Don’t previous winners of most majors get exemptions? Including the US and British Opens?
I dunno, seen much of the Lakers this year?
Sure, that’s the reason they are in the tournament but in my view it diminishes it as compared to the other so-called majors. And did I say anything about time wasting?
As for McCord, just what did he do that- was so disrespectful? My understanding is that he made some joking comment about the playing condition a player faced in one of the hazards.
Note first qualifier for PGA eligibilty.
The PGA of America has approved the following list of players eligible to compete in the 85th PGA Championship:
**
- All former PGA Champions. **
Casper has his Tour card for life too
- Winner of PGA Championship or U.S. Open prior to 1970 or in the last 10 calendar years: (Beginning in 1998, this is a five-year exemption.)
Paul Azinger Mark Brooks Jack Burke
** Billy Casper** Steve Elkington Ernie Els
The British Open is only slightly more stringent
Exemptions from Regional and Final Qualifying
No. Criteria
1 First 15 and anyone tying for 15th place in the 2001 Open Championship.
2 The Open Champions 1992-2001.
**3 Past Open Champions aged 65 or under on July 21, 2002.
**
US Open exemption appears to be 10 years.
Most of the majors do this. It isn’t fair to single out the Masters
[sub] (and I needed the vB practice)[/sub]
He said that the humps in the greens look like body bags (a double metaphor for players who have died on the greens and the unreadable breaks on them), then later on in the broadcast he said that the greens were so fast that they didn’t mow them, they used bikini wax. Needless to say the members did not take kindly to his wit and had him banned from the booth. He says he always looks forward to that extra week of vacation.
Well, I could be slightly wrong about this, but then that wouldn’t be breaking any new ground. However, most of the exemptions in other tournaments have some restrictions, such as a time age limit. In some cases the entry of veteran players is ceremonial and they withdraw after a few holes. An age limit of 65 years is mentioned above and Casper is 70 this year.
I don’t want to pick on Casper who was a favorite of mine, but I think he and others, like Jack Nicklaus should bow out of regular PGA events and not take up a spot that could go to a young player. Palmer has done this I think, and I guess Nicklaus might have this year. But both of them took up places in the field long after they had ceased to be competitive at that level.
65 for British.
No limit on the PGA.
Me, because I couldn’t believe this news item.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/golfonline/news/2003/02/27/kkk_protest_ap/index.html?cnn=yes
Jeepers, it’s gonna be a three-ring circus down there during the Masters–the KKK in Ring Number One, the Rainbow Coalition and NOW in Ring Number Two, the Women Against Martha Burk in Ring Number three, and the Pro-Augusta Lobby ("…he’s over there…") having driven down from Maine, over in the sideshow, along with the media.
Wow.
I don’t even like golf, and I can hardly wait for the first week of April.
Unfortunately, I have to agree with your sentiments DDG, as this excellent tournament is rapidly turning out to be a freak show nonpareil. A number of non-golf fans are coming up to me and asking when the tournament is. They could care less about the golf, they just wanna see the possible spectacle.
With friends like these, Hootie doesn’t need any enemies.
Its awfully nice for the KKK to make the point of the feminists.
Wow.
I might actually watch golf news coverage for that…
Cheesesteak has it exactly right. There is NO rule against women members. You cannot apply for membership. You must be recommended and voted in by existing memebers.
This is such a huge non-issue.
Can anyone explain what women want to be able to do at Augusta? From what I am seeing, they are already allowed to play there, but the problem is that they are missing out on potential big deals that go on in the club house. So do the women want to use the same showers, saunas, locker rooms, etc as the men? If not, then how would being a member help them get access to the big deals that go on in such places?
In the interests of exposing how utterly inane this issue really is…
How hilarious would it be if Hootie calls a press conference and announces that the first women (3 women, not 1, so Augusta can’t be accused of tokenism) have been admitted to Augusta. The new members of Augusta are:
- Phyllis Schlafly (head of Eagle Forum, dedicated to preserving the “traditional American Family”)
- Ann Coulter (nutball anti-liberal harpy)
- Jenna Jamison (adult film vixen, also invited to avoid charges of ageism)
Do you think that would get Martha Burk to shut her pie hole?
Do you think that Jesse Jackson would hail Augusta for rescinding its policy of “gender apartheid” :rolleyes:
(Memo to Jesse - “Gender apartheid” describes places like Afghanistan. Females not being able to sip martinis with boring old rich white farts is somewhat less of a tragedy. Get some fucking perspective, you self-promoting, extortionist asshole.)
Do you think Howell Raines would run a self-congratulatory editorial in the NY Times? After all, it was his brave journalistic willingness to “flood the zone” with story after story blasting Augusta that finally caused Hootie to relent and invite Phyllis, Ann, and Jenna to join - what a giant leap for gender equality. :rolleyes:
After all, Martha, Jesse, and Howell would have gotten what they wanted: Women as members of Augusta.
Yes, Nightime, women want to be members.
Right now, if I want to play at Augusta, or eat in their dining room, I need to be the guest of a member.
I’m the member of a private club. Its nice. Back when I was consulting, I took a lot of clients out for lunch or dinner there. The business rule here is, the nicer the club, the better it impresses your clients. Augusta is pretty much the nicest. If our (my husband’s and my) membership were at Augusta, I wouldn’t be able to have my own guests at the club, I’d only be able to be a guest myself.
Augusta’s bylaws are not public. No one knows (except the membership) if women can or can’t join by bylaw and members are being asked not to comment.
Augusta National is not a typical “private golf club”. Very few of the members actually live Georgia, much less Augusta. And it doesn’t matter who wants to be a member - you can only join by invitation. So saying, yes, women want to be members, and suggesting that it is unfair, only puts those women in the same group as most men who want to members. “Fair” isn’t the criteria.
Dangerosa, unless you are suggesting that Hootie is lying, he has made explicit statements that nothing in the bylaws of Augusta National prevent women from being members. He says, it just hasn’t happened - yet. And that it is up to Augusta National, not Martha Burk, or the courts, to determine when that will happen.
Legally, I don’t see any issue here. Augusta National is a private club and is within their rights to choose its members.
Martha Burk clearly has two objectives here. One is to force/pressure Augusta National to admit women to their ranks. Even she would have to admit that it would only be a symbolic victory for women, as it wouldn’t make any substantive difference in womens rights. Her second objective is to get press and publicity for herself and for her group, the National Council of Women’s Organizations.
Whether or not she accomplishes the first objective (or better, when), she has already succeeded with the second objective.
Funny thing is, even Hootie acknowledged that it is inevitable that women will be admitted to Augusta National. All this does is create a guarantee that Martha Burk will be able to claim success on the first objective, eventually.
So I’ll venture to predict that no woman will be added to membership ranks before this year’s tournament. But (at least) one will be admitted before August of this year. And the participation of the KKK in protests will not have any appreciable impact.
Hootie is blessed by the fact that the impending Iraq war will be dominating the news during tournament time. In comparison, this will all come off sounding pretty trivial.
Combine that with the physical layout of Augusta National, and the protests will not be disruptive in the slightest, and will certainly look more like a circus. While Augusta National would want nothing to do with the KKK, the fact that they will be there will actually bring all the other protestors down to their level (Jackson included).
Augusta National is surrounded by thick woods. Three sides are surrounded by expansive southern estates, and the fourth side lines up against a main strip in Augusta, Washington Avenue. But the course grounds are a quarter to a half mile from the road, with thick woods (and the par 3 course in-between). Ever hear a car horn when watching coverage of the Masters? I don’t think so…
Getting on the grounds of Augusta National is not practical. It is the hottest sports ticket in the world. They stopped selling tickets in 1972, and started a waiting list. They closed the waiting list in 1978. Practice round tickets are only available through a lottery, and I understand that your chances there are less than 10 to 1. The point being, attempting any sort of disruption will be exceptionally difficult.
The City of Augusta has already announced that they will not allow protestors to march along Washington Avenue. The street is busy enough, and at tournament time, it is an absolute disaster. The City of Augusta will find somewhere for the protestors, probably an empty lot or parking lot along Washington Avenue (this, too, may be difficult, because parking spaces are at a premium). In any case, the (legal) protests will be limited to somewhere close to front gates of Augusta National, but nowhere near the course.
Now, CBS will need to provide some coverage of the protestors, but don’t expect them to get much more than a mention or two. If you have watched Master’s coverage in the past, you have probably never seen a picture of Washington Avenue or the front gates at Augusta National. You may see a couple this year, but not much more.
The other networks will certainly cover the protestors, but they will look pretty silly standing in their three ring circus (Burk, Jackson, and the KKK). If the whole thing gets more than 30 seconds of airtime, I’ll be surprised.
Hootie will be able to claim to a victory by not succumbing to Martha’s tactics before this tournament. But his victory will be hollow and unsubstantive.
While I feel that Augusta National has a right to be a “good ol boys” club, I don’t think that is very wise. It is an anachronism. While they have every right, they also have the right to be stupid.
And Martha is likely to succeed in her objectives. I also think that is a shame, because she will have demonstrated her opportunism for an irrelevent issue. I have no issue with her tactics, per se, I certainly agree that she has every right to put pressure on Hootie and the boys, their sponsors, the players, or whomever.
You can bet going forward, the press will be much more likely to provide coverage to any press release issued by the NCWO, which it may not have done in the past. Good for them, perhaps, if they can find legitimate issues on which to focus in the future.
P.S. - Through some very lucky circumstances, I found myself with two practice round tickets for the tournament in 2001. I still feel privileged. There is something special about Augusta National that no other course has ever accomplished. Not Pebble Beach, not Bethpage, not even St. Andrews (which are all special in their own way). And neither Hootie nor Martha can change that for me.
Legally, I don’t see an issue either. And I agree its up to Augusta’s membership. I have no problem with Augusta’s stance, although I think Hootie’s been an ass about the whole issue.
Nor do I think Ms. Burke is making it a legal issue. She is simply doing her best to bring attention to the male membership of the club, putting pressure on sponsors and the tour itself - as is her right under the 1st admendment.
Are there more important issues facing women today - certainly. But that doesn’t mean this isn’t something that should be pointed out.
I haven’t seen any quotes from any members that say “nothing in the bylaws” but I may have missed it (I haven’t been following the story very closely). Last piece of information I heard was Hootie saying he wasn’t about to make the bylaws public and wasn’t going to allow other members to speak on the topic.
The only leg Burk has to stand on on this issue is that PGA will not hold a tournament (anymore) at clubs which discriminate against women or minorities. The PGA claims a technicality that the Masters is NOT run by the PGA, but by Augusta. This is the SLIMMEST of technicalities. But the fact of the matter is that the Masters would not be THE MASTERS if it were not held there. I believe there are only something like 300 members total, so this whole thing is just ridiculous. Too bad it makes for such great ratings for the news outlets.
John Mace, I’m not so sure that’s a “technicality”, AFAIK, Augusta National decides who does and doesn’t play in the Masters (invitation only), and negotiates all of the sponsorship and TV rights. I don’t think the PGA has any say whatsoever in what goes on at the Masters.
If Hootie wanted to invite a dozen chimpanzees to play the first round, I think the could.
Cheesesteak is right, the PGA has no control over Augusta National or the Masters. You could say that the PGA recognizes the Masters, but it does not sponsor or sanction it.
The PGA chooses to allow participation and results at the Masters towards the tour rankings/standings and qualification for other tournaments.
Martha Burk requested that the PGA stop this practice. The PGA refused.
First, let me say that I think Burk is an idiot and I fully support Augusta’s right to choose whomever they want to be members.
However, to say that the Masters is not a PGA event IS a technicality. It is one of the 4 majors, it is on the PGA schedule, and there is no other PGA tournament that week. Let’s say it’s a DE FACTO event for the PGA. Yes, I realize that lawyers could argue that it’s not, but come on… You could say that the PGA has allowed Augusta to, for one week, take over it’s organizational responsibilities. One could then argue that the PGA should require Augusta to abide by it’s key bylaws.