Shock: R&A's Dawson Makes Little Sense In Latest Interview

The governing body of golf everywhere outside of the U.S and Mexico is blessed to have an in-house architect willing to rearrange courses so they don't have to deal with the ball, and even better, a captain of the Olympic movement as its lead man. Unfortunately those design duties rearranging Open rota courses and those pesky visits to Lausanne with Ty Votaw may be distracting Peter Dawson from honing his spin skills, as evidenced by John Huggan's annual sitdown with the R&A's senior apologist.

On not admiting women into the R&A:

"Where equal treatment is very important – and this is where any legislation should be focused – is in mixed-sex clubs. That is fair. But golf is a very broad church and there is plenty of room for every sort of club. It would be dreadful if we were all the same."

Good one Peter! That's right, who would want to be a member of a club that pays its bills with public money, hosts huge public spectacles, but is only made up of a bunch of frugal white guys from overrated gene pools sporting stiff upper lips, bad breath and cranky dispositions?

As for the distance issue, I'd call this answer progress. Maybe he's getting tired of redesigning great courses for one week of golf every 8 years?

"The ball is not off-limits," claims Dawson. "Our position is consistent, whether you agree with it or not. And we are happy with the present situation. If drives start to go up again, then we will haul them back.

"We think everyone should play by the same rules, a stance most people seem to agree with. While I would acknowledge that the gap between the game the professionals play and the one played by most amateurs has widened, we think it is a central pillar of golf that we all play the same ball. The majority of golfers agree with us. And so do the majority of leading players. They want to be the best golfers in the world, not the best players of a 'tour ball.'

"I'd prefer to see the ball going a wee bit shorter; I can't deny that. But never say never. If necessary, we will do it. If drives get any longer we will reduce the overall distance standard."

So why wasn't there this desire say, seven years ago?

The issues we face now are the same or worse than when this all started Mr. Dawson. Slow play, safety issues, architecture out of whack, confining course setups to compensate. I guess Dawson hasn't seen the silly looking 6th at Pebble Beach this week, with a cluster of pre-vent bunkers that were not needed in 2000!

Finally, the all-vital issue of loft. Try and make sense of this.

"We have written to manufacturers saying that we are looking at loft," continues Dawson. "We've had very lofted wedges made – up to 70 degrees – and we are currently testing them.

"In the hands of a skilled practitioner, it is possible to do a lot with these clubs. But I think the average amateur would have a lot of trouble using them. Now, you are probably going to say there is nothing wrong with having to be skilled to use a particular club.

Generally not.

But, on the other hand, if it lessens the skill required by skilful people to play the game, then there is an issue.

Here's the problem Peter. Many of us saw the same issue with the current ball and driver situation after the advent of launch monitors. The technology became advantageous for certain swing speeds to benefit more than others. You and your fellow members, along with the USGA, pooh-poohed this discrepancy between skilled player and hack, even as the hack was told they could benefit as well.

Yet now it's a problem with lofted wedges, which are often needed to combat the rough that is only necessary because the ball goes too far and the game has no other way to combat distance?

I think Peter's going to need to go back to the drawing board before they get serious on this loft business.