WHY are we not really, really excited by the start of the World Golf Championships for 2008? This week the matchplay leg of the WGCs takes place and it really should be a tremendously exciting event.
Yet, after we've done the office draw and we've argued over who's got the best batch of players (this year I got David Toms, Anders Hansen, Jim Furyk, and Jerry Kelly which I'm quietly happy with), it kind of dies a death. Why is that? Probably partly because for most of this event's lifetime it has yet to produce a stellar final or even a star-studded semi-final.
Darrn Clarke v Tiger was pretty good I suppose but they're far too chummy for it to be really interesting.
It needs something thrilling to put it on the map and, let's be honest, it needs Tiger. Put him in the final against Sergio, Phil, Ernie or even Rory Sabbatini and suddenly we're all gathered round the TV.
A re-match against Stephen Ames would be pretty amusing too.
Another reason it's yet to take off? It's always in America! How about Dubai hosting one year? Because the Americans won't travel, just as they didn't when it was in Australia. Surely we've all moved on from there (although the American interviewer who spoke to Henrik Stenson - that's Ryder Cup star and serial tournament champion Henrik Stenson - after winning last year really did ask him if he thought Americans would know him after his victory) and the top names would make it to the Middle East. First-class travel, five-star and a huge prize fund. It's not THAT tough an ask, is it?
Tiger v Phil in Dubai, in the final. Now we're really excited.
By Chris Bertram
1 comment:
The problem is, if Tiger wins then it's boring and predictable and if Tiger gets knocked out then nobody wants to watch anymore
Post a Comment