Ryder Cup - European Picks

First topic message reminder :

Rory McIlroy
Danny Willett
Henrik Stenson
Chris Wood
Sergio García
Rafael Cabrera-Bello
Justin Rose
Andy Sullivan
Matthew Fitzpatrick


The above nine have qualified automatically for this year's Ryder Cup, which 3 will join them on the 29th August when Darren Clarke will announce his wildcards?

Interesting, I see him as this years Stephen Gallacher.

Or, before GPB says it, M-A Martin.

Wonder who DC has standing by??!!

GPB would have him as this year's Sergio

GPB wrote:

MustPuttBetter wrote:I'm surprised at those throwing out the nepotism card re Westwood.
He's not had a terrible year, not markedly worse than Knox, and bearing in mind this is match play and a large part of that is to intimidate / not be intimidated, the extra LW gives you in that regard v Knox surely outweighs the gap in form? I'd say so.
To take things like that into account are why you have captains picks rather than just taking the top 12 qualifiers

If Nepotism wasn't a factor, then why not pick Luke?  His RC W/L percentage (10-4-1) is better than Westwoods (20-15-6), he has the experience and he has actually won the WGC- Match Play.  And Luke actually makes putts once in a while.

Maybe DC feels Westwood has a more imposing game than Luke. I do.
In combination with the rankings where LW is 15th to Donald's 53rd in th eEuropean list and 14th to Donald's 21st in the world list.
Basically there's no reason at all to pick Donald over Westwood aside from a week or two's decent form recently which seems to have faded already
Nothing to do with nepotism

HIPAA - Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_Insurance_Portability_and_Accountability_Act

John Cregan and Davie

We have heard from Doctors about Tiger's health issues, but not Tiger's Doctors. Big Difference

A Orthopedist can comment on a generic microdisectomy but a Tiger's orthopedist cannot comment on Tiger's microdisectomy.

Robo: IME, Poulter has a history of being a drama queen and I think there is a great chance we would have heard about it before he went on the disabled list. I don't why my skepticism continues to offend you, but it is just an opinion. I think the timing of the "injury" was gamey angle shooting.

That (very long) Wiki article seems to cover patient confidentiality quite comprehensively. But though I found the whole article as dry as a desert, I couldn't see anything that barred a doctor from commenting on a patient's condition WITH the patients consent.

So either highlight the paragraph that stops him commenting with the patient's consent - or show me some evidence that Poulter requested confidentiality from his doctor

GPB wrote:Robo: IME, Poulter has a history of being  a drama queen and I think there is a great chance we would have heard about it before he went on the disabled list.  I don't why my skepticism continues to offend you, but it is just an opinion.  I think the timing of the "injury" was gamey angle shooting.

GPB... not offended, nothing wrong with a little skepticism... especially when there's something to warrant it. I just dont see anything warranting it in this particular situation. To believe so, I'd not only have to believe Poulter is lying... but I'd have to believe he's conspired with his physician and the PGA Tour to help him perpetuate the lie. With nothing to support that, it seems entirely outlandish to me. In fact looking at Poutler's significant drop off in results this past year... considering the option something has been going wrong with him physically makes a lot more sense than not.

I agree that there appears to be nothing to prevent Doctors from discussing his patients health with patients consent.

That doesn't mean that it is ethically OK to do it. Why take the chance?

When I was working in the corporate field, we were specifically trained to not talk or even speculate about a co-worker's health.

GPB wrote:I agree that there appears to be nothing to prevent Doctors from discussing his patients health with patients consent.

That doesn't mean that it is ethically OK to do it.  Why take the chance?

When I was working in the corporate field, we were specifically trained to not talk or even speculate about a co-worker's health.

So if you thought someone had a sore foot you wouldn't "speculate" on it - even if they had a limp !!

Poulter was not limping the last time I saw him play.

GPB wrote:Poulter was not limping the last time I saw him play.

But you still speculate about his health...

Hello Mr Strawman.

GPB wrote:Poulter was not limping the last time I saw him play.

I think it's pretty easy to clear this Poulter injury thing up...  this from the story linked earlier (http://www.pgatour.com/news/2016/06/03/ian-poulter-foot-injury.html)

Poulter's doctor, Ara Suppiah, said the arthritic joint has worsened over the last year, and Poulter was able to keep playing after several cortisone shots. Suppiah said further shots would risk thinning the bones and leading to stress fractures, which might require significant time away from golf.

"We feel that the best option at this stage is to take some time off to allow complete recovery and rehabilitation of his foot," Suppiah said. "This will give him the best chance of returning to the game sooner and preventing further deterioration of the affected joint."

So the question seems real simple. What do you believe?  It has to be one or the other:

A) If you believe Dr. Ara Suppiah is fabricating this story and thus is a bald faced liar, them IMO there is ample reason to be skeptical of Poulter's injury.  

or

B) If you  think Dr. Ara Suppiah is being truthful, then there's no reasonable cause to be skeptical of Poulter's injury.

So A or B..... there's no grey area here the way I see it... is Suppiah lying or not?  If he's not, then what's the basis on which to remain skeptical.

robo,
If that explains his condition, which it possibly/probably does, then he must be daft not to hit the sanatorium earlier.

Rhetorical, I know!


At least he doesn't have Drumpf's "doctor", though I'm sure Poults would describe himself as incredibly healthy . . . . . .

Lol on me kwini... your response went wooosh.... right over my head.... sanatorium? Stumped?

Doctors office basically robo.

Does anyone on here think Knox would have got a pick if he had played the Wyndham? Or that he might have got a pick if he hadn't made the comments about DC being "morally obliged" to pick him due to his HSBC points not counting?

Hard to imagine the latter is the case because as clique'y as DC/Westwood etc are I doubt they are as fickle as that.

Mac, the way I see it is thus. As of right, Five "rookies" qualified automatically. This to me would be the biggest concern to a Captain and his team, therefore it seemed to me that it was inevitable he would pick at least two very experienced players, then as Pedro say, pay homage to the ET with the player in best form who didn't qualify automatically. That being Pieters.

I don't see any nepotism for Westwood, I would imagine the RC Captain and VC see him very much as an anchor player, and someone for the rest of the team to rely on.
If Westwood was American for example, he'd be a certain pick given his record.

But knox might be a better player than Westwood.  Lee has only won two PGAT events in about 20 years, Knox has won two this season.  Westwood has also never won a WGC.  As I said somewhere else recently sometimes a rookie isn't really a rookie.  Knox is no Wood or pissypantsmatty, he is a proven PGAT competitor.

If you were a young player in Scotland and you had the offer of a scholarship to a US university or to try and fund yourself for four years and hope to get through the minor tours, which would you choose?

It seems Knox is now being punished for making what seemed like a good option at the time. DC using a #Brexit mentality, having a fear of "others" who haven't quite taken the same path in life as you.

Mac, that's not the point. Adding Knox would mean 7/12 players have zero Ryder Cup experience. Whilst experience has done nothing for American Ryder Cup success, a contiguous and tight knit team is what European camaraderie is built upon.

Who cares if Knox has won WGC's and Westwood hasn't? 9C won 14 majors yet had a shiversome RC record. So who gives a flying toss what you have won? You are falling into the trap that everyone who has ever been involved with the American team is doing. You see everything in black and white, you have no imagination or ability to think about WHY Clarke may have done so.

How is Knox being punished? He didn't play very well in the last few weeks, whilst Pieters did. You could argue that Knox is a victim of circumstances i.e. being one of many "rookies" in contention, but that's not Clarke's fault so many were up there.

He's not been hard done by, he's just not been picked. You're acting like a tin foil hat wearing conspiracy theorising nutjob.

How is Knox being punished?

He did not qualify by right, he had to rely on a captains pick. The captain makes his pick based on what he thinks is needed for the team, and not necessarily the best player. I think we can all agree Tiger Woods is one of the best players ever, he has a pretty poor record in the Ryder Cup, being a better player does not equate to being the best player for a team competition.

Knox is ok, we are not missing out on a player/palmer/nicklaus hybrid.

GPB wrote:

pedro wrote:There are other factors like chemistry, team dynamics, incl. attachment to the ET.

and nepotism.

Don't be daft. You know nothing about the reasons Westwood was picked other than the guff Clarke said in public, which is soundbite for people like us. The fact you can't see anything +ve about Westwood in a team environment like the RC chimes surprisingly well with the inability of the US strokeplayers to gel as a team come the match proper.

Re. Knox, he himself has said that Clarke asked him to play the Wyndham (think it was that one). He didn't (how stupid was that?), he didn't get picked, end of story. Knox clearly doesn't really care about the RC and/or thought Clarke would pick him if he just missed out. Whoops.

John Cregan wrote:

super_realist wrote:

John Cregan wrote:Result of Ryder Cup not overly important to me- probably prefer to see US win it for Davis Love - having to put up with all that "Seve was looking down on us" nonsense in 2012 as well as Kaymer turning his back on Steve Stricker and running off the green - of course no one is allowed to accuse the Euros of bad sportsmanship, when the US whip up the crowd, it's bad sportsmanship, when Euros do it it's ok.

The behaviour of the European Team at Celtic Manor was particularly bad as even 3 foot putts for halves were followed by high fives and fist pumps and waving the arms up at the crowd. I'm already dreading the interviews by the Euros about "the incredible things that were said in the team room" and other such nonsense

This is one European pulling for the US this time.  

Once you hear "baba booey" for the 100th time, you might change your tune.

Almost as bad as "UUUUUrooppeeee" !

Don't watch and don't comment then John. Simple really.

Navy, I pretty much agree with all of what John said but will watch at least the final day of the RC as long as it doesn't clash with a Man Utd match or grand prix. It is easy enough to find aspects of an event distasteful but still watch it.


Super/ben

If Westwood is just there to hold together team spirit could he not have achieved that from the position of VC? Why does he need to play some average golf to boost team moral?

Yes Clarke and Poultry asked Knox to play Wyndham, he didn't. Same thing happened to Casey years ago when he was asked to come home and play a tourney on the ET, but refused.

Knox also admits he hardly knows Clarke or any of the VCs, including Poulter who has played a lot on the PGAT. Why would you pick such a guy over a hot home grown player? I could understand an American team would pick him, but why Europe who has a successful way of doing things?

http://www.golfchannel.com/news/doug-ferguson/lack-european-ties-hurt-knoxs-ryder-bid/

Mac, for the THIRD time, you still aren't getting it.

Let me explain for you. Westwood is an RC stalwart, he excels in ALL forms of the competition, his strokeplay form, is largely irrelevant when compared to what he brings to a TEAM format.  He has the type of game which is suited to a lot of players and he has a lot of strengths in his game which are suited to RC.

Westwood's career and specifically his RC career is not yet over, unlike Lawrie, Harrington etc.

You do not appear to have the ability to separate strokeplay  from matchplay.

He may be good, he may turn out a bad pick, but it's Clarke's prerogative as Captain, and he clearly sees it as a sensible choice in order to make sure that there is one fewer debutant. Are you really that short sighted?

Not everyone can make the team, and Knox, Kjeldsen etc have missed out on the basis of the Captain doing his bloody job. Honestly, you spend half the time saying the Captains do nothing in the position, and then you criticise him for actually doing one of the more difficult parts of his job, to pick the team HE thinks is best for Europe's chances. Stop being such a beligerant plank.

Super, has it occurred to you that I understand what you are saying but disagree with you?

Knox has 2 PGAT wins this season. If that doesn't sink in, then it is you who does not understand how good that is. He hasn't won some tinpot european tour event where the field is bulked up with aging tennis players.

Mac, it looks like Russell Knox has already heard of you..

''I might be a story today,'' Knox said. ''But in a couple of weeks' time, nobody is going to remember - except for a couple of Scottish people - that I didn't get picked.''

pedro

I don't really care about Knox specifically I just like highlighting the small mindedness of DC and winding up the European fans.

Although I have to say in recent times it has become clear that support, or lack of, for the European RC regulars determines your popularity on here. It was a great relief to read John's recent comments and realize I am not alone as a European who can't stand the whole team Europe and its fans attitude to the RC.

Mac, you are an idiot. Why do you think they have Captain's picks? It's PRECISELY so they can pick players with specific attributes. It adds a bit of strategy to team selection. Maybe Knox just didn't match up to Clarke's criteria. Again though, so what if Knox won two WGC's? Winning lots has never helped America, so why would it make Knox worth picking? Sounds very much like Knox would be the equivalent of Ashley Cole stuck on the side of the Roma team photo like some sort of loner. Not Clarkes fault.


If it wasn't they'd just have 12 qualifying by right wouldn't they?

Yes, You can disagree with me if you like, but you are displaying the sort of mentality which sees America pick on name and achievements rather than what they can add to the team, and they've been perennial failures over the last two decades by and large.

It's not Clarkes fault that Knox (or any other player) didn't qualify by right. He doesn't owe Knox a game, he's not even required to consider him if he doesn't think he will bring anything to the team.

Mac a week ago I thought Knox deserved the pick and would get it. The reason he never got it was the outstanding form of Pieters. For the balance of the team Clarke was always going to take 2 experienced players (with Kaymer & Westwood being the straightforward choices ahead the likes of Donald & McDowell).

I have a bit of sympathy for Knox to a point insofar as his WGC points didn't count (which has sweet FA to do with form as indicated by accumulated points but more ET politics). That being said, during the run in he knew where he stood and didn't do enough, indeed skipping the Wyndham could potentially have been interpreted as a lack of desire to secure a spot. He has a right to be disappointed but not aggrieved, he gave it good shot but came up just short. Lets face it, if I'd said this time last year "Russell Knox deserves a ryder cup pick next year" I'd have been laughed off the boards and you would have been among the first to have ridiculed such a statement.

On the other hand Jas, how many people were saying Big Fat Shane Lowry was a shoe in for the RC? He's fallen off the edge of a cliff lately.

Wonder if he'll return to form or whether he's going to be a journeyman for the rest of his career and just take home the odd cheque for top 30 finishes.

I would rather loose using an objective picking system than win picking one of the "lads". :raspberry:

That's the whole point though Mac, you haven't demonstrated that Westwood was picked because he's "one of the lads", that's just your absurd Corbynite assertion, whereas plenty people have put up actual arguments as to why he was picked, which you haven't even bothered to try and refute.

Knox didn't do enough, that's it. Move on.

I think form is overrated when it comes to the Ryder Cup.
It's a month away for a start and those in form now will probably not be in form then and vice versa.
Were I the captain (unlikely i'll admit) I would pick based on quality and type of game.
I would have taken Lowry as he clearly has more quality than a good few of the players in the team, although his recent form has been poor

More worrying is the form of some of the other rookies, neither of Willet, Sullivan or Fitzpatrick have done much of note over the summer and Wood has spent a good part of it on the Physio's bench.

If you can find a photo of me on an empty train I will concede.

I'm not so sure about that MPB, if perhaps the RC was being played at a Scottish venue in bad weather, he might bring something different that the likes of Wood or Bello might not have, but in general Lowry hasn't shown very often that he can perform all that consistently across several rounds which is required in the RC.

I thought he'd definitely be in this time last year, but glad the fat lump has failed to make it. He's just too streaky to me, and by that I mean months of streaky play.

He is streaky but I think his quality is fairly proven and I think his quality is better than a lot of those on the team's quality.
Last year he was winning a WGC.
It was only a couple of months ago he had a very real chance of winning the US Open, and finished 2nd.
His July and August form hasn't been good but that's not months.
I also think it's likely he'll be a RC regular in future matches and so would have been good to get him in now, in my opinion.

Again though, I think focussing on what someone has achieved is irrelevant. In both teams, no one has achieved more than Phil Mickelson on tour, yet he's one of the least effective players of all time in RC matches.
That's where Mac's analysis falls down, he's going on achievement rather than what someone can do for a team

Super

Your argument seem to be that past RC form is the thing to pick people on?

All very good, but what stats/attributes would you look at to identify whether or not an RC virgin will make a successful RC player?

European team isn't the best with all due respect..

US......Johnson, Mickelson, Reed, Spieth, Walker, Koepka, Johnson..

Chuck in Fowler, Bubba and Furyk to the mix.............Add in home soil and a Tailor made course.....

It adds up to a good weekend for any European to keep the TV switched off....Like the robot says in the film Alien "You have my sympathies"...

Stenson, Rose for me are the only two that could scare anybody.....

18-10.....

Mac, the point I'm making is that you need to look beyond strokeplay form. For example, it is often cited how much better the Americans are in majors, ranking, general talent, on paper etc etc etc, yet they consistently lose the RC, so what real use does form/achievement/majors/WGC play in deciding the outcome? None whatsoever.

Remember how woefully out of form Poulter was pre-medinah? Yet he singlehandedly turned round the tie from certain loss, to some at least giving the team hope.
So, to answer your question, picking players who don't know when to give up would be a good start, it seems that Knox for example doesn't even know how to begin to try seeing as he deliberately missed a tournament that could have seen him get in by right.

I've never made a claim on what would make a RC "rookie" a success, I've simply advocated that Clarke has picked Westwood for two reasons, firstly, he's got enormous experience and a good win/loss ratio, especially in Fourball/Foursomes, secondly, by picking Westwood, he's limiting the potential liability of having 7 (SEVEN) "rookies" in the team, for which he would get unbelievable stick should they lose.
I'm not sure why you can't see why it would be a good idea to balance the team a bit better in terms of experience.

It's fine that you see it in your one eyed myopia as being "nepotism", but no one else who actually understands the game of golf, and isn't just here to be on a wind up like you sees it that way.

The surest harbinger yet of a European win: Trussman's back.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:European team isn't the best with all due respect..

US......Johnson, Mickelson, Reed, Spieth, Walker, Koepka, Johnson..

Chuck in Fowler, Bubba and Furyk to the mix.............Add in home soil and a Tailor made course.....

It adds up to a good weekend for any European to keep the TV switched off....Like the robot says in the film Alien "You have my sympathies"...

Stenson, Rose for me are the only two that could scare anybody.....

18-10.....

You are aware that Mickelson has a DREADFUL RC record aren't you, whilst Fowler, Bubba and Furyk make a shockingly bad contribution to your team? Home soil and tailor made courses also haven't done America much use in the last 20 years.

I think we've hear your abysmal predictions before Trussman, yet, look what happened.

Wey hey Jockstrap Boy is back! Just what Europe need!

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:
US......Johnson, Mickelson, Reed, Spieth, Walker, Koepka, Johnson..

Chuck in Fowler, Bubba and Furyk to the mix............

......and you'll bascally have the same losers as 2 years ago.

Truss

Good to hear from you an I hope you stick around for the RC build up chat. I always enjoy your ability to needle the thin skinned Euro supporters on the golf board. You are a master at pushing the likes of Davie's buttons.


On a more serious not the Euro team does look pretty bad on paper, and I know super et al will reply with "on paper doesn't matter", but is this time arounds Euro team a lot weaker than those of the last 20 years.

Sulivan, Fitzykins, RCB, Wood, Kaymer, Westwood and even Willett all looking pretty bad at the moment.

Au contraire mon ami - he doesn't push any buttons except the one for the canned laughter!

McLaren wrote:Truss

Good to hear from you an I hope you stick around for the RC build up chat.  I always enjoy your ability to needle the thin skinned Euro supporters on the golf board.  You are a master at pushing the likes of Davie's buttons.


On a more serious not the Euro team does look pretty bad on paper, and I know super et al will reply with "on paper doesn't matter", but is this time arounds Euro team a lot weaker than those of the last 20 years.

Sulivan, Fitzykins, RCB, Wood, Kaymer, Westwood and even Willett all looking pretty bad at the moment.

Aw!! Kindred spirits, that's nice!! Do you get the bus to work as well Truss? You must be starving man...how long is it since your last slice of humble pie, has it been 2 years or did you pontificate over the Walker Cup last year, I can't remember.