They couldn’t have picked a worse time.
According to reports, USGA Executive Director Mike Davis flew down to Sea Island, Ga., last week, not to catch Tommy “Two Gloves” Gainey’s win at the McGladrey Classic, but to meet with PGA Tour officials about what many see as an inevitable rule change banning long putters.
No details emerged from the meeting, but when asked about the possible long putter ban last month, PGA Tour Commissioner Tim Finchem dodged the question with the kind of politically astute jujitsu that made him a go-to campaign operative for Jimmy Carter.
“When I speak to a position, we as an organization haven't had an interface yet with the direction that those discussions (about the rule change) are taking specifically, so we haven't had the opportunity as an organization to look at that and determine whether we should have a position, and if so, what it should be,” Finchem said in classic triple-speak. “I think what I've articulated from the position I hold is simply that this is important to a lot of people, not just on the PGA Tour, but to all golfers. It should be done carefully, reviewed fully, and discussed thoroughly. At least at this point I'm confident that will happen.”
But it hasn’t happened, at least not in a way that will mollify all interested parties. Meetings have been private, discussions secret. There have been no “town halls,” no conferences, no forums where input can be collected and weighed, no seminars or campaigns to advocate or even explain the USGA’s position in the matter.
Why is banning the long putter (or “anchoring,” as the ruling is most likely to be worded) a good thing? Or more aptly, why is keeping things as they have been since 1936, when Paul Runyan put a belly putter in play at the Belmont Open, a threat to the game?
If anyone can answer that question, they haven’t stepped forward.
“I don't know nearly enough to make any assumptions,” Finchem said. “I mean, we just have to take a process and follow it through. That includes educating if this moves forward, educating our players as to what it is, specifically, and how it's going to be implemented. We have an equipment committee. We have a group of people that work with them on the rules and evaluate what it means to us as a professional sport.
“But also, one of the three parts of our mission is to assist in the growth and protection of the game. So what our position would be, if any, as it relates to the game as a whole, and how that would flow into it is impossible to project at this point.”
Players are less obtuse in their opinions.
Tim Clark, who has been playing with the long putter since he was 16 years old, has hinted at litigation, saying of the proposed ban, “Essentially, they’re probably taking our livelihoods away.”
And this week at the PGA Grand Slam of Golf, U.S. Open champion Webb Simpson told the Associated Press, “If the USGA bans (long putters), I think it’s going to be a whole other ballgame (than) if the PGA Tour bans it…If you look at the facts, last year there was no one in the top 20 of the ‘strokes gained’ category that anchored a putter. So the argument of, ‘it’s an advantage,’ you have to throw that out there. There are a bunch of arguments going around, but I haven’t heard a good one yet.”
Then there is the problem of timing. With a host of organizations -- including the PGA of America, the LPGA, the PGA Tour, and the National Golf Course Owners Association -- expending time and treasure to grow golf, a rule change that takes away the one club that has kept older golfers in the game appears to be contrary to every initiative of the last 10 years.
But an even larger potential problem looms, one the game’s keepers would be well advised to consider.
The public no longer trusts its once-trusted institutions. This goes beyond the normal smarm of a political season -- although this year’s campaign ad wars have been particularly deceitful. It hits at the heart of what have always been considered givens.
Does anyone now doubt that Secret Service agents will party like frat boys on spring break while on duty? Does anyone believe the Bureau of Labor Statistics isn’t above fudging the numbers? Does anyone think the General Accounting Office is the best agency to control waste, fraud and abuse in government spending? And is there anyone left who believes the CIA won't time their assessments for political gain?
It wasn’t long ago that these institutions were above reproach, and questioning them was as absurd as claiming the world was flat. But no more. Their words and deeds are now discounted, perceived as another off-key note in a cacophony of background noise.
Golf’s ruling bodies are one arbitrary and capricious ruling away from the same fate. Whether the long-putter ban will be that final straw remains to be seen, but those in charge should be very careful, not just in their reasoning, but in their timing.
Because once you lose your moral authority, your ability to govern -- whether it is a nation or a sport -- vanishes in an instant.
And that is something our game cannot afford.