SPOTY 2014

First topic message reminder :

Surprised nobody has started this topic yet... it always generates some interest on here every year.

So the cupboard is pretty bare this year. Surely it's a two horse race between Rory and Lewis.

I think Rory's achievements are greater, but Lewis will win because his title carries the greater cachet.

Pretty incredible that, in a world cup year, Gareth Bale gets short-listed when he wasn't even in the tournament. He had a great debut season but hardly set the world alight. And more so then ever before, half the short list features unknowns from obscure sports who are barely famous in their own house.

Hardcore contingent gurn when 'casual fans' catch on to the latest golf craze (Woods, McIlroy) take up space on 'their' golf course and 'hack' the life out of their sacred turf - all hardcore contingent started off with an 18 handicap you see.

New craze then dies down a little and casual fan is fed-up of holier than thou attitude of some golf clubs. Hardcore contingent wonder why their sport rarely wins a popularity contest.

1) Sport is male dominated;

2) Males love cars and things that go fast;

3) Males love head-to-head competition. Golf does not provide - Motorsport does;

4) Motorsport is cooler;

5) SPOTY voters are (I think it's safe to assume) male;

6) Golf is rarely on free to view TV. All F1 GPs are in some form;

7) Any female voters will select the 'cutest' (*reaches for bucket*). Sorrys Rors but ugly tree, branches, bee chewing a wasp, lurgan spade, etc;

8) It's a personality award - Hamilton has one, albeit not a good one. Rors is devoid.

I reckon the way Rory dumped his GF makes him unworthy of being SPOTY in many peoples eyes, especially among non-die-hard golf fans.

Says nothing about his sporting achievements but a great deal about his 'personality' though. And the vote is about 'sports personality', hence highly subjective in nature.

Sports "Personality" doesn't really come into it, otherwise how would Ryan Giggs ever win it?

I wouldn't say Rory is devoid of personality though, certainly more likeable than Hamilton.

liverbnz wrote:Hardcore contingent gurn when 'casual fans' catch on to the latest golf craze (Woods, McIlroy) take up space on 'their' golf course and 'hack' the life out of their sacred turf - all hardcore contingent started off with an 18 handicap you see.

New craze then dies down a little and casual fan is fed-up of holier than thou attitude of some golf clubs. Hardcore contingent wonder why their sport rarely wins a popularity contest.

1) Sport is male dominated;

2) Males love cars and things that go fast;

3) Males love head-to-head competition. Golf does not provide - Motorsport does;

4) Motorsport is cooler;

5) SPOTY voters are (I think it's safe to assume) male;

6) Golf is rarely on free to view TV. All F1 GPs are in some form;

7) Any female voters will select the 'cutest' (*reaches for bucket*). Sorrys Rors but ugly tree, branches, bee chewing a wasp, lurgan spade, etc;

8) It's a personality award - Hamilton has one, albeit not a good one. Rors is devoid.

Liverbnz

Why do you speak like Mr Miyagi?

I wonder how many votes McIlroy lost by declaring to compete for Ireland at Rio?

I don't think people didn't vote for McIlroy because of declaring for or because he dumped his bird by text, I think it's just that Golf isn't as popular as an Engineering competition.

Golf's never garnered much of the vote, and understandably, most don't watch it, many don't like it, it's a shame they couldn't see past that though to see how much better McIlroy's year was than the rest.

Well in fairness since Faldo Britain hasnt had many golfing sucesses. I reckon if Lee Westwood had Mcilroy's year he would have taken the prize. I dont think McIlroy's decision to represent Ireland helped.

Also presumably the award favours people from England as Britain's population is quite concentrated to England.

liverbnz

I think what you say is probably true for a lot of people, but I love F1 and have no interest in road cars. In fact I find people into cars to be a pretty odd branch of the human condition.

Mac, I'm sure I'll regret this, but people are into lots of different things.

Why is being interested in cars "odd" just because you aren't interested in them?

Is it because you don't own a car, have never had a good one, don't need a car?

McLaren wrote:liverbnz

I think what you say is probably true for a lot of people, but I love F1 and have no interest in road cars. In fact I find people into cars to be a pretty odd branch of the human condition.

I was generalising of course. I like both sports. I don't like cars that much. I would have voted for Rory but I didn't care enough.

I think Rory declaring for Ireland had no effect on his votes. Mainly because the only people that would even care and probably know, would be golf fans. And golf fans can plainly see he had a superb season, and probably did deserve the award. So i doubt they would have not voted because of that.

Its purely because golf is not an overly popular sport, and garners very little TV attention. And big events, bar the Open, finish either very late or very early.

Super

I do own a car but I can't understand spending unnecessary amounts to get what might be perceived by some as a "better car". If it fuel efficient and safe that is all I need.

Fair enough, but it isn't necessarily "odd" to have something "better" or more aspirational than something which is "good enough"

There's pleasure in owning something from the upper end, whether that be it better to drive, more luxurious, more comfortable etc etc.

Super

If you had a car with superior grip, handling, balance, acceleration etc would you know how to utilize it?

I agree that getting the better example of some products makes sense but I just don't see what spending tens of thousands more than needed on a road car actually gets you. I have a decent laptop, TV, cooking equipment, golf clubs and the like, but at least they give you an actual benefit.

McLaren wrote:Super

If you had a car with superior grip, handling, balance, acceleration etc would you know how to utilize it?

I agree that getting the better example of some products makes sense but I just don't see what spending tens of thousands more than needed on a road car actually gets you.  I have a decent laptop, TV, cooking equipment, golf clubs and the like, but at least they give you an actual benefit.

Mac, I'm not talking about that, I'm just talking about having "nicer" things.
For instance, if your income was to go up, you might go to more expensive restaurants, buy more expensive clothes, drink better quality wine, go to more exotic destinations on holiday.

Better things can give you greater pleasure or just make life that little bit more comfortable.

For example, I drive from Aberdeen to St. Andrews most weekends, I've got a nice car to do it in, I could do it in something perfectly acceptable like a Polo, but it wouldn't be as quiet, smooth and comfortable, nor would I have space for clubs etc in the same way.
I don't especially "need" a nice big car, but I have one anyway because I can afford it at present.

Can I ask: how many of those that are complaining about the outcome of SPOTY actually voted? If you didn't, it shows what apathy there is amongst what are supposedly keen golfers on a golfers' discussion board. If keen golfers can't be a*sed, why would anyone else?

Just for the record: I voted for McIlroy - on line.

super_realist wrote:Lots of places in Scotland are run in a similar way to St.Andrews, Carnoustie too.

Up here in Aberdeen you can join the muni's (4/5 courses) for about 250 a year. No other fees.

Seems England is more expensive than the rest of the country.

Certainly is - especially in the south-east. My husband pays £350 a year for a 5-day seniors' season ticket on a local 9-hole municipal (generally in c**p condition) which isn't bad when you consider he plays 4 days a week in good weather but is pretty derisory given your quote of £250 a year in the Aberdeen area. Is there any wonder we're planning to move to Scotland when I retire in 18 months' time? The motorsport scene's better, too

Where are you planning on moving to LP?

super_realist wrote:Dancing horses for Christs sake, how can anyone consider that a sport or an achievement.

Have you ever tried dressage - or evening riding a horse? It's nowhere near as easy as Charlotte Dujardin makes it look and takes hours of practice and dedication. Probably as much time as Rory devotes to his golf.

It could be the most difficult thing in the world, but it isn't something which captures the public imagination, much like golf, whilst I've always said that judged "sports" fail the sport criteria.

Is Britain so bad at sport it needs to nominate someone who dances on a horse for the top sporting award?

McLaren wrote:...PS I am really starting to worry about your grasp of probabilities.  Just because there are two people who can win something it does not mean each has a 50% chance of winning.

You keep going on about that as if it means anything at all. So what? IIRC, S_R never mentioned anything about probabilities - you brought that up as some sort of straw man.

pedro wrote:I reckon the way Rory dumped his GF makes him unworthy of being SPOTY in many peoples eyes, especially among non-die-hard golf fans.

Says nothing about his sporting achievements but a great deal about his 'personality' though. And the vote is about 'sports personality', hence highly subjective in nature.

If that's what the voters think then it's no wonder there's an issue. It means 'personality' as in "celebrity" (and I don't use that in the modern vernacular) or "famous person". It doesn't mean 'personality' as in someone's personality.

super_realist wrote:Where are you planning on moving to LP?

At the moment we've narrowed it down to Fife and we're currently looking in the Leven and Burntisland areas, or around the southern coast. LordP wants to be reasonably close to Knockhill so he can resurrect his motorsports career (and there are a couple of nifty hillclimbs nearby as well). It could all change in 2016 depending on what the housing market does!

Leven is very cheap to join, Lundin just along the road. Elie just a little further, Lovely Ladybank up the road. Plenty good golf in the area and very close to Edinburgh.

Navy

Super claimed f1 was a coin toss. I assumed he meant it was 50:50. How do you interpret a reference to a coin toss if not assuming it means 50:50?

Navy,
double- ,
of course there's a relationship between 'personality' (as in celebrity) and personality. Otherwise it would just have been called 'sports person', 'sportsman' or something like that. That's also why other posters refer to it as an X-Factor contest.

People would never vote for a complete and utter a-hole, regardless of whether that person climbed Mt. Everest in record breaking time, naked and blindfolded while joggling torches (if mountaineering was to be considered a sport).

Don't be daft Pedro - there is a huge difference between sports "personality" and just personality

Look at some of the past winners - many have had total charisma bypass - Giggs the finest example but far from alone in that

There have been quite a few a-holes have won the award - and that's OK by me if it reflects achievement rather than personality

I'm not saying the vote is about personality, but that it plays a part. Just like a popularity contest.

McLaren wrote:Navy

Super claimed f1 was a coin toss.  I assumed he meant it was 50:50.  How do you interpret a reference to a coin toss if not assuming it means 50:50?

Well, maybe. I assumed he just meant it was an either/or situation rather than that there was a 50:50 chance that either driver of the two would win.

pedro wrote:Navy,
double- ,
of course there's a relationship between 'personality' (as in celebrity) and personality. Otherwise it would just have been called 'sports person', 'sportsman' or something like that. That's also why other posters refer to it as an X-Factor contest.

People would never vote for a complete and utter a-hole, regardless of whether that person climbed Mt. Everest in record breaking time, naked and blindfolded while joggling torches (if mountaineering was to be considered a sport).

Treble-
No, there's no a priori relationship between a 'personality' (as in a person famous for something they've achieved) and 'personality', per se. There can be, but there's no reason for there to be. Seb Coe - definitely a 'personality' in his pomp, but it had chuff all to do with his 'personality' and many people thought he was an a-hole. SPOTY was never built on the premise that a sportsperson had to have a personality. That's a fallacy but seems to be the accepted position now. Then again, maybe it's always been crap but I was fooled by the Emperor's New Clothes - i.e. the glitz surrounding it. Not any more.
If people didn't vote for your hypothetical a-hole, that would seem to illustrate the problem. They aren't interested in achievement just a media-painted 'personality'. What the media paints and what the reality is probably aren't even remotely close in many cases.
Whatever. It's pap and not very good pap at that. Plenty more on the box that means I don't have to watch.

If "personality" ever mattered, it certainly went out the window when Princess Anne won.
Compounded when her daughter won.

Nigel "Nige" Mansell anyone?

I get your point and tend to agree but that's not how people will perceive it.

To give an extreme example, Adolf Hitler was probably the biggest 'personality' of the 20th century (POTC?) (by having had the biggest impact on world affairs), but I doubt many people would vote for him if there was a POTC contest. People wouldn't be able to through his evil.

Godwin's law - pedro wins the internet

Only after the usual Irish rhetoric . . . . . . not sure what law that should be considering Murphy's been taken.

Btw, I didn't bother to vote, but still thinks Rory should've won it despite his personality.

I think "sports personality" just means someone involved in sport, it does not necessarily refer to their psychological personality.

McLaren wrote:I think "sports personality" just means someone involved in sport, it does not necessarily refer to their psychological personality.

Exactly.

McLaren wrote:I think "sports personality" just means someone involved in sport, it does not necessarily refer to their psychological personality.

Agreed

super_realist wrote:Leven is very cheap to join, Lundin just along the road. Elie just a little further, Lovely Ladybank up the road.  Plenty good golf in the area and very close to Edinburgh.

We were looking at Balburnie Park (£499 each) and Burntisland (£402 each for 5-day membership) as possibles - the others looked a bit stuffy to me and not very female-friendly!

You'll find Balbirnie extremely wet in Autumn, Spring and Winter.
Never played Burntisland.
Lundin has a good ladies section I think and is a tremendous course

Isn't Lundin men only - with the ladies playing at Lundin Ladies' 9-hole course? That's what puts me off the most. Thanks for the heads-up on Balbirnie!

Nah, Lundin isn't men only as far as I'm aware. There is a ladies club who have their own course, but I don't think you have to be a member. They've got ladies tees, lockers, changing rooms and I've seen plenty in the clubhouse, so don't think it's men only. Pretty sure that the Lundin Ladies is a completely separate womens only club that isn't just where wives of Lundin members play.

If I lived down that way, Lundin would be the club I played at. Nice mix of Links and Heath/Park and far less busy than Leven.
Lots of the parkland courses (Thornton, Balbirnie, Pitfirrane, Pitreavie, Balwearie etc) won't give much year round golf quality as they are too wet.
Ladybank is a gem though, plenty lady members there. Best clubhouse in Fife, great practice facilites.

Thanks for the advice. We'll have a look when we're next upon a recce in July (after The Open!). Although I've had a look at the Ladybank website and it looks a bit out of our price range (especially the double fee joining fee - which I assume is still payable even though the website is quoting 2013 prices!). Lundin on HowDidIDo only has details of men's competitions and the only entry for ladies is for the 9-hole course. They don't give details of membership fees at all. As I said, we'll have to go and have a look and play them.

No shortage of good clubs around that area LP. I hear Aberdour is nice too.

Unfortunately yes Super, it is sport I.e. People competing against each other, we may not like it for many reasons not least because it is grossly distorted from being a level field perhaps but that's not unusual either. Football is the same but with slightly different numbers. E.g. Realistically when teams start out in their champions league campaign, how many realistically have a chance of winning? I'd venture a guess at a maximum of 6 from an entry of how many??
How can the likes of Celtic with domestic TV revenues of £2-3m compete with the fat bloated Premiership bank balances. Why do they even bother to turn up?

Golf in a way is too complex to be obviously distorted. What may be perfect clubs for one Pro may be utter tosh in another's hands. Yes there can be an element of luck in big tournaments when a hoolie blows through during a tournament offering people on one side of the draw a significant advantage over the other (Oost in 2010 being an example). I'd rather watch a sport where luck is the only distortion though, that's why I have no time whatsoever for F1 or footsie. They are both so far removed from the open and fair sports that they should be. Unsurprisingly both have corruption issues with their governing bodies, I wonder why

To be fair to Oosthuizen, surely he was at the front of the "bad" side of the draw, was just less affected than later starters?

kwinigolfer wrote:To be fair to Oosthuizen, surely he was at the front of the "bad" side of the draw, was just less affected than later starters?

To be really fair I am sure even Todd Hamilton did better than Oostie after his major win?

McLaren wrote:

kwinigolfer wrote:To be fair to Oosthuizen, surely he was at the front of the "bad" side of the draw, was just less affected than later starters?

To be really fair I am sure even Todd Hamilton did better than Oostie after his major win?

I shouldn't bite but that's another ridiculous statement mac. Since Todd Hamilton won the Open in 2004 he has won precisely zero tournaments anywhere with a best major finish of T15 in the 2009 Masters. Louis Oosthuizen has won a further 5 tournaments since his 2010 Open win, all on the European Tour, and has managed a top 10 finish in the 2011 US Open as well as losing a play-off to Bubba Watson in the 2012 Masters. So although he hasn't been as successful as he might have been expected to be, to say he's faired worse than Todd Hamilton is ludicrous.

Good bite Ralph.
Mac is on his daily wind-up.

PS: Oosthuizen is #45 in the World.
Hamilton is #1430

Another statistical triumph for McLaren.