Growing the game
Last week, a different kind of tournament took place in Gothenburg, Sweden. The Scandinavian Mixed was the first major tour professional event (a joint European Tour-Ladies European Tour event in this case) where both women and men competed on the same course for the same prize. Though smaller events with similar formats had been trialled over the years, this had the credibility and backing of golf’s glitterati. It was pitched as a highly-anticipated milestone for golf, especially after having been sidelined for a year due to COVID-19.
When all was said and done, the tournament was hailed as a groundbreaking, history-making, massive success. And while I wholeheartedly agree, I’d love to have seen a bit more honesty on the part of the golf community in reference to why the Scandinavian Mixed was as important as it was necessary.
For instance, why had it taken so long to put together an event that ostensibly has zero logistical barriers? In comparison, mixed doubles in tennis has been played professionally – at majors – since the 1890s. The answer is, of course, that golf has been, and continues to be, fairly terrible to women. Remember, it took 260 years and a heck of a lot of public persuasion to get St. Andrews, the “Home of Golf,” to allow women to join as members. And then it took them another five years to bother to find their newly welcomed members a place to change. Similar stories are out there for all of the holiest of grail golf venues, which begs the question as to why we hold up these institutions as bastions of the game.
When, in 2003, Vijay Singh refused to play in the same group as Annika Sorenstam, calling her participation in a PGA Tour event “ridiculous,” his issue based around there being distinct, but separate opportunities for women golfers already. While not agreeing with his stance, it’s worth examining what the long-term ambition is for mixed events of this nature. Is it an eventual trend towards a joint tour? A hybrid Ryder/Solheim Cup? Without a structural approach to achieving “equality” in the game of golf, are events such as the Scandinavian Mixed resigned to being more spectacle than the norm?
“Her perspective is fresh, honest, and provides an incredibly accessible and hopeful experience”
It’s here where I lose faith in the powers that be. A lot of the praise and narrative around last week’s event invokes the phrase “growing the game” – a fantastically nebulous term that seems to mean everything and nothing at the same time. Given golf’s association with elitism, and traditional, small c- conservative values, it’s evident that “grow the game” is the sort of buzzword that’s commonly used by those who in fact, have no understanding of how or why the game needs to be grown.
If growing the game means providing women the same opportunities as men in golf then I am absolutely, 100 percent, without doubt behind it. But the very essence of the metaphor requires building from the ground up. A one-off mixed tournament seems to me to be more akin to tossing some breadcrumbs the way of the women’s game, rather than building a long-term, gender-blind, inclusive approach to golf, which would require the hard work of acknowledging past mistakes and overhauling bad practices.
Given that the European Tour recently lifted its ban on a player accused of sexual assault, I’m not sure I should put my faith in their stewardship of the process. And it’s extremely telling (and not remotely surprising) to see that would-be competitors to the PGA/European Tour model, such as the PGL and SGL, while pitching themselves as game-growers and offering a greater golf experience for viewers, have made no such attempt to include women in their proposed initiatives. The PGA Tour’s response to the threat of a breakaway league? To throw an extra $40 MILLION the way of some of the most highly-paid and wealthiest individuals in the world. Seems like a strange way to grow the game.
One fantastic example of actually growing the game, in particular throwing a spotlight on the women’s experience, is The Jazzy Golfer. Her perspective is fresh, honest, and provides an incredibly accessible and hopeful experience for those turned off or alienated by how golf looks from the outside. As you may have guessed, this sort of approach comes at a cost: after calling out misogynistic content online, Jazzy faced a horrifying backlash and torrent of violent abuse. The unintended consequence was perhaps her experience exposed the unacceptable and unsafe environment created by men for women, whether in golf or society in general.
Last week’s event was described as “making history”. That may be true, but the celebration at history being made shouldn’t obscure why it needed making to begin with. More channeling of that energy would perhaps help accelerate and cement some longer-term advancements for the game.
What are your thoughts on growing the game?
P.S. As my golf obsession has grown, I have invested in new equipment for myself. Which left me searching around in vain for a place to donate my old, used clubs. If you know any UK-based golf equipment charities or ways to get clubs into the hands of those who can’t afford them, let me know!
Follow us on Twitter | Facebook | Instagram
#BehindTheTour
Introducing The Cut Stuff - #BehindTheTour