OT: Golf & Rugby Approved for Olympics
The IOC approved golf and rugby for future Olympic games. As a golfer, I think this is awesome.
http://sports.espn.go.com/oly/news/story?id=4545111
"Golf will stage a 72-hole stroke-play tournament for men and women, with 60 players in each field. Rugby will organize a four-day seven-a-side tournament -- instead of the more traditional 15-a-side game -- for 12 men's and women's teams."
October 9th, 2009 at 10:00 AM ^
That is great news!! Thanks for the update.
October 9th, 2009 at 12:07 PM ^
1) Golf might up the sizzle of the Olympics by adding all the high-profile PGA players. Can't really knock this addition. It makes all the sense in the world.
2) How big of a slap in the face is it from the international community to the U.S./North America that they banished Baseball/Softball, team sports played primarily in North America and the Carribean (and obviously Japan/Korea) and then replaced it with Rugby which doesn't have any real following on this side of the pond. Combine that with the snubbing of Chicago last week (its one thing for Chicago to not have won in lieu of bringing the Olympics to South America for the first time, another to be the first bid out) and its abundantly clear of the general hatred of the international sports community towards the U.S. Sad situation.
October 10th, 2009 at 9:03 AM ^
They'll just have to bring competitive eating to the docket. We Americans sure would bring some good competition to the table.
October 9th, 2009 at 10:03 AM ^
Just as long as this doesn't turn into an extension of the PGA/LPGA calendar, I'm cool with it. It is true that there are few sports that have as much experience staging international events as golf.
Yet I have to wonder why baseball and softball aren't good enough to make the cut, yet Rugby 7's is.
October 9th, 2009 at 10:40 AM ^
Yet I have to wonder why baseball and softball aren't good enough to make the cut, yet Rugby 7's is.Probably the reusability of the venue. Outside or North America, Latin America, and the Far East, the baseball and softball venues won't ever be used enough to make them worth the cost to build them. On the other hand (and I'm not very familiar with rugby 7's so this may be wrong), the rugby field probably will be reused enough to make it worth building, if not for rugby then soccer or even American football (again, not familiar, I'm guessing the field sizes are similar). Throw in MLB refusing to allow it's players to take part in the baseball competition and a little anti-American bias against USA-dominated softball from the Eurocentric IOC and you end up with both getting cut.
October 9th, 2009 at 11:00 AM ^
is being dominated by one country. since 92 cuba has won 3 golds and 2 silvers in baseball and the US softball team has won every gold except for 08. the playing field in these 2 sports isn't leveling off like it did in basketball. so there is no point for them. the only shitty part is no more jenny finch.
October 9th, 2009 at 12:10 PM ^
play in the Olympics and take a break like they do in the NHL. That probably would have been the only thing to save baseball. Perhaps if the summer Olympics ever return to the U.S. and MLB agrees to be part of it, baseball will return. In the interim, no chance.
October 9th, 2009 at 4:03 PM ^
...unless you want to see the World Series in mid-November. Given the climate in much of North America, I don't think it's a good idea to extend the baseball season longer than it currently is. Baseball just isn't a cold-weather sport.
October 9th, 2009 at 11:06 AM ^
Softball was dropped mostly because the US won all the time. It's true they lost the gold medal game in Beijing (one of the perils of single game tourneys), but the talent is so wildly skewed to favor the US that the rest of the countries wanted to be rid of it. And then I think baseball was killed because the MLB wouldn't send along their players...basically, the best baseball players in the world couldn't be bothered to participate.
October 9th, 2009 at 2:25 PM ^
What's next? Will swimming be banned because Phelps won every gold medal?
/sarcasm
October 9th, 2009 at 10:17 AM ^
Yeeea another stage for Tiger Tiger Woods to establish his glory!
October 9th, 2009 at 10:22 AM ^
Agias of Pharsalos carried a 2 handicap at the Athens CC, playing a precursor to the feathery. Long hitter. Decent short game.
I love golf myself. And I have no problem with this. Just can't see myself getting fired up to watch PGA players in the Olympics. I have the same feeling about basketball, tennis, hockey, etc.
Now rugby? That I'll probably watch.
October 9th, 2009 at 10:27 AM ^
This is awesome. While I love the prospect of Golf in the Olympics (something that I think is long overdue), I also like the fact that they're adding Rugby in. I've never watched Rugby before, but I am intrigued by it and look forward to watching it in the Olympics.
In other news, probably not worthy to start a new thread with, (whatever your political standings may be, I am just reporting this) Obama won the Nobel Peace prize. Lots of crazy stuff going down this week...
October 9th, 2009 at 10:38 AM ^
As someone born and raised in Australia, this is a great addition! It's one of the more global team sports and I'm super excited for this. Seven-a-side though is strange. Imagine telling Messi or Ronaldo that five-a-side soccer is being played. hmmmm. Now only if they'd add cricket...
October 9th, 2009 at 10:43 AM ^
Yeah, I think it's probably for fan enjoyment. 15 on 15 is a little slow and sometimes confusing for spectators; sevens is faster paced and more action packed.
October 9th, 2009 at 10:56 AM ^
I think they went with sevens not just because of the excitement, but also because the matches last 20-25 minutes each, and teams can play 2 or 3 matches a day. Regular 15-a-side rugby can only be played once a week or so, like football. You can't have a tournament in the 16 days of the Olympics. Rugby Sevens tournaments only take 3 days for 16 or 24 teams, with the winners playing 6 games in those 3 days.
But you are right, Sevens is also easier to understand for the novice, and is certainly exciting:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=abY3U3hcQOU
October 9th, 2009 at 11:13 AM ^
I am a big fan of the addition of Rugby. I also think that Sevens is a great way to introduce the sport to the international audience and takes much less time and effort to both understand and execute.
As someone who studied abroad in Sydney back in '05, I can tell you that most diehard football fans should fall in love after a short time. I know I did. Now if this addition could serve to foster the development of rugby in the US, particularly at the High School and D-I NCAA level, that would be even better. I mean, its way cheaper to play than football and can be played on the same field as soccer. It would also go along way to allowing the US to actually compete in international matches.
October 9th, 2009 at 11:42 AM ^
We have a hard enough time recruiting good safeties. We don't need them to start playing rugby instead.
October 9th, 2009 at 10:58 AM ^
Rugby seems like an odd Olympic sport to me. I mean, there isn't even a consistent flavor of rugby throughout the states of Australia much less the world.
Cricket would make a lot more sense IMO.
October 9th, 2009 at 10:40 AM ^
Since there is no football in the Olympics I am actually looking forward to seeing Rugby as a football alternative.
Anybody thinks Dhani Jones can make the national Rugby team?
October 9th, 2009 at 10:43 AM ^
If they have competitions that measure:
How far someone can throw a spear
How far someone can throw a heavy disc
How far someone can throw a heavy ball
Why can't they add
How far someone can hit a golf ball
I mean...who wouldn't watch this instead of rhythmic gymnastics?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_u0rDVwbVo
October 9th, 2009 at 11:25 AM ^
Happy Gilmore would win the Gold every year.
October 9th, 2009 at 10:43 AM ^
I'm assuming the players from the U.S., England and Australia will dominate this event, with the U.S. being the odds on favorite to win gold, but how great will it be to see Camilo Villegas from Colombia battle Sergio Garcia from Spain? I'm pumped!!
October 9th, 2009 at 10:44 AM ^
South Africa
October 9th, 2009 at 10:53 AM ^
Good point...Els, Goosen, Immelman and Sabbatini do make a formidable team.
October 9th, 2009 at 11:05 AM ^
How soon until they add MMA?
I don't even like MMA, I'm a boxing guy, but I can't see them keeping MMA out for every long given its growing international popularity.
October 9th, 2009 at 12:16 PM ^
..they seem to be cutting back on martial arts and satisfied with Judo and wrestling. Karate was one of the sports that got negged in favor of golf and rugby.
I used to think MMA was too barbaric but I'd be lying if I said I'm not hooked now. That said, Dana White is nuts if he thinks one day there will be high school and college MMA teams or that Olympics will be an Olympic sport. Perhaps what makes it great is to see the different fighters who come from different disciplines fighting each other.
October 9th, 2009 at 11:58 AM ^
I'm so hyped up for rugby.
October 9th, 2009 at 12:29 PM ^
why they didn't adopt a more team-oriented approach to golf, i.e. having foursomes or fourball, or even doing match play (which I find more entertaining) instead of a regular four-round 72 hole tournament.
Maybe with all the concerns listed at the end of the article, they wanted to ease golf in, instead of having a larger program that resembled the Presidents/Ryder Cup. Has anyone here played golf in or near Rio, and would know where this would be located?
October 9th, 2009 at 12:54 PM ^
that the golf format might have been better if it was limited to amateurs?
Obviously not as good for hype or coverage, but it would be an awesome premier amateur event.
October 10th, 2009 at 10:44 AM ^
I think golf is fine as an Olympic sport but I agree on the amateur part. What's going to be different from golf in the Olympics and the PGA? Don't all those guys play against each other all year round? That being said, I have no problem with Tiger winning another gold for the US.
October 9th, 2009 at 11:56 PM ^
Women's hockey almost suffered the same fate because Team Canada had won like every flipping match ever it seems like. Thanks to 2006 and the Swedes the ridding the Olympics of Women's hockey seems to have died down.