Tiger's not happy...

First topic message reminder :

...about Hank Haney's new book, just wait til he sees what Stevie Williams has in store.

Unusual to see Tiger voicing strong opinions in the media, maybe he's opening up more... or maybe the book is worth reading!

What do you think, is this poor form on Haney's part?

http://sports.nationalpost.com/2012/01/20/tiger-woods-will-not-be-reading-ex-swing-coach-hank-haneys-tell-all-book-2/

Unless Tiger answers questions on the subject, we'll never know whether it was half-cocked or the real thing.

As usual Tiger is very selective with the truth - he could easily make an offhand comment and cheerfully dismiss Haney's words and go on to the next topic; the only reason it's got any ink at all is because Tiger shut Miceli up, and I'm speculating some of the press decided he was a bit ott in his (over)reaction.

Will be interesting to read Feinstein's view of all this, given that he's taken Tiger to task for this sort of blanking behaviour in the past.

Freedom of speech in action.

At the end of the day one thing is clear: they ALL want to get their name and Tiger's as close as possible in the written word or on broadcast. Miceli would absolutely not have dug that deep with anyone else, because neither he nor just about anyone else would have cared. Haney won't be writing a book on any of his other students because no one will pay him to do so since no one really cares about those other students (as compared to the fascination with Tiger Woods). Look for a book from Stevie one of these days. Rupert Mudoch would be proud.

That's all well and good Sr, but when one has made $billions by virtue (excuse the anti-pun) of one's public image/persona, surely the public may feel it's occasionally due, if not a pound of blood, at least an ounce of flesh?

As for the despicable Murdoch, he's probably got Tiger and all his ladies hacked already.

Kwin - Agree. If Tiger didn't want any of this attention, he should not have signed a single endorsement deal or turned professional. And Haney and Miceli are delighted a scowling Tiger is reacting to them ... if they are even protesting, they are doing it all the way to the bank.

Sounds like your tongue is firmly in cheek . . . . . . . . !
Clearly there's a limit to the scrutiny but, all things considered, many/most might feel that Tiger's got off relatively scot-free these past four years.

Doubt if Haney gives a monkey's, but sure Miceli feels a little uneasy with all this.

Kwin - I don't believe the press has a sense of morality one way or the other. I think they are amoral. Just the wheels of commerce turning in the media business.

Their job is simple: to build readership. They have no concern for the public interest; only in writing or reporting something that they think is of interest to the public.

I don't think Tiger got off scot-free, in my mind he got exactly the scrutiny and attention he warranted.

The only after-affect for Miceli (that he probably didn't see coming) will be a hand slap by his employers if other professionals give him the cold shoulder as Tiger will certainly do now (as he does to Feinstein).

There is a flaw in the logic if you say we the public deserve a piece of tiger if we have "funded" his wealth through endorsements. The ad men piled the money in his direction before and after his scandel, all the while he barely uttered more than a word in a press conference or interview.

Does he need to give something back to rake in the millions? Apparently not.

Think of it a bit like the estate agent (Realtor) problem. They get 5% of whatever the house goes for so there is no need for them to push for the extra few thousand pounds towards the end of negotiations that you would if you were selling the house yourself. They get only 5% of the extra 2 thousand despite them being the hardest few thousand to work for, hence they dont.

Tiger gets paid 60 million being a surly sod, why would he turn into the public darling (with all the associated effort) just for an extra few million?

The world's per-eminent athlete about to give it all up to enter the military, a story that has been substantiated by previous remarks by Tiger, that is a genuine story. Entirely legitimate to ask a question about that, not sure I agree with Donegan on that.

Tiger's reaction was boorish at best, at the end of the day manners cost nothing, as I mentioned on Kwini's thread he just comes across as a bell end.

Caito wrote:The world's per-eminent athlete about to give it all up to enter the military, a story that has been substantiated by previous remarks by Tiger, that is a genuine story. Entirely legitimate to ask a question about that, not sure I agree with Donegan on that.

Tiger's reaction was boorish at best, at the end of the day manners cost nothing, as I mentioned on Kwini's thread he just comes across as a bell end.

It may be a story but since when does the person at he centre of a story have to comment on it ?
Question asked once , clearly not going to be answered.
Question asked twice and ignored quite rightly, a journalist should have thick skin so who cares.
Kwini, you say many/most might feel Tiger got off lightly? That's about as ambiguous a statement as you could get, not sure how you can begin to justify it really.
I dont see journalists queuing up to ask Donald to pour his heart out after his father passed away. He's world number one, surely we have a right to know how heartbroken he is and that grief should be filmed and shared?

Not sure what you mean about "ambiguous", certainly wasn't meant to be Diggers.
Luke has actually spoken very openly about his father's last years and death.

McLaren wrote:Hard to disagree with much of what lawrence donegan writes here;

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/lawrence-donegan-golf-blog/2012/mar/01/tiger-woods-navy-seal

Actually, it's quite easy to disagree with plenty of what he writes. IMO, it's about time the press stopped kow-towing to TW. The fact that TW makes no attempt to be more media-friendly says to me that he couldn't give a **** for the media or anyone else who might want to read about his golf and/or his thoughts on whatever. Perfectly OK; his prerogative and all that but he's just reinforcing the perception that he's a boorish a-hole. I guess if the cap fits...

It's ambiguous because who are the many/most and which is it many or most and might also means might not surely? And how woukd you know anyway what they think?
Good for Luke, the point is nobody demands it of him or would think less of him for not talking about it or would carry on questioning him when he clearly had no wish to comment.

Perhaps I should have added a ? after "most"?

But how you can compare two golfers with squeaky clean images, one of whom has been revealed as a serial (100 episodes?) philanderer and another has lost his Dad, and feel the press scrutiny should be expected to be similar, I really don't know??!!

I hope I have misunderstood you somewhere along the line.

You compare them because they are both sportsmen, that's the only topic of conversation you should expect them to answer a question about. Quite how you consider that someone should have to give up a pound of flesh just because the public made a choice to buy into a brand they like is beyond me. The public buy into Coca Cola and BMW, it's a personal choice.
I don't think the ? would have made a difference, it was a statement that as far as I can see is made purely on your opinion about what an unknown bunch of people (fans, general public, golfers, Martians? ) may or may not think.

Major corporations chose to invest in Tiger based on the fact the public were drawn to him for primarily his sporting performance. I dont see that as a reason for him to answer to the public. If nike pull him aside and ask what they are getting for $100 million a year then fine, but what reason is there for the public to expect the right to demand tiger does anything?

It was a pathetic effort from a journalist to humiliate tiger and i hope the guy feels good about himself for trying that little stunt. So what, tiger got confused or disillusioned with a extraordinary life and thought about doing something to get in touch with a father he was very close to. Maybe he just wanted to do something approaching reality.

Here's the added irony: Nike was pretty much delighted TW's acerbic (but absolutely warranted response IMO) was shown time and again on various sports shows. He's entitled to his opinion, as is Luke Donald and Webb Simpson. Shove the microphone under anyone's chin and all bets are off. Now, the networks didn't have to show it (they did), the people who complain about too much Tiger Woods coverage didn't have to watch it (many did, strangely ignoring their TV off button).

Diggers, agree Tiger can answer however he likes and journos should have a thick skin (not much public sympathy for them just now).

But it is not like this is an isolated example of Tiger's boorish behaviour and it does contribute to a growing impression of him as being an unpleasant individual. That said I do think Tiger's contribution to golf has been immense and I am rather enjoying his current role as the villain of the piece.

Caiti, if Tiger ever goes on the Piers Morgan show we can expect a few answers. He won't of course and personally I respect that. He's a flawed human obviously but thank god he doesn't feel the need to bang on about his personal life.
To me the boorish behaviour is the hack trying to force a question he knew 100% Woods would not answer.
It seems people prefer to vilify the odd mistake on a golf website as shoddy journalism rather than condemn obviously intrusive questioning. I know what I think is the worse offence.

I always believe these so called journos, just want to ask questions, that will get a response, to encourage more media interest, and make a name for themselves. Most golfers dont really care to much about his off the course activities, they tend to more concerned about what is wrong with his game and what he is working on to correct it.

It was interesting to hear when he was putting well the toe of the putter was in the air, and he is trying to get back to that type of feel, although I dont think he putted badly last night, just nothing dropped, and we all have days like that

you probally get a better roll with the toe in the air, because you hit ball more centrally- i allways did it as a kid without realising! so do loads of golfers.

What is certain is that tiger seems to be taking things very seriously, so good on him for that- he is trying.

Its just he gets frustrated and shows it, many people are like that- it doesnt make him a bad person at all!

Amused by such silliness as I am, I chuckled at some recent Andrew Cotter tweets on the "revelation":

Andrew Cotter ‏ @MrAndrewCotter
I like the idea that Tiger Woods thought about giving up his golf to eat fish, balance a beach-ball on his nose and play a row of horns.

10:28 PM - 1 Mar 12 via web · Details
@MrAndrewCotter clubbing might still be a problem

Skydriver wrote:Amused by such silliness as I am, I chuckled at some recent Andrew Cotter tweets on the "revelation":

Andrew Cotter ‏ @MrAndrewCotter
I like the idea that Tiger Woods thought about giving up his golf to eat fish, balance a beach-ball on his nose and play a row of horns.

10:28 PM - 1 Mar 12 via web · Details
@MrAndrewCotter clubbing might still be a problem

I'm not a Twitterer (or whatever they're called) but I nearly spat tea on my keyboard just then...

The full excerpt of Haneys book on golf digest;

http://www.golfdigest.com/magazine/2012-04/haney-woods-book-excerpt

What do you think people?

Yup, reading the print version during ad breaks!

that was quite good actually!

interesting- dont really want to read the whole thing as it could be abit one eyed, but after reading that i am intrigued and probally will!

what a phone call though lol, hit the big time with dat!

Would not waste my time reading it, Haney does know how to make money

I do think people are getting a little over offended at Haney bringing this book out. After all they are not just Tigers memories but ones Haney has to so he can write what he likes within reason.

That's said just because Haney can write what he likes doesn't mean Tiger has to like it and is also entitled to feel a little bit of resentment. I also feel Journo's should stick to facts about the sport instead of looking for sensationalist stories to sell papers.

Problem is we now live in a time where "celebrity" is almost a commodity and more newsworthy to readers than actual news. I'd be willing to guess even place money on more of the nations populous knowing about what's going on in the land of celeb e.g. Who's doing who and what dresses got worn at the Oscars, than those that know the full extent of what happened recently in Syria. Reality TV only adds to people wanting more "ins" to celebs and their circles than actually paying attention to the horrors going on in the world today.

The above is why Tiger is scrutinised so much as people nowadays (majority of under 35-40's) want to know about his SEAL ambitions or what happens off the course, because that's how society is becoming, wrongly to imo.

Personally couldn't care if Tiger is a jovial character or a down right miserable git off the course, I'm not particularly bothered if he is a serial shagger good luck to him or if he ploughs millions into charity and is holier than thou! Its his life, his choices all I want to see is someone who has the chance to be the greatest champ in history give it a good crack and if he offends a few reporters in the process then those journo's need to grow a pair and think I deserved that reply for such a pointless question.

Last point to people who say Woods isn't as good as Jack and how Woods taints the game and is not deserving of Jacks record again why? Nicklaus lived in a different era he wasn't put under the microscope like Woods, media coverage wasn't trying to intrude on every aspect of his life, times change and if Woods picks up more majors than Jack then he deserves all the plaudits he gets and the title of greatest golfer to have lived. Why? Because he will have earned the title through his on course play off course activities are irrelevant.

After all are any of us whiter than white with no skeletons in our closet at some point in our lives! He's a human being and makes mistakes so what but what a golfer!

Rant over....... And breathe................

Fader wrote:I do think people are getting a little over offended at Haney bringing this book out. After all they are not just Tigers memories but ones Haney has to so he can write what he likes within reason.

That's said just because Haney can write what he likes doesn't mean Tiger has to like it and is also entitled to feel a little bit of resentment. I also feel Journo's should stick to facts about the sport instead of looking for sensationalist stories to sell papers.

Problem is we now live in a time where "celebrity" is almost a commodity and more newsworthy to readers than actual news. I'd be willing to guess even place money on more of the nations populous knowing about what's going on in the land of celeb e.g. Who's doing who and what dresses got worn at the Oscars, than those that know the full extent of what happened recently in Syria. Reality TV only adds to people wanting more "ins" to celebs and their circles than actually paying attention to the horrors going on in the world today.

The above is why Tiger is scrutinised so much as people nowadays (majority of under 35-40's) want to know about his SEAL ambitions or what happens off the course, because that's how society is becoming, wrongly to imo.

Personally couldn't care if Tiger is a jovial character or a down right miserable git off the course, I'm not particularly bothered if he is a serial shagger good luck to him or if he ploughs millions into charity and is holier than thou! Its his life, his choices all I want to see is someone who has the chance to be the greatest champ in history give it a good crack and if he offends a few reporters in the process then those journo's need to grow a pair and think I deserved that reply for such a pointless question.

Last point to people who say Woods isn't as good as Jack and how Woods taints the game and is not deserving of Jacks record again why? Nicklaus lived in a different era he wasn't put under the microscope like Woods, media coverage wasn't trying to intrude on every aspect of his life, times change and if Woods picks up more majors than Jack then he deserves all the plaudits he gets and the title of greatest golfer to have lived. Why? Because he will have earned the title through his on course play off course activities are irrelevant.

After all are any of us whiter than white with no skeletons in our closet at some point in our lives! He's a human being and makes mistakes so what but what a golfer!

Rant over....... And breathe................

More or less spot on and exactly my thinking Fader

Fader - Thanks for injecting some perspective, historical and otherwise. Hats off!

Good spiel Fader. However, people are perfectly entitled to have an opinion on Woods'. I think he stinks as a person even though he was a brilliant golfer. Yes, he's human and he makes mistakes. His lack of anything approaching contrition, embarrassment or humour just means that he hasn't defused anything and he still gets baited. I guess the billions soften the blow(s) somewhat.

The only person he owes any show of emotion to is his family. I don't believe that anyone who has had an affair has to apologise to the public at large. Why on earth should Woods have to?

I don't agree he has to apologise for anything either, he'd still be an absolute cockend even if he did though, as for his Navy Seals ambitions, that is frankly hilarious, to think that such a cosseted and selfish individual would even have a hope of getting through even the easy training for the US army's cannon fodder units is preposterous, let alone an elite unit (even a US 'elite' unit, and the way he reacted to the question was childish and immature. Just another example of him not being bright enough to brush something of with a quip or comeback. Humourless, charisma free man sausage.

super_realist wrote:I don't agree he has to apologise for anything either, he'd still be an absolute cockend even if he did though, as for his Navy Seals ambitions, that is frankly hilarious, to think that such a cosseted and selfish individual would even have a hope of getting through even the easy training for the US army's cannon fodder units is preposterous, let alone an elite unit (even a US 'elite' unit, and the way he reacted to the question was childish and immature. Just another example of him not being bright enough to brush something of with a quip or comeback. Humourless, charisma free man sausage.

in all seriousness when judging if he could be a seal or not - the only thing we have going on is that he has excelled in golf in a way that is unrivialed- the guy could do pretty much anything he wanted if he put his mind to it! he has mental strength that has promoted him into the worlds elite- I have no doubts whatsoever that he could become a seal! and i stick by that 100%.

he doesnt have a sense of humour at present that is obvious, but thats what could happen to anyone under that sort of scrutinity!

I dont want him giving up on golf, he is a special talent even if he can be a bit of a twit!

"In all seriousness when judging if he could be a seal or not - the only thing we have going on is that he has excelled in golf in a way that is unrivialed- the guy could do pretty much anything he wanted if he put his mind to it! he has mental strength that has promoted him into the worlds elite- I have no doubts whatsoever that he could become a seal! and i stick by that 100%.

he doesnt have a sense of humour at present that is obvious, but thats what could happen to anyone under that sort of scrutinity!

I dont want him giving up on golf, he is a special talent even if he can be a bit of a twit!"

To be fair, those who succeed in the elite forces of the world are the polar opposite of Woods. Generally they are humble, self deprecating, have black humour, have a game plan, are selfless, work efficiently and methodically, dedicated to their team/comrades and have an ability to deal with anything that they are faced with. You can't say Woods demonstrates any of those traits.

He had a strong mental attitude for getting a ball in a hole many years ago, but he's hardly John Macaleese is he? He can't even deal with a swipe from a journalist effectively without throwing his toys out of the pram, its his way or no way and that attitude wouldn't work in an elite unit, can't see how his golf career would give him any transferable skills at all for such laughable career switch.

It's as inappropriate as casting rickie Fowler as john steed.

Bizarre logic suggesting one only has the mental fortitude to get a ball in the hole, but not transferable to other occupations.

Shotrock wrote:Bizarre logic suggesting one only has the mental fortitude to get a ball in the hole, but not transferable to other occupations.

Not at all Sr, can't see how being good at golf means he could be in an elite unit. His personality is completely at odds with what a selector would look for. He might have a 'strong' mental attitude for getting a ball in the hole but almost all of his other character traits are completely contrary to being being part of a unit. if you are looking for someone to help you out in the trenches the last thing you need is a selfish, egotistical loner.
I'm waiting for Ye yang to join the long drive championships next.

I dont look at it that way super(transfering skills). More about the fact that he is the type of person if he puts his mind to it that is capable of acheiving in pretty much anything.

I think pro sportsmen get a rough deal by many. people forget what it took for them to get to the level they did and that is by sheer graft and determination.

He is a winner pure and simple, not because of what he won or for his previous mental fortitude on the course, but for being a grafter, just like every pro sportsman is a winner in my eyes, wether they win or lose.

I dont know what it would take to become an elite in the armed forces, however tiger shows plentry of those traits you listed. tiger has had specific game plans which is well documented, he has worked effeciently and methodically- he is very techinical , and on the golf course has dealt with many things thrown at him.

I agree that he may not have the perfect 'character' to be part of a team, however the guy is an enigma, if he put his mind to something i am sure he could acheive.

Well, that would all be fine if the us navy is looking for a one man unit who might react like a petulant child if they enemy dares to answer a question he doesn't like. can you imagine him passing the interrogation tests? not a chance, too much of a spoilt baby. I'd say someone like Westwood or Donald would be better as an elite soldier as they fit the p.rofile far better

i think we are gonna have to agree to disagree on this. tiger obviously doesnt/hasnt allways acted like a petulant child and there is no reason why he cant mature

Eh, he's 36, too old to train and still has a mental age of a surly teenager. You might as well say he'd make a good marriage guidance councillor based on his 'traits'.

I think your being unair on him to be honest,we dont know who he is, all we know is that he has acheived at something he is passionate about- and not just acheived, he was unparralled as a golfer!! and obvioulsy he needs to be motivated to do what he wants to do- tiger doesnt want to be a marriage counceller therefore he wouldnt make a good one, but interestingly enough people that have been faced with problems associated with there counciling can make the best councillors if they 'come out the other side' and deal with there issues!- offcourse this has nothing to do with the topic at hand!

Oakey, it was a comparison of how hopeless he'd be as a Navy seal,. I honestly cannot think of a worse candidate except someone like Graham Norton.

mystiroakey

There is no point trying to have a rational conversation with super about Tiger, as for an as yet unknown reason super has an irrational, and somewhat worrying, level of hatred for woods.

MAC, its no more irrational than your gushing sycophancy, although I can probably think of more reasons to dislike him than you can to fawn over him.

no dramas SR, i think he could do it, you dont, personally i hope he nips the idea in the bud and sticks to golf!! however i am sure graham has dreamt of being in the navy on a few occasions

It's such a silly idea it deserves derision. Firstly to join an elite unit like the sas or navy seals you have to have been in the regular forces for a period of time and you'd uave to satisfy a ridiculously long list of personality criteria before even being considered for selection. He's too weak to take criticism for a start so would fail on that alone, he's also far too old. You cant just turn up and say I want to be a navy seal. So unfortunately we are stuck with him moping his way around golf courses, spitting, swearing, checking clubs (poor composure, fail no 2)
He could however do a good impression of bubba from forest gump if they ever make a remake, although the bottom lip will have to be reduced a bit.
The idea of him being a navy real is as laughable as well anything you can dare to imagine.

So now your a military personnel profiling expert Super. I have no doubt you have, like the rest of us, no idea what makes a good Seal outside of watching a few Steven Seagal films.
The only things I could go on are he has a passion for the military and he's single minded and likes a challenge. Plus his dad who he seems to have similar traits to was a success on the forces.

Further to what diggers has said maybe you should read the article super. It clearly states this was something woods thought about when he was around 29/20 and that he had paved the way for entry after the usual 28 cut off.

We have had a few army guys on here in the past so I would much rather hear from them on how well woods would fair as a seal than the opinions of an ex chef who's closest encounter with military action is producing the soldiers for a boiled egg.

Diggers, I've read plenty on the sas, soe, commandos, etc and the selection process and there is not a chance that a pampered sportsman who has to have an entourage and stage managed press conferences could possibly make it.

Alex Ferguson is a great manager, doesn't mean that Darren Ferguson will be.

If it wasn't so well documented I would think the whole navy seals think to be a mammoth hoax, and Woods was correct to be so visibly embarrassed about it being mentioned because it is so absurdly ridiculous that it could only have come from such a microscopic brain like his. It is about as unlikely to happen as me running as a labour mp.

Mac, that's your best joke yet. Excellent stuff