Love and loathe

First topic message reminder :

I see in a lot of the posts here talk about which professional golfers people really like and really dislike for various reasons. Should it be their demeanor, attitude (on and off the golf course), views or anything else. So, lets ask who do you like and why and who do you dislike (I won't say hate as that is too strong of a word) and why?

Like - Alvaro Quiros - Because of his attitude. I remember he was leading a tournament, but a ball up a tree, took a triple bogey, lost the lead but kept his positive attitude. Later in the round he had a hole in one and won.

Dislike - Ian Pouter - I admit he is a very good golfer and almost unbeatable at match play, but the way he dresses and his over confident arrogance puts me off.

A Guid New Year tae ye, kwini. Lang may yer lum reek.

I remember being quite shocked at the time but then I was thinking about what his boys might make of it when they would inevitably have found out via the ever-intrusive media.

Happy New Year to you gael,
Just hope none of us have to go through the despair that Mr & Mrs DC would have gone through for five years and therefore never discover what we would do in a similar situation. A friend in need is etc etc.

kwini ... it wasn't only DC who experienced grief and heartbreak though, was it? Indeed, I would say it would have been far worse for the children and for this reason he should have waited longer if only to ensure they would not be exposed to any further angst resulting from media intrusion.

Begs the question: wonder if it got out because his phone was hacked?

There is always a question mark when a relationship with a family friend becomes public soon after the end of one pr both parties previous relationship.

Love - Blair O'Neal (Big Break MVP) Someone I wouldn't mind playing a round with.
Loathe - Tommy Two Gloves, need I say why....Tiger Woods same reason as the rest of you....Keegan Bradly, his setup drives me up the wall and finally, Boo Weekly, redneck....

gaelgowfer wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-421681/How-I-love-Heather-Darren-Clarke.html

What on Earth is wrong with that? What I do see is a typical Daily Mail piece of twaddle. Clarke's 'lamborghini', her 'top of the range' Range Rover, his 'mansion'. They make me sick.

NB

I assure you I am hoping more so than winning the lottery that the daily folds after a news of the world style scandal.

Mac,
I see you saying that simply because it's trendy to bash The Mail.
I don't read it, never have, as I'm not from Middle England, but if you are going to have a go at it, then you need to have a go at every other newspaper around, especially The Guardian because they are all just as bad as one another.
Although I'm sure you'll defend The Socialist Worker.

Super

I agree the guardian has taken some of the its pet issues and managed to cover them in a way that is no more than a caricature.

No, Id say you are wrong SR. The Mail is the worst paper by a country mile in my book. It's actualy more like a magazine almost.
Of course all the papers have their faults, I happen to think the Guardian is on the whole objective, my complaint is its just not very well done.
The Mail isn't objective, is poorly written and the content is mindless right wing tosh......and Princess Di articles.
It's a truly awful paper that sadly appeals to a lot of people in the country.

Not as many princess Di articles as the express. But yes the mail is the worst paper in the UK by a long way. what is worse is that the readers think it is of such high standing.

I actually dont mind the independant if on a train and in need of something to read. I normally dont read papers.

I don't think anyone think that The Mail is a paper of high standing.
Is there such a thing as a UK paper with high standing?

I don't think you can begin to compare the Mail with any if the broadsheets. They all have different political slants but will all offer good content and usually varied views on a subject. The Mail is just mindless tut and Tory propaganda.
Completely different products.

kwinigolfer wrote:Putting any reservations about the Honours system to one side, and considering who else has got what in the past, I'd say DC very definitely deserves his OBE.

As for Jeff's final sentence, not sure that, true or not (and I've no clue on that), it has any relevance and/or makes him any less of a guy one should enjoy. (Understand your reservations on other personal characteristics, about which I also couldn't care less either.)

Surely personal characteristics are part of why we like/dislike any sportsperson - George Best - many people loved him not only because of his skills on the pitch but his rock n roll lifestyle/attitude. Poulter - personal characteristic being that he is a complete Muppet and arrogant pr1$k - hence many people dislike and don't want to see him win on the course.

Ps. thanks to gaelgowfer for providing the article to back up my point made about Darren Clarke.

And to the guy that said I was bang out of order for saying that- i don't think it's unreasonable to be somewhat peeved by this having watched the man invoke such a level of sympathy and sorrow mere weeks beforehand

jeffkenna wrote:...Ps. thanks to gaelgowfer for providing the article to back up my point made about Darren Clarke.

And to the guy that said I was bang out of order for saying that- i don't think it's unreasonable to be somewhat peeved by this having watched the man invoke such a level of sympathy and sorrow mere weeks beforehand

It backs up nothing and the pathetic article actually says "months" not your stated "weeks" after his wife died. Who're you to judge what's appropriate or not for him? You've no idea what was said between Clarke and his wife leading up to her death; for all you know, she might have told him to enjoy himself. Let's see how you handle yourself under the same circumstances.

jeff,
Re personal characteristics. Agreed, just that my point was meant to be that those particular characteristics don't bother me, whether or not I agree with them - lifetime non-smoker for instance, and certainly not overweight!

As I said, we couldn't possibly know what the circumstances of DC's family life were the last five years of Heather's life, just leave it at that.


nbs,
I think jeff's point was that it was suggested there was no evidence of his allegations - certainly not many weeks though, but your last point is one of mine also.

I didn't realise there was a statutory mourning time in the UK. I'm no fan of DC but he had a hard time and whatever helps you get through the day is fair enough as far as I'm concerned.

I notice that everyone has conveniently tiptoed passed my reference to the children.

Whatever was said between husband and wife is, in my view, not relevant to Clarke's conduct after his wife died. I also think it's more accurate to state the affair was over by the four month mark.

I think his brief affair with this woman was, for him, about sex and nothing more than that. After all, he dumped her and didn't even have the courage to tell her at a more timeous moment. By that, I mean she had to find out she'd been dumped via the press.

Not one of Darren Clarke's finer moments in life.

Gael , one of my bests friend wife's died of cancer last Xmas. He has a 5 year old boy, all very sad.
He was on a relationship with a friend by May and the boy is thriving on having this girl on his life and she dotes on him.
As far as I'm concerned life is for the living. No time scales need be attached, just try and be happy. I'm sure the boys Mum would just be glad to see her son happier and loved.

Diggers wrote:Gael , one of my bests friend wife's died of cancer last Xmas. He has a 5 year old boy, all very sad.
He was on a relationship with a friend by May and the boy is thriving on having this girl on his life and she dotes on him.
As far as I'm concerned life is for the living. No time scales need be attached, just try and be happy. I'm sure the boys Mum would just be glad to see her son happier and loved.

gael,
As young as the boys were at the time, I'm not sure any "liaison" would be of that much significance. Perhaps I'm wrong, and every family is different, but imagine it would be more significant to the tonguing wags than young boys (who, after all, must have had a lot of experiences I for one wouldn't have wished on my children).

gaelgowfer wrote:I notice that everyone has conveniently tiptoed passed my reference to the children.

Not really. Just forgot to comment on it. Since you insist, you know for a fact that his children dislike him for it? Are scarred by it? Again, who are you to speculate on what was said between them all as a family when it was known, as it obviously was, that she was dying? He strikes me as very close to his children; I would be surprised if he hadn't spoken to them about it. Then again, I don't know what went on so I'll stop speculating...

gaelgowfer wrote:...I think his brief affair with this woman was, for him, about sex and nothing more than that. After all, he dumped her and didn't even have the courage to tell her at a more timeous moment. By that, I mean she had to find out she'd been dumped via the press.

Quite possibly was about sex. He wouldn't be the first and he won't be the last if that was his reaction. Did that paragon of 4th Estate virtue, the Daily Mail, 'report' that she'd had to find out via the press?

Gael,

How are things up there on the high moral ground??
I really am taken aback by some of the venomous comments on here regarding DC.

I don't think DC has ever in his lofe pertended to be something he is not....

kwini ... would those "tonguing wags" include schoolchildren who, we all know, can be very cruel? Not only that but I think it will come back to haunt Darren Clarke in years to come when "his boys" are all grown up.

Gael, I think kids today don't care so much about their mates household arrangements.
Single mums, single dads, second and third marriages , same sex marriages. Times have changed somewhat.

tonguing wags? That's something footballers get up to.

Wagging tongues surely?

I would have thought that these days the married mum and dad might be in the minority in modern Britain.

Coming to terms with grief is a complex thing. Darren obviously knew this person as a friend and got close to her. Having the love of a good woman is something he had been used to and may have become reliant on. There are many different aspects to a relationship and sex is just one element. We are in no position to comment why he had the relationship.It may well of been for the sex, but equally he may just have wanted comforting,friendship and support at what must have been a difficult time. We don't know at the end of the day and who are we to judge?

Diggers wrote:Gael, I think kids today don't care so much about their mates household arrangements.
Single mums, single dads, second and third marriages , same sex marriages. Times have changed somewhat.

Diggers ... there is absolutely no way you can possibly support such an observation so, as far as I'm concerned, consider it filed on WPB!

Faldono1fan wrote:Coming to terms with grief is a complex thing. Darren obviously knew this person as a friend and got close to her. Having the love of a good woman is something he had been used to and may have become reliant on. There are many different aspects to a relationship and sex is just one element. We are in no position to comment why he had the relationship.It may well of been for the sex, but equally he may just have wanted comforting,friendship and support at what must have been a difficult time. We don't know at the end of the day and who are we to judge?

Nicely articulated Faldo and certainly difficult to argue with but, and notwithstanding the reason I based my objection to his conduct, I just wonder if either you or some others here would feel so understanding had this been a female who had behaved in this way?

Gael, I can easily support it as its factually correct. Less kids have the usual married parent background than in the past. It's just society today.
You haven't commented on the example of my friend and his situation. By the way the little boy has had no comments at school, he loves it.

I couldn't care less what Clarke or anyone else gets up to in their private lives, so to take umbridge to somethin someone has read in a newspaper about someone you don't even know is sad in the extreme.

Gael - I honestly would not judge in that way, however I understand why you have made that observation.

Diggers wrote:Gael, I can easily support it as its factually correct. Less kids have the usual married parent background than in the past. It's just society today.
You haven't commented on the example of my friend and his situation. By the way the little boy has had no comments at school, he loves it.

I'm wasn't taking issue with your views contained in the first para.

I wouldn't expect a five year old child to be bullied by his classmates on the basis that both he and said classmates would be too young to understand what had happened. I'm talking about older children ... as well you know!

The point is that no-one knows how things will pan out ... I just don't think he stopped to consider "his boys" and how they might feel in the future about his conduct so soon after his wife's funeral not to mention the "gossiping wags" of the school playground.

gael,
It is not unknown for females to enjoy "equal opportunity" in such matters, wouldn't actually think any worse of any/those who did.

But why it should affect the reputation of any widow/widower who did seek such comfort/release (call it what you will) is beyond me.

Certainly wouldn't "loathe" anyone for it either.

And: We don't know (certainly I don't as I don't read the Mail) enough to know how DC's & HC's children would be affected. Do we?

Here's hoping DC has a terrific 2012, on and off the course.

gaelgowfer wrote:

Diggers wrote:Gael, I can easily support it as its factually correct. Less kids have the usual married parent background than in the past. It's just society today.
You haven't commented on the example of my friend and his situation. By the way the little boy has had no comments at school, he loves it.

I'm wasn't taking issue with your views contained in the first para.

I wouldn't expect a five year old child to be bullied by his classmates on the basis that both he and said classmates would be too young to understand what had happened. I'm talking about older children ... as well you know!

The point is that no-one knows how things will pan out ... I just don't think he stopped to consider "his boys" and how they might feel in the future about his conduct so soon after his wife's funeral not to mention the "gossiping wags" of the school playground.

You could say exactly the same of my friend, and I know for a fact how much he thought about his boy. The lady he is now with also has 2 girls who are older and much thought was given to them.
The fact is a year after the sad death of my friends wife he is living with his new partner and they are happy. It doesn't mean they wanted the situation to happen in the first place or that they have forgotten a lovely wife and mother.
But they are doing the best they can to be happy. Who is anyone to call that a bad thing ?

I really can't see why Gael is getting her girdle in a twist about this.

Gael - you are completely out of order.....

Unless you have gone through a death of a loved one or a marriage break-up - you have no idea how you would react.

get off your high-horse

Diggers, think I'm done with this subject. You clearly don't or refuse to understand where I'm coming from on this so it's pointless to continue.

Its not that Diggers doesn't understand, its that it isn't your place to question how Clarke chooses to live his private life or whether or not he has considered his kids in terms of how quickly he did or didn't move on.

If the worst that happens is that the kids get the urine taken out of them then its hardly a big deal is it? They probably get smoke blown up their backside most of the time anyway for being Clarkes kids. I hardly think it would ruin their lives

gaelgowfer wrote:Diggers, think I'm done with this subject. You clearly don't or refuse to understand where I'm coming from on this so it's pointless to continue.

That's a perfectly OK position to adopt. However, it's everyone else's right to disagree. For the record, I couldn't care less if a woman in a similar situation did as DC did. His situation wasn't remotely normal so I'm not sure how anyone can begin to apply their own remote logic...even if they know all the family details. Which they don't.

gaelgowfer wrote:Diggers, think I'm done with this subject. You clearly don't or refuse to understand where I'm coming from on this so it's pointless to continue.

Gael, you told everyone they had chosen. to ignore the kids question so I gave you a direct and personal illustration as to why it might not be the negative that you suggested.
But everyone will of course have their own opinion, I do see yours, I just don't think it covers all bases. It's not a black and white subject.

Gael

As we are all speculating on clarkes position, and his family's, maybe we should all just accept that speculation is all it is and not fight to the death about it.

Yes it is odd he was "loved" up within weeks of his wifes death but how do we know he and his wife had a healthy relationship anyway. They may have been passionless or loveless for a long time.