf - and the incredibly restrictive licensing and sponsorship conditions. Remember the row over Christie's Puma contact lenses, the withdrawal of the French women's football team because they were contractually obliged to wear Nike and would be fined if they swapped to the Olympics official sponsor adidas, etc?

Before that they were about politics (from 1936 to 1984) - but the first few were about sports.

It means if the guys playing Sevens were good enough to earn a professional contract in the 15 a side version and pay it full time they would not be playing Sevens.

No rugby player who is good enough to play the 15 a side verison would choose sevens above it.

The olympics is supposed to be about the best of the best competing.

Jawgap

Dirty Dingus McGee wrote: »

It means if the guys playing Sevens were good enough to earn a professional contract in the 15 a side version and pay it full time they would not be playing Sevens.

No rugby player who is good enough to play the 15 a side verison would choose sevens above it.

Well, from personal experience you're wrong on that point - I know a couple of lads I helped coach now at uni in the UK playing sevens. Will they end up playing 15-a-side rugby? Eventually - the fitness levels involved in Sevens mean it's difficult for players to remain competitive beyond their late 20s (yes, I know there are examples of players who play into their early 30s, but they are not typical).

No player who is offered a pro contract is going to turn it down to remain an amateur (unless there are reasons unrelated to sport) - that's why Moran and Quinn took the boat - why play an amateur sport when you can play a professional one?

If your idea is right - that Sevens is a watered down version of 15-a-side Rugby - then good Sevens players should make good 15-a-side players, and good (young) 15-a-side players should make good Sevens players - that is emphatically not the case.

In fact one of the reasons the Kiwis have been so so successful at Sevens is because they maintain it as a separate development stream - there is some crossover but both games are littered with players who tried to make the jump between them and failed spectacularly - just as there were and are many who try to make the jump from Union to League (or vice versa) and fail spectacularly (or worse end up injured).

There are even a few who try to jump from rugby to American Football......and fail spectacularly!

15-a-side rugby is a collision sport, Sevens is a contact sport - typically, for example, there are between 3 and 4 tackles attempted or made in an average minute an elite 15-a-side rugby game and a ruck every 45 seconds. In World Series Sevens it's half that - plus 70% of tries do not involve a ruck or maul and the ball is actively in play for over 50% of the time (compared to less than 30% for 15-a-side rugby).

If Sevens had professional teams then your comparison would be valid but at the moment it's like saying no one good enough to play golf professionally would stick at Pitch 'n' Putt - your comparator is a non-professional sport that offers zero opportunity to get paid for playing.

Birdie Num Num

FixdePitchmark wrote: »

Well sorry - but you are wrong.

Rugby players are about 5 million.

So relative to golf that is a joke.

Golf is at least 12 times that mathematically.

But in reality way more.

I have never played Rugby so I guess that means I am not one of the 5 million. I have however played the odd game of golf. Does that make me one of the way more than at least 60 million? We're talking about competitive sport here. I have an appreciation of almost all sports and a fan of most, particularly when there is an Irish interest. I'll support Irish golfers as much as I will support Irish rugby players. Your position of bias is preventing you from a reality check.