[ad_1]
RIt will not be an easy task to drop the breath of vulgarity, because "The Match" takes off Friday in Las Vegas. Those who have already been offended by Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson playing an exhibition game that can not even be considered glorified will not have been reassured by the promotional images of the latter surrounded by bundles. of notes that have emerged in recent days. The weight of Harry Enfield is immediately brought to mind. Enfield was at least loud as a comedy routine rather than participating in a cheeky marketing exercise.
With Samuel L Jackson joining Charles Barkley on the cover team, US residents will be charged $ 20 when they choose to participate in this contest, in which attendees wear microphones, the public can not enter and $ 9 million. is available for the winner. This pot was reduced by $ 1 million after a discreet call from the PGA Tour, anxious to preserve the authenticity of its FedEx Cup playoff bonus.
It was revealed this week that layovers between players, divided into six figures, will also be at stake. Unlike the price, it is at least money from competitors.
The imminent explosion of sports games in the United States is an important sub-parcel. Indeed, two of the biggest names in the game should they publicly defend a sometimes problematic concept. Golf should be cautious, as it was theoretically open to handling bets even before the legislation began to collapse across the Atlantic. Mickelson's penchant for a bet is legendary; his role in the Billy Walters internal trade scandal, so he should, too, be cautious.
Sign up for The Recap, our weekly e-mail editor's choice.
"I have a unique opportunity to do something that I have struggled to do in my career, which is to give Tiger a length in advance in whatever", said Mickelson. "It's great to win nine million. I just do not want to lose against him and give him satisfaction because the right to boast is what will be even worse than money. That raises the question of why $ 9 million is needed.
A recurring theme has been the lukewarm reaction elsewhere in golf. Rory McIlroy only partially joked that Woods versus Mickelson could have been valid 15 years ago. Denis Pugh, coach of the Open champion Francesco Molinari, and a well-known TV analyst, called the tie "crazy." Eddie Pepperell described it as "putrid" and "pathetic".
There is also a misconception that Woods and Mickelson have been fierce rivals in their careers. Mickelson's first success was the 2004 Masters, when Woods had already reunited eight of his 14 major tournaments. Mickelson did not catch Woods 'attention when he won none of his next four, which is partly related to Woods' seemingly temporary – albeit still serious – decline. Mickelson has never been the world's first player. Woods held this position for 683 weeks combined and remarkable.
"It's my luck after losing so many major tournaments and tournaments that I get a little something back," said Mickelson, publicly, at Woods this week. This idea, that the glory at Shallow Creek would somewhat offset the trail at Augusta National, is slightly ridiculous.
The game has a charitable element worthy of mention. Similarly, the fact that Woods in particular has generated fortunes for golf because of its presence even in the sport. If he considers the exhibition matches as a commercial avenue to explore, no one may have the right to chastise. At the grassroots level, the match does not cause any harm. There will inevitably be a plot – including that of other sports – around two players of such status who will face it in a very unusual way. "Being able to face Phil like that allows me to run my juice," said Woods.
The event distribution officials were still struggling Thursday in the hope of finding a British point of sale for the cover. Sky Sports, a specialist in boxing à la carte, initially hesitated over the number quoted. A last minute deal was reached on Thursday, leaving no real possibility of promotion.
The relationship between Woods and Mickelson had been so much icy cold for so long, making their sudden girlfriend quite extraordinary. Cynics will suggest that achieving the common tax value may have been helpful in building bridges. Defusing these dissenting voices seems like a monumental task.
Source link
