Gandhi...MLK...Chubby Chandler

Chubby Chandler annoys me.

Chandler, the agent for Ernie Els, Lee Westwood and Rory McIlroy (among others), was the topic of an interview* where he continued his tireless defense for the ability for European golfers ranked in the top ten to play whenever and wherever they want.  Chandler is doing his job as agent, using any pull or publicity he can to better the work conditions of his clients, I just wish he wouldn’t shroud his goals as Gandhi-like struggles against an oppressive regime.

*It was less an interview and more John Huggan opening up his recorded, asking Chandler if there was anything on his mind, and every once in a while acting as a literary Flavor Flav, hyping Chandler’s comments.  Of course, now I want to see Huggan with a baseball cap turned to the side, over sized Batman sunglasses, wearing a clock around his neck.  Damn, I wish I knew how to use Photoshop.

As ever in professional golf, the root of all problems is self-interest. By way of example, rather than work together for the common good, the PGA Tour and the European Tour spend way too much time trying to score petty points off each other.

"I don't know what sort of relationship exists between the PGA Tour and European Tour," acknowledges Chandler. "I don't attend their meetings. I suspect they talk more than we think. And I can't imagine they are blind to the fact that they have to get together for some things. But it isn't happening enough.

If every time a golf flack (media, agent, or tour rep) said something about the good of the game when he or she meant good for whomever I am championing at that moment you had to take a drink, you’d be dead of alcohol poisoning before the last twosome hit the 15 tee Sunday on what ever tour is your home tour.

I also question why self-interest is bad for tours but good for players.  Especially considering in the paragraphs before, Chandler said:

I just happen to be looking after two lads at times in their careers when they don't need to do what everyone else wants them to do.

"One of them is 37. He's at a stage in his life - he has two growing kids at home - where he does what he wants to do. It's that simple. Then we have a 21-year-old who told me at the end of last year that he will never again play in places he doesn't like. And he's sticking to that. He doesn't particularly like Sawgrass and right now it isn't on his list."

Westwood and McIlroy doing what they want to do is good and should be lauded and defended.  The PGA Tour and European Tour doing what they want to do will lead to the destruction of all we hold dear in golf. 

There is too much protectionism going on. The end result is that the PGA Tour and European Tour are hindering the game.

How?  I can’t speak for the European side, but television ratings are up in 2011.  With the improvement of the global economy, sponsors are coming back, particularly automobile companies.  Lee Westwood’s inability to play Quail Hollow isn’t hindering the game.  It may hinder Lee Westwood, but that is his (and Chandler’s) problem, not the game of golf.

Don't get me wrong, we don't need a world tour.

Sorry Eas :-)

All we need is nine or ten annual events where everyone plays. Take the BMW PGA Championship at Wentworth. It's the right time of the year. It's a good course and the event already has a good standing. They have a great sponsor in place. It would be a perfect place for the very best to get together and compete in a World Golf Championship.

"The other option in Europe would be the Barclays Scottish Open. Again, they have all the ingredients in place. The only question would be the date, right before the Open. But that could work because everyone would just come over for two weeks. Another WGC should move around, to places like South Africa and Australia. There have to be global sponsors out there for events like that."

I must agree with Chandler here; there should be a WGC in Europe.  And when the current WGC contract is up, the European Tour should say we get a tourney or we are out.  Which is what they should have done in the beginning, but allowed Finchem to hypnotize them with his ‘we can make the most money here in the US’ argument. 

"The easy accusation when anyone plays in Europe rather than America is that they do so because of appearance money," says Chandler, shaking his head. "But there is appearance money all over America. All the promoters ring up with all kinds of offers. So anyone who thinks that a golf day, or a dinner, or a hospitality visit is somehow different to what goes in Europe is wrong. It's exactly the same. There is no difference.

And the agreement time is over.  I’m not against appearance fees per se, but in Chandler thinks the John Deere Classic offering to fly all players eligible for the British Open to Europe in a chartered flight is different than cold hard cash, I’d like to see his W-2 forms (or the European equivalent).

Plus, this is nothing new. It's been happening forever. Did Tiger play in Buick events because he had a deal to do so? Of course.

Yes and no.  It would be short sided for Tiger, when he was an endorser for Buick, to skip events sponsored by the automobile company.  The term is professional courtesy.  But there wasn’t a contractual agreement that Tiger had to play like he had (and may be negotiating to do so in the future) with the Omega Dubai Desert Classic.  If Tiger doesn’t play in UAE, he doesn’t get the $ (or € in this case).

As you'd expect, Chandler has spent more than a little time considering all of the above infighting and his solution is simple: "I'd like to see the top 20 players at the end of each calendar year free to play wherever they want for the following 12 months. Maybe even the top 50. The plusses are obvious.

"Take later this year. The European Tour has been handed three of the best seven players in the world - Westwood, McIlroy and Martin Kaymer, who isn't a PGA Tour member either. They will all play in Switzerland and Holland in September. They each have a gap in their schedules when the Fed-Ex Cup is played. So two of Europe's oldest events will benefit. Brilliant. If you let people move around it isn't going to be to the detriment of anybody.”

I can think of a detriment.  If you allow players to be free of all tour restrictions for a calendar year, you also allow them to be free of all tour minimums for the calendar year.  I can easily see Phil Mickelson deciding to only play ten tournaments in 2012 (assuming he is in the top 20 at the end of 2011, which for this exercise, he will).  And by the way, it doesn’t get McIlroy to Sawgrass; he doesn’t like the course and doesn’t want to go. 

Once again, I respect that Chandler is doing his job.  But please remember, Chander’s job isn’t the betterment of golf as a whole or as an advocate of golf fans everywhere.  And I wish he would stop pretending it was.