He wasn't attacking the pin the way he usually does, which meant he left himself long birdie chances all the time.
It was similar all week but he was putting at the top of his game then. He had some very good chances today. Smith made some long birdies today because his putting seemed to click into gear on the back nine.
Na sorry mate. McIlroy didn't want to take too many risks today and was bailing out a lot. If he'd stuck to what he was good at and played more aggressive then he'd have won by a few shots.
The problem for McIlroy was that he was either too conservative or put himself in a bad position on the holes that most were scoring on yesterday. There was plenty of room to play safe and attack the right holes (namely 9, 14 and 18) but he just didn't take advantage. That said, at the turn he can't have envisaged Smith and Young going on the runs they did. Sensational golf. What a year of majors it's been by the way - it's such a shame the LIV debacle is taking away from what should be all about how exciting the golf is right now
I will say it's promising that he had 4 good scores in a row. Hopefully he can repeat that form, and eventually one will be enough.
He didn't play better than Smith for 4 days did he? and as I said, Take out Smith and he still didn't win did he? Young beat him as well. I'm still of the opinion he played too safe in the final round and the ones who took the course by the scruff of the neck finished above him. Maybe he was scared of the usual "wheels falling off" round he usually has nowadays? No suppose about it mate, the man who won it, deserved to do so. Hovland was even more conservative than Mcilroy and look where he ended up.
Well he didn't play any bad rounds of golf whereas Smith had a plus one on Saturday which is bad considering the course. Anyway let's see if Smith can kick on and win another few majors in the next few years or will he be like so many players after a first major win and lose form for a few years. I'm guessing they lose the hard work ethic that gets them there in the first place
If a player shoots 64 on Sunday to win the Open, or any other major, it's very hard to say that player doesn't deserve it. My only hope is that the new champion doesn't join the LIV lot.
Why are you conveniently avoiding my point that Mcilroy didn't even just get beat by Smith, and that Young finished in front of him? By your logic, somebody who had say 4 rounds at 2 under par each day, deserves to win more than Smith. I wanted Mcilroy to win, but you are going beyond the call of duty in fandom here. I was very disappointed by Mcilroy's general approach on Sunday.
Nothing to do with fandom. I just said he didn't have a bad round whereas Smith did. Mcilroy more than likely would've finished level with Young if he didn't need an Eagle. Anyway I'm not saying Smith didn't deserve it just think mcilroy deserved more for 4 good rounds. Yes mcilroy should've attacked more but Smith kind of came from nowhere and it seemed to be too late for mcilroy to respond. He tried though because that 17th hole shot to the green was one of the best shots of the week and that's the commentators words.
This appointment epitomises the issue with LIV golf There is nothing wrong with a competing golf organisation that will go up against the other tours and has issue with the PGA Tour preventing players from competing in both The issue is that LIV is actively aiming to be as disruptive and antagonistic as possible Stenson has been so attractive because he’s the Europe Ryder Cup captain, not because he’s a former Major and players Champion. You can’t knock him accepting $40million. In signing him, LIV are trying to be as disruptive to the Ryder Cup as possible. And it’s disrespectful and objectionable, in my view. That, along with the obvious human rights issues, are the major problems with LIV.
. I get you. Look mcilroy should've attacked more and played a little safe I'll admit but Smith did take him by surprise. Golf really is a cruel game though. I saw a stat about mcilroy being the most under par in the majors this year or after cuts or something like that and yet he has none. So many top ten finishes in all tournaments meaning he's possibly the best golfer all year yet people will only judge him on major wins.
In making the decision that he has, Henrik Stenson has effectively done what the late Tony Greig did when he joined World Series Cricket in 1977. He has sacrificed the biggest job in his sport, that of Ryder Cup captain, for a seemingly alien cause. Greig, in his time, was castigated for his apparent greed and his disloyalty. Yet history now views both him, and the cause he took up, very differently. Time alone will tell whether Stenson comes to be viewed in the same way. But there shouldn't be any doubt that the fight between the golf establishment and LIV is the same sort of fight as that which took place in cricket more than 40 years ago, particularly in the sense of one side having far greater financial resources at its disposal than the other. It may well be, in the end, that the establishment has to come to some sort of arrangement with LIV, particularly if more of the game's current big names decide to jump ship in the months ahead. The key difference as I see it between LIV and World Series Cricket is that it isn't yet clear exactly what LIV's ultimate objective is. The motivation for World Series Cricket was never to run or take over the game, but simply for Kerry Packer's organisation to win television rights in Australia. I suspect that the resources available to LIV means it could potentially take over elite men's golf if it wants to. But if it does, it needs to be clear about it and set out how it will improve the game for everyone who cares about it. At the moment, it just looks like an alien, tacky, money-driven enterprise and it could well do a lot more damage yet.
Quite disappointed by that one tbh. Always like watching him and thought he had a great career ahead of him in terms of major wins.
Sadly probably thinks I’ve won my major now time to go and make more money for myself . Then return at some point .
