"The coarse language and club acrobatics aren't anything we don't hear and see on courses every day."

Jim Frank pens an excellent SI My Shot defense of Tiger Woods's on course antics.

But this was Tiger Woods, who is supposed to set an example, especially for children. And this is golf, the "gentleman's game," in which virtue is supposed to trump vitriol.

Well, I've got two words for you, and they're not "you're away." Get real! If Tiger wants to go ballistic and wax scatological, let him.

There is nothing golf needs more now than emotion, and Woods is one of the only players who ever shows any. (Lucas Glover, anyone?) The man is a pro with millions in the bank, and the fire in his belly — plus the steam coming out of his ears and the vulgarities from his mouth — show that he cares about more than cashing checks, which can't be said of everyone carrying a PGA Tour card.

"Dude, it's a bromance."

Thanks to reader John for S.L. Price's entertaining look at the blooming Tiger-Federer bromance.

The fact that he and Roger Federer text each other "every day" or that Woods actually calls him Fed. Daily communication is one thing, but for Woods the bestowing of a clunky nickname is the supreme sign of acceptance. If the guy ever tees it up with the President, he'll be calling him B.O. by the fourth green.

The second hint came five days later. While on the practice range at the AT&T National, Woods got wind that Federer had just won Wimbledon to break their tie of 14 majors apiece; sent Fed his now-famous "Great job. Now it's my turn" text; and then shot a 67 to win the tournament. By the time Woods next popped up in public, calling Federer "great" and "phenomenal" at the British Open, their symbiosis had sparked an Internet-fueled bedazzlement not seen since ultrahumans Brad and Angelina joined forces. Woods declared that "our texts back and forth have always been jabby—but also extremely supportive of one another—and that's what friends do," and what we had on our hands became clear.

Dude, it's a bromance.

"Unfortunately I guess we had to finish by 6 o'clock."

While we await the working press reactions to Tiger's press conference Tuesday, it's quite clear he's sticking to his story and his views on the Paramor situation. He'll probably be roasted by the commenters here, but I admire his stubborness here.

TIGER WOODS: The way I understood it, we were the only two in contention to win the event. We had separated ourselves. The winner was not going to come from the groups ahead, even though Robert played just a great round ahead of us. It was going to come from our group. And we were having a great battle.

You know, I just thought that even after Paddy had pitched the ball in the water, he then walked all around the lake, taking the drop, hit his shot over the green and pitched back up, we got on the 17th tee, hit our shots down the fairway and as we were arriving at the ball, the group ahead of us was now entering the 18th fairway. So we were not that far behind, maybe five minutes or whatever it may be from the group ahead of us.

If Paddy does not hit the ball in the water, we play up, we are right behind the group in front of us. So that's why I was -- that's why I said what I said, because that certainly affected how Paddy played the hole, and how the outcome of the tournament, he was in control of the event. He was 1-up with three holes to go and he had a par 5. And you know, when we were put on the clock, it certainly changed everything.

And...

Q. Just to go back to Bridgestone for a moment, Padraig was saying that he was not able to sleep Sunday night. I wondered if you had a lasting sense of frustration and whether you also felt that it was perhaps sending out the wrong message to supporters, to spectators who had been enjoying what was a pretty compelling duel.

TIGER WOODS: Absolutely. We had a great battle. Unfortunately I guess we had to finish by 6 o'clock. I guess that was that important. You know, we finished three minutes late, I think it was, so unfortunately we didn't get in in time and unfortunately that influenced the outcome of the event. Having a battle like that with Paddy when we go one-on-one like that and when we separated ourselves on the front nine, we were enjoying that battle, and that's why I think Paddy feels the way he does and that's certainly one of the reasons why I've said what I said because we were having such a great battle going head-to-head like that, and it got influenced from outside.

The 6 o'clock part interests me. Anyone else getting the vibe that someone actually mentioned that time to Tiger and Padraig either on the course or after the round?

Q. Going back to the timing issue last Sunday, do you in any way regret personalizing the issue by naming John Paramor in your criticism of --

TIGER WOODS: No. Because he's the one who did it.

Q. And secondly, do you have any sympathy for what he has to do and officials like him have to do under these circumstances? And thirdly where does discretion begin and end in the discussion of slow play which is really strangling the game?

TIGER WOODS: Yeah, that's why I thought they would have used better judgment on that considering that, as I said, we were the ones that were probably going to win the golf tournament in the last group. We separated ourselves.

And after what Paddy went through, we were still right there behind the group in front of us. So I don't know if the group in front of us was being timed or not. They didn't look like they were rushing. But it certainly influenced us in how we played and influenced the outcome of the tournament, which that's not how you want to have the tournament come to an end.

Q. Where does discretion begin and end on the subject of slow play, which is strangling the game?

TIGER WOODS: Yeah, you're right. But then again, we were in the last group, and you know, we finished at 6:03.

He probably could have taken the bait on the slow-play-strangling-the-game component to the questions, no? After all, Tiger is the one who prefers limited field sizes and did take over 4 hours in just such an event even if it was Padraig.

"There were other players out on the course playing for large amounts of money and they still managed to play within the time schedule we set."

As expected, John Paramor's defense of Sunday's on-the-clock warning to Padraig Harrington and Tiger Woods, as told to Lawrence Donegan.

By the time Harrington and Woods stepped on to Firestone's 16th tee the group in front had just left the green 670 yards ahead. After Paramor's warning to speed up, the Irishman ran up a triple-bogey eight, which turned his one-shot lead over Woods into a three-shot deficit and all but ended the tournament as a contest.

"I'm sorry Padraig hit the ball in the water. I wanted a grandstand finish like everyone else,'' the rules official said. "I was simply carrying out the policy we have on slow play. If as a consequence of me doing what I am employed to do was that Padraig hit a poor shot then I am desperately sorry for him. There is no way I wanted that to happen. In fact, I would have liked the ball to have gone in the hole because it would have saved a great deal of time."

Zing!

And this is beautiful:

To the exalted list of those who have been unable to intimidate Paramor, the world of golf can now add the illustrious name of Woods.

"When we were on the 17th fairway Tiger said to me "Are we still on the clock?" and I said to him "Yes",'' said Paramor. "He then pointed to the group in front and asked me if I could see them. I said yes, but I think he thought they were closer than they actually were. In fact, they were on the 18th hole. You can't put anyone off the clock when the group in front are a hole ahead."

Update on 2009-08-10 22:35 by Geoff

Donegan posts this blog item adding some context to Paramor's remarks.