Some are more equal than others: Peter Dawson explains the R&A's stance on women, golf in the Olympics, drugs and shackling technology

Published on Saturday 14 February 2009 18:38

"Every golf course in the world that has been awarded the dubious honour of the Royal Charter has two things in common: they have some of the best courses with some of the worst members."

– David Feherty

OUT OF touch. Misogynistic. Oblivious. Old fashioned. Finding unflattering adjectives to describe the men of the Royal & Ancient Golf Club isn't exactly the hardest part of any journalist's job.

We're not alone, of course. Just last week Scotland's First Minister, Alex Salmond, highlighted one of the R&A's weak spots – their continuing and inexcusable inability to find a suitably qualified woman member. Unfortunately, our esteemed leader identified the new principal of St Andrews University, Dr Louise Richardson, as someone who should be ushered immediately into the famous clubhouse behind the first tee on the Old Course. Doctor Richardson is apparently a non-golfer, a fact that rather got in the way of the bigger point wee Eck was attempting to make.

Anyway, Salmond's outburst didn't go unnoticed. It certainly struck a nerve inside golf's all-male inner sanctum.

"I think the problem with this is, the more we talk about it the more it feeds on itself," sighs Peter Dawson, the R&A's executive director. "I'm always reticent to talk about it at all, but what does irritate me immensely is that the media and politicians can go into bat on such subjects in total ignorance of the facts. They never seem interested in those facts if they get in the way of a good story.

"Last week, for example, we had one of the local MSPs talking about Louise Richardson's 'membership of the Old Course'. And so many times we hear about the 'R&A's Old Course', which it isn't. These people never seem to appreciate that the St Andrews courses are public and everyone can play on them. So we're not keeping women off the golf course.

"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."

The bottom line? Best not hold one's breath regarding the prospect of anyone in a skirt teeing off in the R&A's Spring Medal any time soon.

Moving right along, perhaps the biggest issue currently facing the R&A is the question of golf's participation in future Olympic games. Along with most of the game's many and assorted blazers and jackets, Dawson is right behind this particular cause, the undoubted attraction being International Olympic Committee funding for the game worldwide. Many leading players have also come out in favour, although that could change as soon as they are asked to declare for the record their whereabouts for one hour every day for the next year as a prelude to urinating into a cup in front of spectators.

"The golf development argument is surely irrefutable," contends Dawson. "If you are in that business, you have to be supportive of golf in the Olympics. In years to come, the professional game is going to be more dependent on other countries than it has been. It isn't going to be so America-centric, or Europe-centric. The more countries playing golf, the better it will be for the game.

"As far as the competitive landscape is concerned – and the argument that the only Olympic sports should be those where the gold medal is the biggest thing – I see that as a moveable feast. Just recently, Oliver Wilson said that the biggest thing in his golfing life would be playing in a Ryder Cup. You could not have imagined anyone saying that even 25 years ago. It just goes to show how things can change.

"So, while Olympic golf may not seem like a huge thing for a current player, a young person growing up with golf in the Olympics would see things very differently."

Then there are the continuing debates over the distance leading players can hit the modern ball with the modern driver and the decreasing importance of driving accuracy at the sharp end of the game. Despite loud and prolonged calls from many of golf's most famous players – Jack Nicklaus, Tiger Woods, Arnold Palmer, Ernie Els, Greg Norman, Geoff Ogilvy, Peter Thomson, Tom Watson, Ben Crenshaw, Seve Ballesteros and Lee Trevino, to name but a few – the game's legislators, cowed by the ever-present and implicit threat of legal action from equipment manufacturers, allowed driving distances to spiral out of control before eventually and belatedly coming up with a 'line in the sand' that has seen a recent stabilising of those numbers. Too late, however, for the many courses rendered obsolete as far as professional play is concerned.

Anyway, in an attempt to get the game's 'bazooka Joes' to throttle back a little, next year the players will be forced to use irons with grooves less likely to produce spin from long grass. And, as an aside, the R&A is currently looking at perhaps limiting the loft on wedges too.

"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."

And the wedges?

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

"Some professionals are very sophisticated about this. I know of one player who takes two sets of clubs – one with square grooves, the other with V grooves – to every event, then switches to suit the course he is playing. Sometimes he mixes the sets. So there is a science to this, which proves we are right to do what we have."

Uh-huh. At least in its own 'mind,' the R&A is never wrong. And, long-term, that may be golf's biggest problem of all.