Tiger Takes A Stand...For The U.S. Naval Glee Club

I don't know about you, but it sure seemed odd to be at an inaugural event and to not have said a single word about the reason for the event (initials B.O.). Here's the text of Tiger's introductory speech for the U.S. Naval Glee Club.

Update on 2009-01-30 16:15 by Geoff

In the January 26th Golf World, Bill Fields writes in The Bunker's lead item:

When it was announced that Tiger Woods would participate in last Sunday's "We Are One: The Obama Inaugural Celebration at the Lincoln Memorial," the implications quickly were fodder for speculation. Someone at the website geoffshackelford.com wondered if this meant that Woods was a Democrat. "I would say," a poster named "Al P" responded, "this means Tiger is an American."

Indeed, it would be quite a stretch to assume Woods' two-minute speaking role--during which, citing his late father Earl's Army career, he paid non-partisan tribute to the men and women (and their families) who serve in the U.S. military before introducing the Naval Academy Glee Club--is a harbinger that Woods soon will be trading in victory speeches for stump speeches.

Woods Making Inaugural Festivities Appearance

From his website:

It was announced today that Tiger Woods has accepted an invitation to speak at the live presentation of We Are One: The Obama Inaugural Celebration at the Lincoln Memorial Opening Celebration for the 56th Presidential Inaugural, to be presented live by HBO on SUNDAY, JAN. 18 at 2:30 p.m.(ET)/11:30 a.m. (PT).

"I am honored that I was invited to this historic event, and look forward to participating in Sunday's festivities," Woods said. 

Update on 2009-01-18 04:25 by Geoff

** Jason Sobel notes the magnitude of this (symbolic) move by Tiger, who to this point has not lived up to the expectations created by Earl Woods...at least politically.

Woods Considering Early Comeback To Halt Endless Stream Of Inane Stories Speculating On His Return

I won't link any of the guilty scribes because they are doing their job (the few left). But please, Tiger, return ASAP and make them stop! 

"I really thought he had won about eight majors, and he told me he won 14."

Anthony Kim, on Tiger's return just before the start of play at Kapalua:

Q. What are you expecting out of him when he gets back?

ANTHONY KIM: I guess the same guy. He's obviously played very well.

It's like I said at the clinic. I'm not a huge golf fan, so I don't know all the stats. I thought he -- I really thought he had won about eight majors, and he told me he won 14 (laughter). I didn't know that.

"You're going to see some pretty phenomenal things from Tiger Woods the next three years."

Steve DiMeglio considers the state of Tiger's game upon his return and shares this from Mark O'Meara:

Mark O'Meara has seen Woods hitting golf balls on the Isleworth range. He liked what he saw.

"I'm not always right, but a lot of times I seem to be right about him, and he'll come back better than he has ever been," he said. "You're going to see some pretty phenomenal things from Tiger Woods the next three years."

The next three years? Does Mark know something we don't?

Meanwhile, The Tiger Return Watch has begun. Jason Sobel picks apart the tournament schedule and lands on Doral, while Alex Miceli likes the match play.

The Bookies Are Really, Really Tired Of Losing Money On Tiger Woods

Because as The Guardian's Dan Roebuck reports, these prices look "short"...

Despite Woods' absence from the fairways as he recovers from surgery following his incredible win at Torrey Pines in June, the world No1 still heads the betting for the two 2009 majors the layers have priced. Woods is 5-2 (Sky Bet) for the Masters and 3-1 (Hill's and Totesport) to win the Open . Even for a man that has so often defied the odds those prices look short.

Woods will not make a competitive return until the spring – Sportingbet offer 9-4 he will next tee up in the Arnold Palmer Invitational in March, two weeks before the Masters. He may, of course, not make the line-up at Augusta which means Phil Mickelson would almost certainly take over at the top of the market.

Lefty, who has won twice and rewarded each-way backers six times in eight years, is 10-1 generally. If Woods, who is 13-8 (Sky Bet) to lose his top spot in the world ­rankings in 2009, looks out of touch on his return, Mickelson's price will go only one way – so the advice is to back him now.

I think I'll take a rain check on that.

Stevie and Phil, Photoshopped

Don't miss HookedOnGolf's Stevie-Phil make up photos.

"But it'll be very interesting to see what happens, how guys make that adjustment."

I spent much of Wednesday asking players at Sherwood about grooves. Why, when the rule doesn't take effect until 2010?

I felt it would be interesting to hear what kind of adjustments players are making going into this year, if any. And you would think it's a topic that players have started to pay attention to now that the rule change is looming.

Naturally, my naivety is once again exposed. Most of these supposed hi-tech savvy dudes have no idea what kind of grooves are in their irons or wedges, and if they do, have given little thought to how the rule change might impact their game.

Stephen Ames was one exeception. He has already switched out his irons and wedges at the same time he went to a softer ball and sees some difference. He has had a few flyers and noticed the biggest difference in reduced ball spin on a windy day. He said he's lost maybe 5 yards off the tee because he now plays with "the softest ball possible," which I presume to be the Nike ball that Tiger uses. Asked why he already made the change in his bag instead waiting until the end of the year, he just shrugged his shoulders and said why not?

I asked Tiger Woods in his press conference and found his answer (and enthusiam on the topic) both exciting and disheartening.

Exciting:

Q. In 2010 the USGA is changing the rule for grooves. Is that going to affect what's in your bag now or how you play golf courses in the coming years?

TIGER WOODS: Yeah, it'll affect what's in my bag. I can't have my two sand wedges the way I have them now.

But as far as -- I play the spinniest ball on TOUR, so for me, my transition will be a little bit easier than the rest of the guys, guys who play a harder golf ball. They're going to have to maybe a little bit more of an adjustment, whether they do it with loft. Some guys are experimenting with 64-degree wedges to try to help them out that way so they can hit fuller shots with more spin, or guys just might be making -- actually more mental adjustments in their course management skills, going for greens, because you know you actually can't get the ball to spin like you used to so it puts more of a premium on putting the ball in the fairway. With the wedges you can't blast it out there on the par-5s and expect an easy up-and-down. You've got to miss it on the proper side more than ever. But it'll be very interesting to see what happens, how guys make that adjustment.

So the USGA and R&A should be pleased to see that Tiger thinks hitting fairways will take on importance.

The disheartening part? I think he has a lot more to say on the matter, and a natural follow up on the news of a high-lofted wedge study would probably elicit a fascinating answer as well. But with his appearances limited and minimal accessibility, we'll have to wait a while.

"It's over and done with and we put it to bed." **

I'm going to spare you the answers (except to the Stevie question) and just list the questions to Tiger's dull press gathering Wednesday. Granted, it was 42 and raining outside and inside the cart barn were way too many TV types who have to introduce themselves and their affiliations before launching into a bland question. But as you will see, it was definitely not the media's finest moment (and I include myself, though I did have burn my question on something for a story I'm working on...excuses, excuses).

Q. You talked about being right on schedule. Do you have any preliminary idea of what that schedule might be?

Q. Considering the seriousness of the injury, how difficult has this rehabilitation process been for you?

Q. You hadn't expected to be able to hit shots until January, so the fact that you're hitting some shots now, are you a little bit further ahead --

Q. I've got to ask you about Stevie. Can you talk about any further reaction to it?
TIGER WOODS: Yeah, what ended up happening is I communicated with Phil, and we have discussed it. I talked to Stevie about it, and he feels bad, what happened. At this point it happened at all, and it's something that none of us really wanted to have happen, but it's over and done with and we put it to bed.

Bill Plaschke of the L.A. Times asked, and no one followed up about the conversation with Phil. In fact, I'm going to go so far as to predict Tiger wanted to be asked more because today's session has not put the matter to rest. It will come up ad nauseum next time that a Tiger-Phil pairing lurks. Yes, the matter will come up anyway, but without some key questions asked and answered, the story will not die.

Besides, why ask those when you can ask this as a follow up...

Q. Welcome home. Did you not talk to the weather man before you came here?

Q. I was going to ask you about that. How strange is it to host the event but actually not play in it this year?

Q. You talked about having time with your daughter, and at the same time how difficult the rehab and the injury has been. In your time away from PGA events, did you gain a different perspective or view of the game that you could only get watching it?

Q. In the time you've had off, how much time have you spent thinking about or working on course design? Obviously you've had more time to do that than you would have were you playing. And in terms of the projects you've got going, do you have more on the table right now, and do you also envision coming up with any public access courses, as well?

Q. You said you haven't hit full shots with your entire bag yet. Could you talk about when did you hit your first full shot and how many have you hit?

Q. Do you have any pain or stiffness or scar tissue?

Q. I know retirement talk would be a long way off, but did this layoff make you feel like you enjoyed it so much that you could retire earlier?

Q. Is it your intention to try to play a couple events before the Masters, and if so, what kind of criteria are you going to need to get to to make that decision?

Q. If it came to that, would you make the Masters (indiscernible)?

Q. What have they told you about how you may or may not have to change your swing or how you attack the ball to prevent this from happening again, and how much is there a concern that the repetition that you have to do time and time and time again to practice and play and the stress you put on it that this is just going to be a recurring issue?

Q. I heard you're doing a lot of swimming. I was wondering if you could talk about that as a form of rehab maybe being different for you. Also you look leaner than at the Open. What are you down to and what are you trying to accomplish there?

Q. Is swimming a new thing for you?

Q. Having effectively defied doctors' orders to compete at Torrey Pines, would you describe yourself as an obedient but frustrated patient over the last six months?

Q. During your absence there was a search to see who would step forward, and there was a lot of focus at the end of the year on Anthony and Camilo and a little bit of Sergio. I wonder if you could just talk about that and if you're expecting that to be a challenge, given their age and whatnot?

Q. Did you vote for Paddy?

Q. Why?

Q. Is that all it comes down to?

Q. Do you think at the high frequency that you've been winning over the last several years, do you think your absence may have emboldened these guys by allowing them maybe more chances to win?

Q. Other athletes coming back from what you've had talk about fear, whether it's fear of not being the same, whether it's fear that the leg, they're going to feel it with the swing or a hit or a run. Can you talk about fear?

Q. You mentioned in the early weeks after the surgery that you were laid up in bed and couldn't move the leg. Can you talk about what that time was like, how you filled the days?

Q. Because of the pain, the excruciating pain that you had down at Torrey Pines, the length of the tournament, the difficult shots that you had to make, where do you rank that victory among all the rest that you have?

Q. Have you watched tape of The Open much maybe during your rehab or when you were laid up? And also, at any point did you marvel at what you were able to accomplish? Have you thought back and wondered how you actually did that?

Q. Are you aware of when you first injured your knee? And then looking back at the Open, you said you've seen some of the highlights. Are you more amazed now that you actually pulled it off?

Q. Long-term?

Q. The actual competition, how much have you missed that, and has that tempted you at all to want to come back sooner than maybe you should?

Q. If you can give us a little behind-the-curtain view, post-round each day how difficult was it going back to the hotel and trying to prepare for the next day? And were there doubts in your mind going forward each day about whether you would be able to do it?

Q. Having said that, you looked more comfortable on Monday than on Saturday and Sunday. Why was that?

Q. Two questions: As a member of the PGA TOUR you were eligible for drug testing even though you weren't playing. Did the TOUR ever come to your house?

Q. Were you expecting them at all?

Q. Secondly, there's been so much speculation since June about so many surgeries that you'll never be the same. Is there any doubt or any question that you'll be better than you were before?

Q. Are you preparing yourself emotionally if things don't go well the first couple of tournaments, if it's slower than you think?

Q. I was wondering about your thoughts on the economy and how that's going to impact the TOUR in the next few years and even your events, as well. Have you felt it at all?

Q. In 2010 the USGA is changing the rule for grooves. Is that going to affect what's in your bag now or how you play golf courses in the coming years?

Update on 2008-12-18 17:00 by Geoff

** I love Jim McCabe's no-nonsense approach, but this point just doesn't match with how things played out:

One can only hope, since it's a lot of blather about nothing, but don't be surprised if Woods is wrong on that count, too. We've discovered over the last couple of days that a lot of people direct far too much anger at inconsequential matters, even within the usually genteel world of professional golf. Williams's disdain for Mickelson came through loud and clear, and that's disappointing. Equally alarming is the anger that apparently is harbored by many golf writers toward Williams (he's a caddie, folks, not the show) and on both fronts there seem to be people who need to assess things and question whether their emotions are worth it.

If the writers were really angry, there would have been many more questions and it would have been more than just Lawrence Donegan pursuing the story. Most of the press sat this one out until Phil Mickelson issued a statement. Hardly seems like an angry over-reaction by folks just waiting to get back at a lowly looper.

Will Scribblers Be Required To Take Off Their Shoes Before Entering Today's Sitdown With Tiger?

Because I can see it now, Art Spander, fed up with Tiger's one word answers, stands up and heaves his Rockports at the world's No. 1!

So if we have to take our shoes off today, then we'll know Tiger's media liaison Glenn Greenspan has consulted the White House on media security.

Seriously, a few emails have rolled in complaining about the excessive coverage of the Steve Williams remarks. Now, the "pushback" is appreciated but I'm also getting a big chuckle out of the stance that this is a non-story.

You have the caddie for the most famous athlete in the world hurling  slurs at his bosses' rival. In any other sport this would be a fun story for a few days.

LeBron calls Kobe a not so flattering name, check!

But Stevie/Tiger v. Phil lept to another level when Stevie was given a chance by reporter Greg Ford to clarify his remarks. He repeated his assertions about Phil, minus the big bad word, then continued to perpetuate a lie by claiming that the Phil/tits story took place at Bethpage.

John Hawkins asks the key question this week in Golf World:

In this case, the size of the deal and width of the proportions aren't as serious as the depth of the motivation for Williams' venom. Why would you say such a thing, Stevie? Can you give us a good reason?

The venom is beyond just about anything you'll see in these little dramas. But ignore the drama and consider the Ryder/President's Cup dilemma. We just witnessed a Ryder Cup where team chemistry and Captain Azinger's clever structuring made the difference. And how on earth can Captain Pavin or Couples possibly deal with this mess in the future unless Tiger gives his man the week off, or perhaps the rest of his career off?

Should Tiger have to eventually fire Steve Williams or have him work a limited schedule, that makes this a huge story because it potentially impacts this remarkable and historic run, one that Tiger has worked so hard to develop, and which Williams has been very much a part of (on the bag for 13 of 14 majors).

This site is devoted to following the state of the game, with a (hopefully) strong historical bent that aims to put some of the events we see in perspective. As a fan of the history of the game, I believe this drama does have the potential to impact the game's history.

So you've been warned, full Sherwood press conference coverage is yet to come...

"You can already get 8-1 on the splitting of golf's most famous two-man team..." **

Douglas Lowe reports that you can wager on Stevie's fate:

You can already get 8-1 on the splitting of golf's most famous two-man team prior to the first PGA Tour event that Woods will play in, while Mickelson has spoken out saying how lucky he feels he is in comparison to have a class act in Jim Bones' Mackay as his caddie and representative.

James Corrigan makes several points in his Independent story analyzing Wednesday's Tiger Woods press conference possibilities, including this about Mickelson and a long rumored joke Corrigan's attributing to the "Woods camp":

This part of the attack plainly touched a nerve and that may just be because it reminded of another cruel joke supposedly circulated by members in or around Tiger's entourage. I certainly first heard it off a person with close connections to the Woods camp. "What's the difference between Phil Mickelson and his wife Amy?" went the wisecrack. "One has fake tits and a real smile..."

Of course, all of this playground silliness was blessedly rooted in the past, but now it promises to blight the present and in particular Woods's comeback from his knee reconstruction (which will reportedly occur some time around March). If Woods stands by his man as his own statement signifies he will – while calling Williams's remarks "inappropriate" and saying he "respected" Mickelson, he also said that the matter had been "discussed and dealt with" – then the atmosphere is bound to be tense and go way, way beyond that if and when the pair are required to play with each other.

What does already seem a given is that Woods will have to employ another caddie for this year's Presidents Cup in Los Angeles and possible even for 2010's Ryder Cup in Newport. No captain worthy of his team's camaraderie would want Mickelson and Williams in the same room and only a very weak captain would countenance it. The bristling enmity between Woods and Mickelson was long credited as being one of the factors for the American's desultory performances in the Ryder Cup, but since the Kentucky glory in September much has been made of the new-found Starred and Striped bonhomie. Has this been threatened already?

And Freddie thought being Captain (in San Francisco, not Los Angeles) would be a breeze!

Woods has long been depicted as the ultimate individual sportsman who does not care for the feelings of his rivals. But now golf is demanding that he must. Williams's biggest crime could well be in forcing Tiger to be reverential to Leftie. If Woods doesn't – starting today – then the feud, mythical or not, truly will be blown out of all proportion.

Lawrence Donegan writes on the Guardian blog:

For those inclined to disagree consider this: what if Pat Rice, Arsène Wenger's admirable assistant at Arsenal, was a guest speaker at a charity event and called Sir Alex Ferguson a prick? What if he then made Ferguson the butt of an anecdote which subsequently turned out to be fiction? Would that be newsworthy? Of course it would.

Uh, right, Pat Rice. Oh and Arsenio Wanker and Sir, wait, who? Sorry...I'm sure it's a fine point if you think it's nice to swim in the North Sea and believe black pudding is a delicacy.

This point I understand:

If that sounds too apocalyptic, then ask yourself this: what would have happened if Mickelson's caddie, or any caddie working for a leading professional, had publicly insulted Woods in the same manner? The answer, of course, is the caddie would have been fired on the spot.

I enjoy Mark Reason's work but I just don't get where he sees Stevie as a victim here. If you follow the course of the events and read Greg Ford's article, Williams did not back down from his comments or in any way express remorse for possibly telling a lie. Instead, he repeated the lie with a new spin.

Williams had assumed his remarks were made to a small, private audience.

Woods may be more sympathetic than most because in 1997 he told a magazine reporter some dodgy jokes off mike, only to see them appear in print.

Woods will understand that to some extent Williams is a victim, even if not too many other players and caddies will be crying about his plight.

The biggest fall-out from this story is that the world will once more become a duller place. Padraig Harrington says that he has nothing in common with Sergio Garcia and that is turned into an admission of sulphuric hatred.

A baggage handler makes a few choice comments on the other side of the world and suddenly we have an international incident. This is celebrity bonkers.

Sportsmen already say very little worth hearing. Soon they will say nothing. Who can blame them when private remarks become a matter of public gossip.

Wow, poor Stevie.

Meanwhile, Garry Smits notes that Stevie made another comment that has gone unnoticed, but which may upset Tiger more than the Phil comment.

In the first story in the New Zealand media in which Steve Williams, Tiger Woods' caddie, took several shots at Phil Mickelson, Williams had this to say about the final hole of regulation in the 2008 U.S. Open at Torrey Pines:

On the 18th hole in the final round, [Woods] needed a birdie four to tie Rocco Mediate and force a playoff.
"He hit a crap tee shot, [Williams said], then a bad second into the rough with the pin located front right. He hit the shot I wanted him to hit ... he took some convincing ... hit it right and made the putt. What a feat that was."

Just a word of caution to Mr. Williams: Mike "Fluff" Cowan, Woods' first caddie on the PGA Tour, was supposedly fired for taking too much credit for Woods' play and being too chatty with the media.

In a statement, Woods said the matter had been "dealt with." We'll see. 

We shall see. 1 p.m. PST.

Update on 2008-12-17 14:58 by Geoff

** Lorne Rubenstein defends Williams without breaking out the violin and making him a victim, as Reason did above, while essentially making the same point: it's incidents like this that make athletes and the people who carry their luggage just a little less willing to say anything at all.

Williams was saying something he truly felt. That could be the last time he'll say anything interesting during a public event. That's too bad, because, evidently, he has a lot to say.

Here's to the unguarded, unscripted moment, then. There lies truth. Williams let Woods down, but he was telling it as it is for him, and that was telling. It was Williams, unvarnished. From now on, you can be sure of what you'll get: whitewash, and no colour.

Reports: Stevie Williams To Spend Next Ten Years Impersonating Marcel Marceau

...that's because he appears to have a wonderfully forgiving boss. One who used to have a no-exploitation policy for his last looper who was canned for giving too long of an interview to Golf Digest (as Larry Dorman notes in his NY Times story).

Doug Ferguson chiming in for the Associated Press, and therefore, most publications:

Tiger Woods said Monday he was disappointed by his caddie’s disparaging comments in New Zealand newspapers about Phil Mickelson, whom Woods referred to as a “player I respect.”

Steve Williams was quoted in the Taranaki Daily News as saying he wouldn’t call Mickelson a great player “because I think he’s a (expletive).” Contacted by the Sunday Star Times, Williams confirmed making the comment.

“I was disappointed to read the comments attributed to Steve Williams about Phil Mickelson, a player that I respect,” Woods said in a statement. “It was inappropriate. The matter has been discussed and dealt with.”

Ferguson goes on to detail the past tiffs and other oddball moves by Williams, but neglects to mention his thrillingly entertaining race track meltdown!

What isn't explained in the story or any other is how Tiger addressed this with Phil Mickelson. Reader DGS emailed wondering if Tiger's "dealt with" comment includes calling Phil to apologize for his caddy? Maybe that'd be a good question for Wednesday's press conference.

Of course so would the termination question. Which Lawrence Donegan says is likely out of the question:

The world No1 was the best man at Williams' wedding in New Zealand and in a world where player-caddie relationships are notoriously transient the two men appear to have a permanent and close friendship.

Steve Elling files a must read with too many one-liners to copy here. Amid his entertaining dissection, Elling slips in this key point which can't be overlooked:

Imagine the thermonuclear holocaust that would have ensued if a comparable statement had come from Mackay about Woods.

Several have said Phil should not have responded at all by issuing the statement. However, Elling's point is exactly why Mickelson and his media guru T.R. Reinman made the right move. This story would have died had they not put the statement out. And if team unity means anything in the Cup world, the comments needed to be heard by all because Williams must not be a part of future Ryder and Presidents Cups (assuming he is still by Tiger come Cup-time).

Speaking of Tiger, who you almost feel sorry for him if it weren't for all of the previous warning signs that Mt. Stevie would blow, Elling paints this beautiful image:

It's not difficult to imagine how Woods is processing all this. He probably has a resigned look on his face similar to when playing partner Mickelson, at the Ryder Cup matches in Detroit four years ago, whacked a tee shot so far offline, it landed stone dead against a chain-link fence. This is a decidedly different brand of alternate shot. A cornerman is involved, too.

And as much as I'm touched by wonderful sportsmanship in the game, I have to side with Jason Sobel, who says this incident and the tension between the two best American golfers does nothing to tarnish the sport. In fact, it only helps generate interest.

Woods and Mickelson will never be confused with best friends -- their interpersonal gigglefest three years ago notwithstanding -- and that's not such a bad thing for the state of the game. In fact, it could make it all that more entertaining, knowing that each player wants to win a given tournament as much as he wants the other to lose. Such emotion instills passion on the course and ensures there will be greater drama between the players when they next tee it up together.

And Ron Kroichick in the San Francisco Chronicle agrees, delving into an interesting comparison with Nicklaus and Palmer's relationship.

It's difficult to digest all this middle-school name-calling without A) chuckling at the whole silly, entertaining spectacle, B) imagining Arnold Palmer and Jack Nicklaus engaging in a similar feud in the 1960s and C) realizing this makes the 2009 season all the more alluring.

Phil Fires Back: "After seeing Steve Williams' comments all I could think of was how lucky I am to have a class act like Bones on my bag" **

Tiger's caddie fabricates a tale and refers to Phil Mickelson as a "prick," then offers a new version that also proved to be untrue while sticking to his classy characterization of Mickelson.

So Sunday, the target of Steve Williams issued a statement. And curiously, as of 11:32 EST Sunday night, The Guardian's Lawrence Donegan is the only one to report it:

The sedate world of professional golf is unused to such unvarnished opinions being thrown around in public and Mickelson made his unhappiness clear. "After seeing Steve Williams' comments all I could think of was how lucky I am to have a class act like Bones (his caddie, Jim Mackay) on my bag and representing me," the American left-hander said.

Mickelson also said a "joke" told by Williams in which the player was heckled by a fan over his weight during this year's US Open at Torrey Pines was "a total fabrication". "It is based on an incident on the 17th hole during a practice round of the US Open at Bethpage in 2002 that involved a European Tour player. The story has been retold often but Woods and Williams were not present at that incident," he said.

Obviously I'm entertained by the drama at play here and how it'll impact future Tiger-Phil pairings, but I'm also fascinated by the media reaction.

If Tiger Woods passes gas, the media grills him about the odor and his emotions before-during-after the passage. Follow ups will probe how hard the eruption made Stevie laugh and finally, if Elin had any thoughts on the matter.

Yet Tiger's ticking time bomb caddie, who works for someone with a no tolerance policy on questionable behavior from the people he surrounds himself with, fabricates a story and puts down the world's No. 3 player in demeaning fashion. But only one paper and no major golf website is picking up Mickelson's statement, with minimal or zero coverage of the overall controversy.

So is this because it's a silly season weekend when already slim coverage becomes less of a priority or this dereliction of duty driven by a fear of upsetting Team Tiger?

Or ominously for us readers, a combo platter deal?

Update on 2008-12-15 14:55 by Geoff

**As of 10 a.m. EST Monday, only golf.com has added Mickelson's statement, linking to Donegan's Guardian story. Nothing about the controversy on ESPN.com, GolfDigest.com, Golfweek.com or Yahoo.com.