Archive for July, 2009

Friday, July 31st, 2009

RealClearSports: Bonds is Looking Better Every Day

By Art Spander

Day by day, leak by leak, Barry Bonds keeps looking better and baseball worse. Bonds didn’t ruin the game. Bonds didn’t poison pigeons or fail to stand for the national anthem. He simply used performance enhancing drugs.

So, we learn, did a great many others, A-Rod, the Rocket, Manny and now, according to one of those anonymous reports — this one on the New York Times web site, which makes it considerably more credible than others — David Ortiz.

We may not be amused, but neither are we surprised, about the names or the fact the names keep being made public, despite promises no such things would happen.

Players, dozens of them, were tested in 2003 and told the results would remain secret. That would have been impossible.

If we know what’s going on in the White House we’re going to know what’s going on in Bud Selig’s House. You think those TV shows stay on the air because people don’t like to talk?

Bonds now is insignificant. We went after him and his silent partner, Greg Anderson, the trainer, so long ago it’s almost ancient history. Mark Fainaru-Wada and his then San Francisco Chronicle colleague Lance Williams left no syringe unturned. We acted like the sky was falling, then shrugged.

What’s falling now are other names into place, the latest of those Ortiz and Manny, who in 2004 combined to help the Red Sox win their first World Series in 86 years. And just an aside, you think any of those self-righteous Boston fans would give back the title because, like the Bonds homers they yelped about, it might be tainted?

The line forms on the right. Soon there will be more stars who used what daintily are known as “performance enhancing drugs,” or PEDs, than didn’t. It was common practice. It was, some will argue, a necessity.

In their book, “Game of Shadows,” Fainaru-Wada and Williams insist what pushed Bonds over the edge was watching Mark McGwire and Sammy Sosa in their magical run in 1998 and bristling that the two were getting more attention than he.

Barry got his attention and his home run record. Does it deserve an asterisk, as Hank Aaron, who held the old mark, contends? Maybe. But Selig, the commissioner, is loath to tarnish his legacy. So there aren’t going to be any little stars next to a name with the notation, “Was thought to have put something into his body besides milk and honey.”

Players took steroids. Baseball did nothing to stop them until it was too late. Back in the 1989 World Series, the one in which an earthquake had us much more frightened than a little thing like illegal substances, somebody mentioned a drink called the “Canseco Cocktail.”

In theory, Jose — looking, well, bulked up — was ingesting stuff that enabled him to hit that shot into the third deck of the place now called Rogers Centre but then known as SkyDome.

How naïve. He wasn’t taking things orally, he was taking injections in his bottom, not that the method was of such great importance.

After the New York Times disclosures on Ortiz and Ramirez — revelations, they’re not — Canseco said he wasn’t surprised. Neither was anybody else, Jose. But we have to find people willing to give their opinions, and inevitably when drugs and baseball are involved, Canseco appears as an expert witness.

The probability that anyone who starting in the mid-1990s hit a lot of balls over fences was artificially enhanced has turned into a very good one. The probability that those major leaguers who agreed to be tested “secretly” in 2002 will be outed is an excellent one.

The feds, knowing all too well that steroids were illegal in America, if not America’s national pastime, seized the results of the tests. Now newspapers are seizing the chance to make everyone look bad.

The Times says its information about Ramirez and Ortiz “emerged through interviews with multiple lawyers and others connected to the pending litigation.” The lawyers spoke anonymously, the Times said, because the testing information is under seal by a court order.

Barry Bonds has a different problem. He’s being hounded by the government on charges of perjury, the U.S. claiming he lied under oath when in December 2003 Barry said he never used the stuff.

But the guess is that Barry never will come to trial. And who cares anymore? He took his grief. He was the Lone Ranger, the one who stood alone until it seems there was no room left on the list for all players who were guilty. The line forms to the right.

As a reporter since 1960, Art Spander is a living treasure of sports history. A recipient of the Dick McCann Memorial Award — given for his long and distinguished career covering professional football — he has earned himself a spot in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. He was recently honored with the Lifetime Achievement Award by the PGA of America for 2009.

- - - - - -

http://www1.realclearsports.com/articles/2009/07/30/bonds_is_looking_better_every_day.html
© RealClearSports 2009

Wednesday, July 29th, 2009

RealClearSports: Only in New York, the Mets Mess

By Art Spander

It was the great golfer Lee Trevino who correctly told us never to complain about what you shot. Ninety percent of the people don’t care, he said, the other 10 percent wish you had been worse.

So it has been with this situation involving the Mets front office, something more Hollywood than New York. A team executive, Tony Bernazard, was fired after challenging minor leaguers to a fistfight. Then the general manager, Omar Minaya, blamed a New York Daily News reporter, Adam Rubin, for Bernazard’s demise.

We know the rest of the country looks upon New York without sympathy. Troubles in Gotham? Most American sports fans wish whatever goes on would be worse.

“Tragedy,” cracked Woody Allen, “is when I cut my finger. Comedy is when you fall down a manhole. What do I care?”

Long Island didn’t care because the Washington Nationals dispatched their manager, Manny Acta, recently. Yet, we’re all supposed to be concerned about the Mets? New York believes so.

Everything in New York — A-Rod’s back, the unsold season tickets at the two new ball parks, the Knicks’ inability to draft Stephen Curry who, heh, heh, was taken by the Warriors — is supposed to be of national interest.

On the field, the Mets are perhaps the biggest bust in baseball, and who can ignore that collapse? But a personnel director challenging a group of minor leaguers because he didn’t like their attitude? And then the GM getting into a grumping contest with a newsie? It isn’t Iran or the U.S. economy, that’s a given.

Unless you’re a New Yorker. Then it’s the only thing that matters. Unless you’re a Yankees fan. My friend, Bill Madden, the sharp baseball guy from the Daily News, said the Yankees and Mets didn’t have games as much as they had 162 incidents.

What Madden’s paper said in the headlines on the back and front pages was “Smears of a Clown,” and “Shirt Hits the Fan.” And no matter what else, those lines are both telling and brilliant. Newsday bannered, “Big Apple Circus,” while the Post, called it “Amazin’ Fireworks.”

Why doesn’t this nonsense happen in Minneapolis? Or San Diego? Or Cincinnati? If a Mariners executive lost his temper, would anyone in Seattle lose perspective? (Since the city is down to one printed paper, would anyone in Seattle even know?)

People screw up every day, in sports and out. You make a mistake, you correct the mistake, apologize if need be, and then move on. Except in New York. Nobody ever moves on in Gotham. Bill Buckner still is a villain or a hero, depending on your viewpoint. Twenty years from now Adam Rubin will be. In New York.

Reporters are told to tell the story, not be the story. Rubin blew that one. Rather, Minaya did. He contended Rubin wrote critical articles about the Mets because he wanted Bernazard canned so Rubin could get Bernazard’s job. Now there’s a new one.

Every journalist thinks he knows more than the GM or head coach or manager, but heaven help him if he actually accepted the position. Especially in New York. As the lyrics go, paranoia strikes deep.

Rubin confessed only that he didn’t know how he was going to cover the Mets any longer. May I suggest with a couple of straitjackets and a hidden microphone? It’s one thing when Fox News and Obama can’t get along, but a baseball journalist and a GM? Help!

It’s time for the Mets executives either to take a vacation or take a hike. These are ball games, not life-threatening decisions. What happened to the Mets big shots was that their team fell apart, which anywhere is looked upon unkindly and in New York is akin to passing military secrets to the Taliban.

When teams fail to meet expectations, even if the reasons — injuries for example — are legitimate, the sad souls who put them together, Minaya, Bernazard, et al, tend to fall apart as quickly as the ball club. For the past couple of years, Minaya was treated as both delightfully brilliant and pleasant. Then all of a sudden, he’s accusing a lowly sports writer of conspiracy.

Panic is what it is. Understandably. Nothing can be approached rationally in New York, and so Minaya couldn’t approach Adam Rubin’s knocks rationally. There they were one of the most famous executives in baseball and one of the stars of a tabloid newspaper in a messy struggle.

How unfortunate. Or some might say, to borrow from Lee Trevino, how wonderful.

As a reporter since 1960, Art Spander is a living treasure of sports history. A recipient of the Dick McCann Memorial Award — given for his long and distinguished career covering professional football — he has earned himself a spot in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. He was recently honored with the Lifetime Achievement Award by the PGA of America for 2009.

- - - - - -

http://www1.realclearsports.com/articles/2009/07/28/only_in_new_york_the_mets_mess_96436.html
© RealClearSports 2009

Wednesday, July 29th, 2009

SF Examiner: A’s, Giants headed in opposite directions

By Art Spander
Special to The Examiner

SAN FRANCISCO — The funny thing as one considers the progress of the local baseball nines, is that back in April, the belief was if either team could produce a winning record it would be the A’s. Goes to show what we know.

Maybe the Giants are not the surprise team in the major leagues, but they at least draw a few upraised hands when somebody asks for a vote.

And west of Citi Field, is there any franchise a bigger bust than the A’s?

The trades the last few days, one apiece, were a reflection of what the folks in charge think of their franchises. Oakland is always getting rid of somebody. In this case it was Matt Holliday. Conversely, the Giants are looking for help, not merely a way out.

Ryan Garko isn’t Ryan Howard, but seemingly he isn’t Travis Ishikawa, and Giants management believes the team will be better off with Garko, which we were told back in grade school was the whole idea of making a trade. Unless you were the A’s of recent vintage. Yes, Matt Holliday was brought in to be sent out. Was there any doubt?

Then again, when the A’s introduced Holliday and Jason Giambi at a media session last winter and then a few weeks later in Arizona brought in Nomar Garciaparra and Orlando Cabrera, there was a misguided thought Oakland would be less than embarrassing. Goes to show what we know.

There is no attempt here to make anyone believe Holliday is Mark McGwire, but the last time the A’s sent a power hitter to the St. Louis Cardinals it was the red-haired kid who would hit 70 home runs in a season. Sort of makes one wary.

When taunted about the Holliday trade, an A’s spokesman pointed out something about Oakland getting a potentially great young third baseman, Brett Wallace … meaning he’ll eventually be sent to the Diamondbacks?

This is not to berate the continually berated and continually maneuvering Billy Beane — guilty, your honor — but when does the gerbil-cage wheel stop turning? Is Oakland ever going to hold onto what it has? Ever?

Long ago and far away, the A’s were champions. But so were the Raiders and 49ers. That bit of gloating, “No splash hits, four World Series,” is now irrelevant. No, the Giants haven’t won a World Series the 50–plus years they’ve been in San Francisco, but they’re trying.

The season ended weeks ago for the A’s. In Oakland, it’s always tomorrow, but tomorrow never comes. You can’t tell whether they’re at the beginning or the end or who will be showing up next February for introductions.

Over at AT&T Park, there’s a palpable satisfaction, although being miles back of the dreaded Dodgers is proof the Giants are in need of more than Garko.

San Francisco, we’re advised, has talent a year or two away from the bigs — Buster Posey, Angel Villalona, Madison Bumgarner — and yet we kept hearing thoughts like that about the A’s system. And Oakland is hopeless once more.

You can’t be certain, but the Giants seemingly have a future. All the A’s have is a past, and a potentially great third baseman.

Art Spander has been covering Bay Area sports since 1965 and also writes on www.artspander.com and www.realclearsports.com. E-mail him at typoes@aol.com.

- - - - - -

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/Spander-As-Giants-headed-in-opposite-directions-51963587.html
Copyright 2009 SF Newspaper Company

Friday, July 24th, 2009

RealClearSports: ESPN Rarely Exercises Caution, Why Now?

By Art Spander

So the world leader in avoiding stories it alone determines not to be true has had a change of opinion. Covering the civil case involving Ben Roethlisberger is, according to the announcement by ESPN, “the right thing to do.”

After, in tactics that would have impressed the old Soviet Union bosses, ESPN attempted to avoid all mention of the situation.

Which might have worked if the issue hadn’t been covered in every daily television sports roundup and radio talk show.

The issue here is responsibility. It’s one thing when a coach says his quarterback forgot the play. That’s sports. It’s something else when an individual is accused of rape. As was Kobe Bryant six years ago. As was Ben Roethlisberger a few days ago. That’s life. Dirty, nasty, how-did-it-happen life.

There are two sides every time a well-paid athlete is accused of bedding a young woman who later claims it was against her will.

She knew exactly what she was doing, and now months later is attempting to hit the guy in the wallet big time, taking advantage of a reputation or a bankbook.

Or the jock, raised on entitlement, figured as in everything else from the time he was about age 15 the rules of society didn’t apply to him and because he was rich and famous would never be prosecuted.

That another non-sports sports story involving ESPN, or at least announcer Erin Andrews, illegally photographed in her hotel room, was crashing some of the front pages at the same moments could only be described as fateful. One tale had nothing to do with the other, but they became linked.

July is a quiet month for sports journalism, meaning a bad month for sports journalism. Baseball is grinding away, relatively unchanged from the way it had been in May and June. NFL camps are yet to begin. The British Open, as compelling as the most recent might have been, is merely a blip on any screen.

So the smallest of incidents are overplayed, not to imply that what happened to Andrews was in any way minor — it was disgraceful. And surely when a man who has won two Super Bowls, including the most recent, is involved, we’re going to pay attention.

ESPN did just that. What it didn’t do, until Wednesday, was treat the story the way it normally does when a sporting celebrity, say its special favorite, Terrell Owens, is involved. ESPN brings out the big artillery and big names, lawyers, former coaches, and studio analysts to attack our senses. There’s nothing wrong with that. It’s just around midnight, there’s nothing left.

Conversely, with Roethlisberger, there was plenty left. ESPN, when the civil suit alleging sexual assault against Roethlisberger was filed in a Nevada court, issued a memo to all its outlets and reporters, “do not report.”

One feels sorry for Roethlisberger if the suit by one Andrea McNulty, claiming a year ago he lured her to his room at the Harrah’s hotel at Lake Tahoe during the annual celeb golf tournament, is only an attempt at gold-digging.

One feels sorry for McNulty, a penthouse concierge, if her story that Roethlisberger demanded she fix a broken TV in his room and then attacked her is true.

One feels no less sorry for ESPN which, if it backed away from its responsibility as a news outlet only to protect its acknowledged relationship with Roethlisberger, lost more than a minimum of credibility.

It was July 2003 when Kobe Bryant was accused of persuading a concierge at hotel outside Vail, Colo., to come to his room. Now it is July 2009 when Ben Roethlisberger is accused of persuading a concierge at Nevada hotel to come to his room.

ESPN was all over the Kobe story, sending reporters and attorneys from Los Angeles and Washington as the trial unfolded. Maybe Roethlisberger never comes to trial. Maybe he doesn’t deserve to come to trial — although then again, possibly he does. But why the shift in ESPN’s approach?

“Based on the sensitive nature of the story and other factors we mentioned,” ESPN’s Bill Hoffheimer told Pro Football Talk, “we initially exercised caution and did not report it.”

That philosophy is admirable, except it runs counter to the very existence of ESPN which, while most of the time does a fine job, rarely can be described as exercising caution.

The network delights in letting us know everything its workers accomplish, even when little more than “confirming” a story that first appeared somewhere else, such as Fox Network or Associated Press.

You wish it would confirm why it treated the Ben Roethlisberger story in a most unusual manner, like not treating it at all.

As a reporter since 1960, Art Spander is a living treasure of sports history. A recipient of the Dick McCann Memorial Award — given for his long and distinguished career covering professional football — he has earned himself a spot in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. And he has recently been honored with the Lifetime Achievement Award by the PGA of America for 2009. 

- - - - - -

http://www1.realclearsports.com/articles/2009/07/23/espn_rarely_exercises_caution_why_now.html 
© RealClearSports 2009

Wednesday, July 22nd, 2009

SF Examiner: Likeable Watson forced to deal with sting of defeat

By Art Spander
Examiner Columnist

Losing, we have been told, is the great American sin. But was it sinful what Tom Watson did at the British Open? Surely, it was disappointing. The idea in sports is to win.

The reality is that more times than not we lose.

“The taste of defeat,” wrote basketball star and U.S. Senator Bill Bradley, “has a richness of experience all its own.”

The memory of J.T. Snow hunched over and staring at his locker after the seventh game of the 2002 World Series forever will remain. Snow and the Giants had that Series won, had a 5-0 lead in Game 6. Yet they didn’t win.

And there was Snow contemplating what could have been, what Giants fans to this day believe should have been.

Tom Watson is very much a part of the Bay Area as the Giants and A’s and the rest of the franchises. He came from Missouri, but was a Stanford man … still is a Stanford man.

No cheering in the press box is the yardstick to which American journalists must adhere. An event must be approached without bias. In this British Open, however, I cheered silently for Watson.

Not only because of his age, not only because a 59-year-old golfer finishing first in a major championship tournament would have been the sports story of the century, an irresistible tale of persistence and implausibility, but because in this world of fraudulence and dishonesty, Tom Watson is genuine, truthful.

In the winter of 1968 as a Stanford freshman, Watson for the first time competed in the San Francisco Amateur at Harding Park. In the match-play portion he hit an errant shot, into the trees, at the 10th hole I think it was, and after he putted out for what presumably was a par, he said he had moved the ball accidentally at address, thus had a bogey and lost the hole.

No one saw his transgression. The ball had remained virtually in the same place it had been. He received no advantage. But Tom Watson was governed by the rules of golf, as well as his conscience. For him, there was only one way to play the game.

Tom has had his moments, created his legacy. He won five British Opens, two Masters and then at Pebble Beach in 1982 in the U.S. Open. He was involved with Sandy Tatum and Robert Trent Jones II in the creation of Spanish Bay Golf Links on the Monterey Peninsula and has taken part in charity events at Stanford.

He can do without our tears, even though symbolically he deserves them.

Watson played so well for so long in the Open, until the last of the 72 holes, and then as the Bay Area, as America, as the world of golf winced, he messed up, dropped into a playoff and lost to Stewart Cink.

“This ain’t a funeral, you know,” Watson told a grim-faced pack of writers in what the Open still calls the “Press Centre.”

No, it was a defeat, supposedly enriching an athlete’s experience.

You looked at Watson as you did Snow back in 2002 and found that concept very hard to understand.

Art Spander has been covering Bay Area sports since 1965 and also writes on www.artspander.com and www.realclearsports.com. E-mail him at typoes@aol.com.

- - - - - -

http://www.sfexaminer.com/sports/Likeable-Watson-forced-to-deal-with-sting-of-defeat-51368017.html
Copyright 2009 SF Newspaper Company

Sunday, July 19th, 2009

Newsday: Watson falters, loses British Open playoff to Cink

By Art Spander
Special to Newsday

TURNBERRY, Scotland — It could have been the sports story of many a year, the golf story of the century. Tom Watson, who will turn 60 in September, was going to win the British Open. He had a putter in his hand and the tournament in his grasp.

It was wonderful, fantastic. And then like that, it was gone.

Then like that, late Sunday afternoon, Stewart Cink — mentioned so often as a probable major tournament winner — was raising his arms in triumph and reaching for the historic silver claret jug on which his name, as is tradition, already had been engraved.

Watson was a shot ahead after 71 holes of the 138th Open, but he bogeyed the 72nd and came apart in a brutally sad four-hole playoff in which he looked like the 59-year-old man he is, getting beaten by six shots.

Cink, playing five groups ahead of Watson, birdied the 18th hole for a 1-under-par 69 and a total of 2-under 278. It didn’t seem to mean much until Watson’s 8-iron approach to 18 was long. Using the putter, he took three from just off the green, shot 72 and also finished with 278.

Cink went par-par-birdie-birdie in the playoff, Watson bogey-par-double bogey-bogey.

Tied for third at 1-under 279 were two Englishmen — Lee Westwood, who held the lead before bogeying 15, 16 and 18, and Chris Wood.

“It would have been a hell of a story,” said Watson, who had at least part of the lead in all four rounds at Turnberry, where 32 years earlier he won the second of his five Open titles.

Indeed. Not that the 36-year-old Cink didn’t like the story that came to be. He grew up watching Watson’s World Golf Hall of Fame career, and to face him in a playoff for a major, Cink said, in a bit of awkward prose, “would be beyond even my mind’s imagination capabilities.”

The presumption was that holding up the last day was beyond Watson’s capabilities. He had hip surgery in October. He plays the Champions Tour, where the courses are not as severe. He had not won a major since the 1983 British Open.

But with a hole to play, Watson was a shot ahead and seemed destined to become by 11 years the oldest man ever to win a major. Unfortunately, he hit an 8-iron when he said he should have used a 9, and the ball rolled off the back edge of the 18th green, Watson made a bad putt, then missed an 8-footer for the par and the win.

“Yes,” Watson said, “it’s a great disappointment. It tears at your gut, as it always has torn at my gut. It’s not easy to take. The playoff was just one bad shot after another and Stewart did what he had to do.”

Which was make one good shot after another.

Cink had won other tournaments. He had been on Ryder Cup teams. He just didn’t have that finishing touch, a major. He does now.

“How much I needed it, I don’t know,” Cink said. “I’m not sure I ever thought about whether I was good enough to win a major or not. I knew I’d been close a few times, but I never heard my name tossed in there with the group of best ones not to win.

“So maybe I was starting to believe that, that I wasn’t one of the best ones to never win a major.”

Watson opened his post-round interview with the admonition, “This ain’t a funeral, you know.”

It was a golf tournament that gave Watson and others a huge jolt and then, excluding Cink, a massive letdown.

“It was almost,” Watson said. “Almost. The dream almost came true.”

- - - - - -

http://www.newsday.com/about/ny-spbrit2012984854jul19,0,2597041.story
Copyright © 2009, Newsday Inc.

Sunday, July 19th, 2009

CBSSports.com: Easygoing Cink gives fans fairy tale — just not one they want

By Art Spander
The Sports Xchange/CBSSports.com

TURNBERRY, Scotland — It wasn’t as if he shot Santa Claus. All Stewart Cink did was shoot under par. That he beat Tom Watson, whose age and reputation made him everybody’s favorite, couldn’t be held against Cink.

Finally Cink had won a major, the oldest one on the planet, the British Open.

Did it by sinking a 15-foot birdie putt on the final hole of regulation Sunday, and then after the 59-year-old Watson bogeyed the same hole, Cink crushed him in their four-hole playoff.

“It’s a surreal experience for me,” said Cink. “Not only did I play one of my favorite courses, but playing against Tom Watson. I grew up watching Tom Watson play on TV and hoping I could follow in his footsteps at the Open Championship.

“I feel so happy just to be part of all this.”

As he should. As Watson felt so devastated.

After the 36-year-old Cink and Watson tied with 72-hole scores of 2-under 278, Watson, coming unglued, went 4 over par in the four extra holes — the fifth, sixth, 17th and 18th — while Cink went 2 under.

A onetime star at Georgia Tech, Cink twice finished third in majors, including the 2001 U.S. Open, when — despite a reputation for being a great putter — he missed a short one on the final green that kept him from a playoff. Cink is maybe the best unknown star on the PGA Tour.

He understood the compassion for Watson, a five-time Open winner who by 11 years could have become the oldest champion in a major.

Stewart was the unintended villain, the guy who ruined arguably the best golf story ever.

“Playing against Tom, it was with mixed feelings, because I watched him with such admiration all week,” Cink said.

The admiration was universal. Virtually everyone in the boisterous gallery wanted Watson to make history.

“It’s not the first time I’ve been under the radar,” said Cink. “I’ve played a lot of times with Tiger [Woods] and hearing the Tiger roars, and with Mickelson. I’m usually the guy the crowd appreciates, but they’re not behind me 100 percent. Maybe this will change it.”

Or maybe not. For some, this 138th British Open at Turnberry on the Firth of Clyde will always be the one Watson lost rather than the one Stewart Cink one. The one that might have been.

Cink came in with a 1-under-par 69 Sunday, holing that 15-footer on 18, although at the time, with Watson several holes behind and battling Englishman Lee Westwood, the putt didn’t seem that big. As we learned, it would become huge.

An easy-going individual — and in this world of shouting and waving, that may have kept him in the figurative shadows — Cink was mentioned by the golfing cognoscenti as one of the game’s top players.

He had won other tournaments. He had been on Ryder Cup teams. He just didn’t have that finishing touch, a major. He does now.

“How much I needed it, I don’t know,” Cink allowed. “I’m not sure I ever thought about whether I was good enough to win a major or not. I knew I’d been close a few times, but I never heard my name tossed in there with the group of best ones not to win.

“So maybe I was starting to believe that, that I wasn’t one of the best ones to never win a major.”

He can stop believing. The way he went through that playoff late on a windy afternoon, going par-par-birdie-birdie, was the stuff of excellence. He talked about Tiger, but Woods rarely has put on so emphatic a performance.

Someone wondered if Cink, who was embraced by his wife and family just off the 18th green, felt he had come in at the end of a syrupy Hollywood film and stolen the girl just before the final scene.

“Well, just as long as I get the girl,” said Cink, “I’m OK with that. No, I don’t feel that way. I feel like whether Tom was 59 or 29, he was one in the field. I had to play against everybody in the field and, of course, come out on top.

“I don’t think anything can be taken away. Somebody may disagree with that, but it’s going to be hard to convince me.”

Understandably. Cink did what he was supposed to do, win the tournament, although admittedly it was not what many people wanted him to do. The Tom Watson Tale was one that never may come along again.

“I never would have dreamed that I would go up against Tom Watson head-to-head in a playoff for a major championship,” Cink said. “That would be beyond even my mind’s imagination capabilities.”

That’s an awkward way of saying that even if the ending wasn’t all fuzzy and magical for the world of golf, the story was as good as it gets for Stewart Cink.

- - - - - -

http://www.cbssports.com/golf/story/11969462
© 2009 CBS Interactive. All rights reserved.

Saturday, July 18th, 2009

Newsday: Watson holds on to lead at British Open

TURNBERRY, Scotland — This can’t keep going, can it? Tom Watson can’t continue rolling back the years and rolling in the putts, remaining on top of a British Open which may be lacking Tiger Woods but in no way is lacking in subplots, drama and emotion.

For a second straight year, someone out of the past has taken control of the present, making us wonder if anything we know about golf or sports makes sense and whether Watson for one final round is able to keep waking the echoes.

Greg Norman was 53 when he led after 54 holes of the 2008 Open at Royal Birkdale and then, not unexpectedly, tumbled under the weight of the pressure, ending up tied for third behind Padraig Harrington.

Now we wait to see what 59-year-old Tom Watson, leading this 138th Open by a shot, is able to accomplish, not that what he’s already accomplished at Turnberry so far hasn’t been remarkable.

Watson was 27 when he won the Open at Turnberry in ‘77, the second of his five Open titles, defeating Jack Nicklaus by a stroke. Jack was 10 years older than Tom. Now Watson’s closest competitors are in their 20s and 30s.

Of course, as the saying goes, the golf ball doesn’t know how old you are.

Watson began the third round Saturday tied for first with Steve Marino at 5 under par. Marino destructed, a 76 with three 6s, one on a par 3. Watson wobbled, but after he dropped into second by a shot, he birdied 16 and 17 to walk off as the leader.

He is at 4-under 206 after a 1-over 71. Mathew Goggin, an Australian who plays the PGA Tour, and Ross Fisher, an Englishman who plays the European Tour - and tied for fifth in last month’s U.S. Open at Bethpage - are at 207. Goggin shot 69, Fisher 70.

Tied for fourth at 2-under 208 are Lee Westwood of England and Retief Goosen of South Africa, a two-time U.S. Open winner.

To make things more interesting, Fisher’s wife, Jo, is in London expecting the couple’s first child, and he has said he would leave the tournament to be at her side if she went into labor. He has a jet standing by at nearby Prestwick.

Watson has two grown children. And, as he said, a sense of serenity. His poignant story involves memories of his longtime caddie Bruce Edwards, who died in April 2004 of ALS, Lou Gehrig’s disease.

“It’s kind of emotional out there,” Watson conceded. “I looked at Ox [his caddie Neil Oxman, a friend and political consultant], after I hit my shot on the green at 18, handed him the club and said, ‘Bruce is with us today.’ He said, ‘Don’t make me cry.’ So he started crying and I started crying.”

Watson insisted he’s not thinking of the magnitude of what has been happening as he tries to become the oldest by 11 years to win a major tournament. Julius Boros was 48 when he took the 1968 PGA Championship.

“First day here,” Watson said, “yeah, let the old geezer have his day in the sun, a 65. The second day you said, well, that’s OK. And then now today, you perk up your ears and say this old geezer might have a chance to win the tournament. It’s kind of like Greg Norman last year.

“I don’t know what’s going to happen, but I do know I feel good about what I did today. I feel good about my game plan. And who knows, it might happen.”

- - - - - -

http://www.newsday.com/about/ny-spbrit1912983429jul18,0,7708853.story

Copyright © 2009, Newsday Inc.

Saturday, July 18th, 2009

CBSSports.com: Fisher hopes he, and wife, can hold on for one more day

By Art Spander
The Sports Xchange/CBSSports.com

TURNBERRY, Scotland — Oh, baby.

This is a matter of, well, golf and life, if not necessarily in that order. Ross Fisher is doing what he can to win his country’s golfing championship. His wife is doing what she can not to give birth to their first child.

Until her husband plays his final shot Sunday, which of course both hope will be for a victory in the British Open.

This 138th Open lost Tiger Woods after 36 holes, but it doesn’t lack for drama or human interest. Or subplots.

Not when 59-year-old Tom Watson has the 54-hole lead. Not when an Englishman, Ross Fisher, is shot behind, tied for second. Not when Jo Fisher is in the maternity ward down in a London hospital.

Not when her husband has said if she goes into labor he will leave the links to join her.

A couple of days ago, the 28-year-old Fisher said if he were notified the baby was coming, he would be going to catch a plane. But now that three rounds are history and he has a chance to make history, Fisher has begun to vacillate.

Asked what he would do if before he teed off for the final 18 holes a text message arrived of the impending birth, Fisher responded, “We’ll cross that bridge when we come to it.”

Then later he said, “If Jo goes into labor, I’ll be supporting her 100 percent, and I won’t be here. I’ll be with her, because it’s something that I don’t want to miss.

“It’s been an intriguing week. … I’ve got through three days, and she’s got through three days. Who knows? To win and then get back home and see the birth of our first child would be obviously a dream come true.”

Watson finished at 4-under-par 206 on Saturday at windblown Turnberry, on Scotland’s western coast. Fisher, with an even-par 70, is at 207, as is Australian Mathew Goggin. Another shot back are Lee Westwood, another Englishman, and South Africa’s Retief Goosen.

Fisher mostly plays the European Tour, but a month ago he came in fifth in the U.S. Open at Bethpage, the best finish by someone from this side of the Atlantic. The result was uplifting. The challenge is fascinating.

Only five Brits have won the British Open in the past 60 years, the last one Paul Lawrie of Scotland in 1999. The others are Nick Faldo, the Englishman, in 1992, ‘90 and ‘87; Sandy Lyle of Scotland in 1985; Tony Jacklin of England in 1969 and Max Faulkner of England in 1951.

Fisher understands what a victory would mean. But it doesn’t mean as much as his child.

“No news is good news,” he said of the next few hours. “Hopefully she’ll be able to hang on another day, and hopefully I can hang on another day.”

In his gallery was a man wearing a billed baseball-type hat with a hand-painted message: “Hold on Mrs. Fisher.”

Mr. Fisher has figured out the closing holes of this course hard by the Firth of Clyde. He birdied 16-17-18 on Thursday, 16 on Friday and then 16 and 17 on Saturday.

“Not bad,” mused Fisher, a classic English understatement.

Then, egged on, he continued.

“I don’t know what it is,” he said, “but 16 [a 455-yard par-4 with an approach shot over a burn, or stream] I birdied every day. Seventeen [a downwind par-5] is probably one of the easier holes, and if you don’t make birdie, you feel like you’ve slipped a shot.”

Fisher said he likes links courses, having competed on them as an amateur, but in his only two British Opens, he missed the cut at Carnoustie in 2007 and finished 39th a year ago at Royal Birkdale.

And his European Tour record this year isn’t terribly impressive. In 19 events, he has missed 10 cuts, including six in succession at one stretch.

Yet he is 21st in the world rankings, having won last year’s European Open and this year making the semifinals of the Accenture World Match Play in Marana, Ariz.

“I feel quite prepared to play,” Fisher said. “I probably haven’t got the experience as to the likes of Tom [Watson], you know. He’s been playing this golf for quite a few years.”

Another understatement. Watson has been playing links golf since before Ross Fisher was born and has won the Open five times, going back to 1975.

Whether Watson or Fisher is a bigger surprise is anyone’s guess. One is two months from his 60th birthday. The other is only in his third year as a touring pro.

“Tom is similar to my story,” Fisher said. “It’s a bit of a Cinderella story. To be playing as well as he is at age 59, I mean, it’s incredible. He won here, what, 32 years ago? So I’m sure there will be a lot of followers out there rooting for Tom.

“But I had my fair share today. It was wonderful to hear the reception, up to every tee, up to every green. Hopefully I can play good [Sunday] and it will be for a win. If not, to push Tom and just put in a good performance.”

While Jo Fisher waits a few hours longer for her own special performance.

- - - - - -

http://www.cbssports.com/golf/story/11967129
© 2009 CBS Interactive. All rights reserved.

Friday, July 17th, 2009

Newsday: Watson, 59, shares British Open lead; Woods misses cut

By Art Spander
Special to Newsday

TURNBERRY, Scotland — The haunting unpredictability of golf jolted the British Open on a windy afternoon that sent the world’s No. 1 player out of the tournament and surprising Tom Watson and Steve Marino into a share of the halfway lead.

Tiger Woods, the overwhelming favorite — in the betting parlors as well as in casual conversations — missed the cut. That was more stunning than the 59-year-old Watson — the oldest player to lead a major championship — and the winless Marino moving into a first-place tie.

Marino, 29, a graduate of the University of Virginia who had never even seen a links course until this week, shot a 2-under-par 68 Friday at Turnberry. Watson, a five-time Open champion, was at 70. Each had a 36-hole total of 5-under 135.

A shot back at 136 was another of the near-geriatric set, 49-year-old Mark Calcavecchia. Ross Fisher, Retief Goosen, Kenichi Kuboya, Vijay Singh and first-day leader Miguel Angel Jimenez were tied for fourth at 137.

Only once in 48 previous majors as a pro — the 2006 U.S. Open at Winged Foot a few weeks after his father, Earl, died of cancer — had Woods missed a cut.

Unable to control his tee shots, even though he mostly used irons and his 3-wood instead of a driver, Woods lost seven shots to par in a torturous stretch of six holes on the famed course, eight through 13.

He had bogeys at eight, nine and 12 and double bogeys at 10 and 13. Even a birdie at 17 was of little help as Woods shot a 74. Added to Thursday’s 71, it left him at 145, a shot over the 144 cut line.

“I was 1 under par for seven holes,” Woods said, attempting to mask his disappointment, “and just right there in the championship and had a few tough holes right in a row and couldn’t get it back.

“I hit a couple of bad shots, but other than that, I made a double bogey at 13 from 150 yards. It was just problem after problem. I kept compounding my problems out there. I just made mistakes, and obviously, you can’t make mistakes not only to make the cut but to try and win a championship. You have to play clean rounds of golf, and I didn’t.”

This is the third straight major of 2009 in which Woods came in two weeks after a victory and didn’t win, although in the other two - the Masters and U.S. Open at Bethpage Black - a pair of sixth-place finishes were hardly as crushing.

The double bogey at 10, a 446-yard par 4, came after a lost ball. Using a 3-wood, Woods smashed his tee ball into the deep rough.

Woods, who had been the 2-1 choice in this nation where gambling is legal - The Racing Post called the action on Woods a “feeding frenzy” - won three previous Opens. But he never had played Turnberry, on the west coast of Scotland along the Firth of Clyde, until a practice round Sunday. He did not take to the course.

“I was playing well coming in,” said Woods, who when asked what was next on the agenda answered, “Head home.”

The great drama now is whether Watson — who won at Turnberry in 1977, edging Jack Nicklaus in their renowned “Duel in the Sun” — is headed for a miracle win.

The oldest major winner was 48-year-old Julius Boros in the 1968 PGA Championship. Greg Norman was 53 when he challenged in last year’s Open at Royal Birkdale before slipping back the final day. This time Norman missed the cut at 77-75-152.

“The spirits are with me,” Watson said. “And I’ve holed some long putts.”

- - - - - -

http://www.newsday.com/sports/highschool/golf/ny-spbrit1812980876jul17,0,2331801.story
Copyright © 2009, Newsday Inc.