Tiger unhappy With Lehman

[Colby]

http://msn.foxsports.com/story/3172018

[Kilroy]

Yah, O'Mera should be captain beacuse he fishes in Ireland. Gimmie a break

[EDSGOLF]

Who else do you think puts the bait on the hook for Tiger

[BC MIST]

Who else do you think puts the bait on the hook for Tiger

Steve Williams. He baits everyone else.

[mpare]

On this one, I have to say that I'm with Tiger. Mark O'Meara would have made a better pick for captain. He is both enthusiastic and calm under pressure. I'm not sure that the same thing can be said for Tom L, whose emotions sometimes get the better of him. That said, the outcome of the Ryder Cup seems to be tied directly to the degree of enthusiasm and heart manifested by the winners and Tom has plenty of that.

[donh]

Tiger not happy? Well the USGA must be shaking in their collective boots.

I'm sure that O'Meara's name came up in the selection discussions. But Tiger is only one person on a team of 12 individuals and his feelings were probably not necessarily considered when they made their selection. This is one problem when a body makes a secret selection.

For me personally, I'd like to know the list of candidates that were considered and the reasons why one candidate was chosen over another. But... that would hurt some egos now wouldn't it.

O'Meara as Capt. Sure. Why not him after Lehman. Zinger can wait (he's really young to be a capt.)

[mr shank]

Just further proof that Tiger has no idea of what a "team" concept is.
By opening his already too big mouth he has managed to create a controversy well before the event is even played.
Are they going to have pro-Lehman vs. pro-O'Meara camps now?
I'm looking forward to watching Tiger help the US lose again.

[Farzin]

Be it Tom, Mark Or Zinger, The choice for captaincy should be given to players by voting for candidates.
I think Tom is a better choice. He is more of a player than Mark O'meara, and he is more in touch with players.
Would it make any difference in 2006? I say Europe will beat them again no matter who the captain is..

[Andru]

Just further proof that Tiger has no idea of what a "team" concept is.
By opening his already too big mouth he has managed to create a controversy well before the event is even played.
Are they going to have pro-Lehman vs. pro-O'Meara camps now?
I'm looking forward to watching Tiger help the US lose again.

First of all you have no idea whether O'Meara or Lehman are better for the "team" so in this sense YOU have no idea what 'team' is.

From what I've heard about Tom Lehman he's a 'line drawn in the sand' Christian Republican. There's nothing wrong with that in itself. The only problem is, they just endured that in Hal Sutton. To me, you should go for the exact opposite this time around. Say O'Meara, Couples or Zinger. A more tolerant, easy going type of guy. The US needs to have the collars loosened a bit not tightend. I could be wrong maybe Tm will be everything the US needs and more.

Who cares. it's a meaningless competition between the 2nd and 3rd best teams in Golf.

It's too bad we can't see the INT team kick some American and Euro *****. That would be sweet.

[mr shank]

First of all you have no idea whether O'Meara or Lehman are better for the "team" so in this sense YOU have no idea what 'team' is.

Andru: for YOUR benefit:

Team: n.
1. A group on the same side, as in a game.
2. A group organized to work together: e.g. a team of engineers. (or golfers)

Nowhere did I say that O'Meara or Lehman would be the better captain so don't tell me I have no idea what a "team" is because I think Tiger should keep his mouth shut. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Tiger obviously doesn't care who is better for the team or he would shut up.

[Andru]

Andru: for YOUR benefit:

Team: n.
1. A group on the same side, as in a game.
2. A group organized to work together: e.g. a team of engineers. (or golfers)

Nowhere did I say that O'Meara or Lehman would be the better captain so don't tell me I have no idea what a "team" is because I think Tiger should keep his mouth shut. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Tiger obviously doesn't care who is better for the team or he would shut up.

What does make sense is Tiger would probably have a better idea of who would be better for the 'team'. Seeing that he is actually on the 'team'. Unlike you.

Second.

Talk about not making sense.....

Just further proof that Tiger has no idea of what a "team" concept is.

So, being critical of the selection of the captain means you don't understand the concept of a team? He's still going to be on the same side as Lehman competing for the US in the Ryder Cup.

That would mean he's on the 'team' right? I would say that passes your approved definition. 1. A group on the same side, as in a game. So he( Tiger ) obviously understands the team concept.

In essense you've proven that Tiger speaking out about the captains selection, is not actually proof that he doesn't understand the concept of a team.

Interpreting the definition you posted was for YOUR benefit and you're welcome.

Good Day.

[BC MIST]

Andru: for YOUR benefit:

Team: n.
1. A group on the same side, as in a game.
2. A group organized to work together: e.g. a team of engineers. (or golfers)

Nowhere did I say that O'Meara or Lehman would be the better captain so don't tell me I have no idea what a "team" is because I think Tiger should keep his mouth shut. That makes no sense whatsoever.

Tiger obviously doesn't care who is better for the team or he would shut up.

Maybe Tiger will be upset enough with this issue that he will refuse to play on the 2006 TEAM, assuming he qualifies. Considering his current Ryder Cup record, would he really be missed?

Perhaps the top 125 on the money list at the end of 2004 should vote for whom they would like to be captain in 2006. In that way they would have to live with their choice and the rest of us would not have to endure all of this adolescent whining.

Andu is right: The Ryder Cup is meaningless, but it is very entertaining.

[mr shank]

What does make sense is Tiger would probably have a better idea of who would be better for the 'team'. Seeing that he is actually on the 'team'. Unlike you.

Second.

Talk about not making sense.....



So, being critical of the selection of the captain means you don't understand the concept of a team? He's still going to be on the same side as Lehman competing for the US in the Ryder Cup.

That would mean he's on the 'team' right? I would say that passes your approved definition. 1. A group on the same side, as in a game. So he( Tiger ) obviously understands the team concept.

In essense you've proved that Tiger speaking out, about the captains selection, does NOT actually prove that he doesn't understand the concept of a "team".

Interpreting the definition you posted was for YOUR benefit and you're welcome.

Good Day.

I won't bother discussing this with you anymore. Your posts simply don't make sense.

[Andru]

I won't bother discussing this with you anymore. Your posts simply don't make sense.

It's not my fault you don't understand english.

[powerlefty]

Maybe Tiger will be upset enough with this issue that he will refuse to play on the 2006 TEAM, assuming he qualifies. Considering his current Ryder Cup record, would he really be missed?

Perhaps the top 125 on the money list at the end of 2004 should vote for whom they would like to be captain in 2006. In that way they would have to live with their choice and the rest of us would not have to endure all of this adolescent whining.

Andu is right: The Ryder Cup is meaningless, but it is very entertaining.

When Tiger becaomes the dominant player in Ryder Cup play that he once was in PGA Tour stroke play events, maybe then his comments should carry more weight. As it now stands, he is a mediocre 0.500ish team-match-play guy (not just this year but over a number of years he is 13-15-2 in Ryder/President's Cups). For a guy with that much talent, how can his record be explained other than he is not a great team-event player. Therefore he is no expert on team events, let alone what constitutes the best qualities for a captain. Now if he were Monty (16-7-5 for the other guys) his comments might mean something.

[Andru]

For a guy with that much talent, how can his record be explained other than he is not a great team-event player. Therefore he is no expert on team events, let alone what constitutes the best qualities for a captain. Now if he were Monty (16-7-5 for the other guys) his comments might mean something.

That's not true at all. Knowing what makes a good leader or captain has nothing to do with how well you play in the Ryder Cup, on a hockey rink, basketball court or the grid iron.

The two don't relate. You think the bozo's at the PGA of America or The R&A that actually select the captians were "great' ryder cup players? No. in fact some weren't even great PGA players.

You've never played a Ryder Cup. But given proper access to the players. I believe you could select a great captain.

For the record and it's not totally relevent to my point but here's an example of this fact. A good ryder cup record doesn't make you a good captain either.

Ben Crenshaw 3-8-1. Won the Cup
Hal Sutton. 7-5-4 Suffered the worst loss in history.

[golfmania]

Maybe Tiger will be upset enough with this issue that he will refuse to play on the 2006 TEAM, assuming he qualifies. Considering his current Ryder Cup record, would he really be missed?

Perhaps the top 125 on the money list at the end of 2004 should vote for whom they would like to be captain in 2006. In that way they would have to live with their choice and the rest of us would not have to endure all of this adolescent whining.

Andu is right: The Ryder Cup is meaningless, but it is very entertaining.

Agreed. If Tiger wants to speak loudly, don't speak at all, just refuse participation.

[mr shank]

It's not my fault you don't understand english.

I understand English perfectly, however, it IS your fault that you are unable to write intelligibly in English, which is why your posts don't make sense.