LIV Tour Discussion Thread (*** NO POLITICS ***)

[m052310]

28 minutes ago, Pastit said:

Over here, a judge will not normally grant injunctive relief if there is a remedy in damages at trial.

In theory, same here. The party seeking the injunction has to show irreparable harm will result without the injunction. If the harm can be fully compensated with money damages, it isn't irreparable (again, in general).  

[CasualLie]

1 minute ago, NJBigFish22 said:

Since there was 1 granted in Europe, they may issue 1, but it all depends on the court if they feel the case has merit, and like I mentioned earlier this was filed in a favorable jurisdiction, on purpose.

 

Euro/UK courts really have nothing to do with U.S. Courts.  Just look at Johnny Depp.  0-1 in UK Court, 1-0 in US Court!

[m d g]

And just as I predicted, only the lawyers will get rich...

[NJBigFish22]

Just now, CasualLie said:

 

Euro/UK courts really have nothing to do with U.S. Courts.  Just look at Johnny Depp.  0-1 in UK Court, 1-0 in US Court!

You’re right, but there has been a precedent with the UK court, and the PGAT and DP alliance, which has clearly been established may have an impact.

[oikos1]

18 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I suppose.  But to the point. Just like the nba and mlb.  I won’t watch.  You couldn’t have found a larger Chicago cube fan than me in the 90s.  And if you know baseball that’s like being a proud browns fan.  I was hard core.  Same with basketball. And then they both changed.  And I couldn’t stomach the no defense basketball or the 26 pitchers a night baseball.   I don’t watch the finals I can’t watch the all star games. Those two games are dead to me at the pro level.  Golf will be the same.  Reason why ?  They’re not the same games now.  At all.  The reasons I liked each died.  
 

i don’t think I’m the only one. And I think with golf.  They’re 30 years premature at least. The largest demographic in golf is older than me at 42 . 

And the NBA topped $10 billion this year and MLB is projected to do the same.  Without you, or me for that matter, as a paying customer.🤣🤣

 

 

[smashdn]

1 minute ago, aus10KC said:

 

Those are good points, but I would counter in that those other tours were on different continents and have a different market than the PGAT. Whereas LIV has encroached on PGAT territory holding events opposite of PGAT events. Nothing stopping LIV from doing that, but don't expect the PGAT to play nice guy with the players who are not supporting the PGAT. 

 

Not saying you are wrong as clearly that is the case, legally though, I don't think that will/should matter.

 

It is hard not to have an event opposite a PGAT event when they have one almost every week (including events opposite the majors, WGC's and other co-sanctioned events).  Also, the PGAT is controlling nearly the whole pathway to ascending to the top level of men's professional golf (especially in the US).  They too have a closed shop, it is just a really large shop.

[aus10KC]

36 minutes ago, UncleJohn’sBand said:

I didn’t ask about that. I should have lol 

 

Let me go do that now! Personally, I can see it being denied because they are suspended by the TOUR, and these are TOUR run events. I don’t know how a judge can tell an organization that their own rules don’t apply anymore. 

 

Agreed, unless their rules are discriminatory towards a protected class for example. Are millionaire golfers a protected class? I think Phil would like to think so.

[CasualLie]

24 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

 

 

Agreed with the above... A few notes:

 

• This absolutely feels like so much is written from the POV of LIV Golf despite LIV not actually being a party to the lawsuit. It will be hard to show significant damages to the players for violating the Conflicting Event and Media Rights releases, given that they deliberately chose to leave and not only have received large guaranteed money contracts, but in only 3 events have won significant purse or team winnings too. 
• The one area that has teeth is the Media Rights issue. Conceivably, this has caused LIV serious harm because no broadcaster wants to touch it if they might get sued by the PGAT for airing content they don't have the rights to. However, again this is confusing because it is LIV Golf, not the players who left, who are harmed by this inability to secure broadcasters, and LIV Golf is not a party to the lawsuit. 
• The goal for LIV Golf is to pull the teeth out of PGAT restrictions because they know they have difficulty competing in an "us vs them" choice of being 100% LIV or 100% PGAT. LIV was forced into these large guaranteed contracts (per the filing) because they had to compensate players greatly for taking a risk with LIV. However to rely on the players in this case would require showing damages. Many of these players (Perez, Phil) have publicly badmouthed how badly the PGAT mistreats them. Others have said that they want to play less golf for more money. They've all publicly professed how happy they are with LIV. It will be interesting in depositions when they're asked why they want to now play more golf, for less money, on a tour which mistreats them and made them so miserable that they left?
• The filing is long on accusations of collusion and the PGAT "threatening" or "leaning on" other parties to do their bidding, and short on evidence. My thought is that they want to stir up the media pot, hope to get to discovery, and actually find out whether there is evidence to support these accusations. 

 

And a couple random thoughts:

 

• Gooch apparently said recently that he only intended to play one tournament and was absolutely shocked that the tour suspended him, but once they did, he was forced to be all-in on LIV. In the filing, it was clear that Davis Love III told him he'd be suspended and then another Tour official told him via text that he'd be banned for life. So it's not like he went into this blind, as he represented to the media.
• GN makes it sound like he's beating top players back with sticks who all want to join LIV and it's a closed shop for 2023... But at the same time the filing makes it clear that the threat of suspensions/bans for players is what drove LIV to be forced into paying large guaranteed contracts, and that it is making players unlikely or unwilling to leave. So it sounds like that was BS from GN. Which is what we all believed anyway, but the filing definitely takes the wind out of that statement from GN. 

 

That's my $0.02 anyway. 

 

The goal here is to get a preliminary injunction and get those players into the FEC, which will embolden more players (who think they can now get away with it legally) to jump ship for the rest of the fall while this all gets sorted out. Therefore, even if LIV ultimately loses this lawsuit, if they can actually get a short-term win by getting these players back into the FEC, it can help them become established enough to get a critical mass of top-shelf players on board. 

 

Also remember, I am not a lawyer lol 😉 

 

 

 

Good points.  I just do not know how GN/LIV/Others can claim LIV was forced into large contracts to overcome risk and be taken seriously.  

 

1. The financing behind said large contracts is from the deepest source on the planet known for spending wildly, so no harm there.

2. This happens everyday with companies convincing/poaching/offering one employee to leave their current employer with a large enough compensation package to overcome various risks.  That's life in the city, hardly a tort.

3. Long before other players got crazy contracts, LIV/GN and Phil were in talks.  Phil and his big mouth has made it well known he feels underpaid.  GN/LIV didn't know it was going to take $100-200M to snag Phil?!  Of course they knew, he told everyone what he thought he was worth.  Phil set the market for LIV, and now poor LIV has to live with it.

 

 

Edited August 4, 2022 by CasualLie

[physasst]

13 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

Most were mentioned in the other thread.  

 

I absolutely hate the "playing through" or "live look in" mess where they split the screen and show a commercial and golf.  I don't need the human interest crap.  I don't remember what broadcast this was on but one of the announcers mentioned that the player's sister was a golf course super back in BFE Falls wherever and was likely watching her brother.  He then sank the putt and the announcer mentioned that she and her two cats, and he named them by name, were jumping for joy.  Really?  They dig that deep to get to the names of the sister's cats and mention it in a broadcast.

 

More golf and less announcer talk.  The only things I need to hear are the situation, yardage, for what and on what hole, the on-course can tell me the club.  Otherwise "let the moment breathe." Mic the caddies more.  I like that discussion.  It shows me something of the decision-making process.  Sometimes that is infuriating, sometimes I learn something.  

 

More hole dissections and more strategy talk would be fine.  Let me know how the architect may have intended the hole to play or what options the hole gives the player off the tee and then let me watch the shots be hit.

 

In short, more golf shots and more golf related talk.  Less human interest junk and less idle banter.  If your mouth is moving it better be telling me something I need or want to know about the golf being played.  No fluff.

Agreed, I'd rather hear the player-caddie discussions. Would love to have them all mic'ed up. Less Zinger.....

Edited August 4, 2022 by physasst

[smashdn]

40 minutes ago, UncleJohn’sBand said:

I didn’t ask about that. I should have lol 

 

Let me go do that now! Personally, I can see it being denied because they are suspended by the TOUR, and these are TOUR run events. I don’t know how a judge can tell an organization that their own rules don’t apply anymore. 

 

2 minutes ago, aus10KC said:

 

Agreed, unless their rules are discriminatory towards a protected class for example. Are millionaire golfers a protected class? I think Phil would like to think so.

 

 

How does it play out that the PGAT has essentially barred/banned Phil (and perhaps others) from his ability to make income doing what he does, playing golf?  He can't go play PGAT events, he presumably cannot play Champions or DP Tour events.  His only option is LIV at the moment, and during the weeks between events he is unable to be employed doing what he does.

 

If it can be demonstrated that the PGAT controls and blocks his ability to play golf for money does that come into play?

 

(Now I completely get Phil has plenty of cash to live on.  This is a question more posed from a legal perspective as opposed to the reality of the situation.)

[Pastit]

45 minutes ago, NJBigFish22 said:

Since there was 1 granted in Europe, they may issue 1, but it all depends on the court if they feel the case has merit, and like I mentioned earlier this was filed in a favorable jurisdiction, on purpose.

Thanks but are you sure there was an application for interim relief and not just a threat from Westwood/ Poulter et al ? I may be wrong but I thought the DPWT withdrew the ban - possibly avoiding costs until a trial or settlement. 
 

p.s. You’re correct though it’s not reported as an injunction but a short suspension of the DPWT actions v Poulter/ Westwood Et al. Thanks

Edited August 4, 2022 by Pastit

[Pastit]

14 minutes ago, CasualLie said:

 

Euro/UK courts really have nothing to do with U.S. Courts.  Just look at Johnny Depp.  0-1 in UK Court, 1-0 in US Court!

But judge in one and jury in the other - yes ?

[bladehunter]

14 minutes ago, oikos1 said:

And the NBA topped $10 billion this year and MLB is projected to do the same.  Without you, or me for that matter, as a paying customer.🤣🤣

 

 

Sure. I’ll concede that the entire world has no taste. I mean. Look around. 😂.  But for me and mine I’ll stand up for logic. Logic says that a fat dog won’t hunt.  It’s that simple. 

Edited August 4, 2022 by bladehunter

[bladehunter]

22 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

Most were mentioned in the other thread.  

 

I absolutely hate the "playing through" or "live look in" mess where they split the screen and show a commercial and golf.  I don't need the human interest crap.  I don't remember what broadcast this was on but one of the announcers mentioned that the player's sister was a golf course super back in BFE Falls wherever and was likely watching her brother.  He then sank the putt and the announcer mentioned that she and her two cats, and he named them by name, were jumping for joy.  Really?  They dig that deep to get to the names of the sister's cats and mention it in a broadcast.

 

More golf and less announcer talk.  The only things I need to hear are the situation, yardage, for what and on what hole, the on-course can tell me the club.  Otherwise "let the moment breathe." Mic the caddies more.  I like that discussion.  It shows me something of the decision-making process.  Sometimes that is infuriating, sometimes I learn something.  

 

More hole dissections and more strategy talk would be fine.  Let me know how the architect may have intended the hole to play or what options the hole gives the player off the tee and then let me watch the shots be hit.

 

In short, more golf shots and more golf related talk.  Less human interest junk and less idle banter.  If your mouth is moving it better be telling me something I need or want to know about the golf being played.  No fluff.

Sure. But DVr does that for me now.  
 

i agree with you. 
 

BUT.  Is LIV producing this ?   It seems like a cut your nose off to spite the face of you're for LIV and want less fluff. 

[getitdaily]

40 minutes ago, bladehunter said:

I suppose. But if I’m honest I don’t really agree. I don’t find any pro golf boring. Some just extra exciting. I record and watch it all.  And pyrotechnics, team names and walk on music will make me watch less. Not more.  
 

But to your point. I’m again opposite , Just like the nba and mlb.  I won’t watch.  You couldn’t have found a larger Chicago cubs fan than me in the 90s.  And if you know baseball that’s like being a proud browns fan.  I was hard core.  Same with basketball. And then they both changed.  And I couldn’t stomach the no defense basketball or the 26 pitchers a night baseball.   I don’t watch the finals I can’t watch the all star games. Those two games are dead to me at the pro level.  Golf will be the same.  Reason why ?  They’re not the same games now.  At all.  The reasons I liked each died.  
 

i don’t think I’m the only one. And I think with golf.  They’re 30 years premature at least. The largest demographic in golf is older than me at 42 . 

Me and the braves. Me and the Michael Jordan era.

 

I haven't watched a baseball game in over a decade. Been longer since I watched an NBA game.

 

I haven't watched the ncaa tourney in 2 or 3 years...not even a single game. 

 

College football, with all the $$$ and NIL invading has Me losing interest big time.

 

I still watch the tour. I watch it because of no name guys who can win an event and completely change their lives. I watch because there's no guarantees. 

 

LIV is doing to golf what $$$ has done to every sport. It may not be long before I just stop watching golf too. Especially with cable costing what it does and all the absolute garbage in TV shows, movies, etc.

[Christosterone]

39 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

 

 

Agreed with the above... A few notes:

 

• This absolutely feels like so much is written from the POV of LIV Golf despite LIV not actually being a party to the lawsuit. It will be hard to show significant damages to the players for violating the Conflicting Event and Media Rights releases, given that they deliberately chose to leave and not only have received large guaranteed money contracts, but in only 3 events have won significant purse or team winnings too. 
• The one area that has teeth is the Media Rights issue. Conceivably, this has caused LIV serious harm because no broadcaster wants to touch it if they might get sued by the PGAT for airing content they don't have the rights to. However, again this is confusing because it is LIV Golf, not the players who left, who are harmed by this inability to secure broadcasters, and LIV Golf is not a party to the lawsuit. 
• The goal for LIV Golf is to pull the teeth out of PGAT restrictions because they know they have difficulty competing in an "us vs them" choice of being 100% LIV or 100% PGAT. LIV was forced into these large guaranteed contracts (per the filing) because they had to compensate players greatly for taking a risk with LIV. However to rely on the players in this case would require showing damages. Many of these players (Perez, Phil) have publicly badmouthed how badly the PGAT mistreats them. Others have said that they want to play less golf for more money. They've all publicly professed how happy they are with LIV. It will be interesting in depositions when they're asked why they want to now play more golf, for less money, on a tour which mistreats them and made them so miserable that they left?
• The filing is long on accusations of collusion and the PGAT "threatening" or "leaning on" other parties to do their bidding, and short on evidence. My thought is that they want to stir up the media pot, hope to get to discovery, and actually find out whether there is evidence to support these accusations. 

 

And a couple random thoughts:

 

• Gooch apparently said recently that he only intended to play one tournament and was absolutely shocked that the tour suspended him, but once they did, he was forced to be all-in on LIV. In the filing, it was clear that Davis Love III told him he'd be suspended and then another Tour official told him via text that he'd be banned for life. So it's not like he went into this blind, as he represented to the media.
• GN makes it sound like he's beating top players back with sticks who all want to join LIV and it's a closed shop for 2023... But at the same time the filing makes it clear that the threat of suspensions/bans for players is what drove LIV to be forced into paying large guaranteed contracts, and that it is making players unlikely or unwilling to leave. So it sounds like that was BS from GN. Which is what we all believed anyway, but the filing definitely takes the wind out of that statement from GN. 

 

That's my $0.02 anyway. 

 

The goal here is to get a preliminary injunction and get those players into the FEC, which will embolden more players (who think they can now get away with it legally) to jump ship for the rest of the fall while this all gets sorted out. Therefore, even if LIV ultimately loses this lawsuit, if they can actually get a short-term win by getting these players back into the FEC, it can help them become established enough to get a critical mass of top-shelf players on board. 

 

Also remember, I am not a lawyer lol 😉 

 

 

I like my lawyers to specialize in bird law.

 

 

[lowndes]

43 minutes ago, betarhoalphadelta said:

 

 

 

Agreed with the above... A few notes:

 

• This absolutely feels like so much is written from the POV of LIV Golf despite LIV not actually being a party to the lawsuit. It will be hard to show significant damages to the players for violating the Conflicting Event and Media Rights releases, given that they deliberately chose to leave and not only have received large guaranteed money contracts, but in only 3 events have won significant purse or team winnings too. 
• The one area that has teeth is the Media Rights issue. Conceivably, this has caused LIV serious harm because no broadcaster wants to touch it if they might get sued by the PGAT for airing content they don't have the rights to. However, again this is confusing because it is LIV Golf, not the players who left, who are harmed by this inability to secure broadcasters, and LIV Golf is not a party to the lawsuit. 
• The goal for LIV Golf is to pull the teeth out of PGAT restrictions because they know they have difficulty competing in an "us vs them" choice of being 100% LIV or 100% PGAT. LIV was forced into these large guaranteed contracts (per the filing) because they had to compensate players greatly for taking a risk with LIV. However to rely on the players in this case would require showing damages. Many of these players (Perez, Phil) have publicly badmouthed how badly the PGAT mistreats them. Others have said that they want to play less golf for more money. They've all publicly professed how happy they are with LIV. It will be interesting in depositions when they're asked why they want to now play more golf, for less money, on a tour which mistreats them and made them so miserable that they left?
• The filing is long on accusations of collusion and the PGAT "threatening" or "leaning on" other parties to do their bidding, and short on evidence. My thought is that they want to stir up the media pot, hope to get to discovery, and actually find out whether there is evidence to support these accusations. 

 

And a couple random thoughts:

 

• Gooch apparently said recently that he only intended to play one tournament and was absolutely shocked that the tour suspended him, but once they did, he was forced to be all-in on LIV. In the filing, it was clear that Davis Love III told him he'd be suspended and then another Tour official told him via text that he'd be banned for life. So it's not like he went into this blind, as he represented to the media.
• GN makes it sound like he's beating top players back with sticks who all want to join LIV and it's a closed shop for 2023... But at the same time the filing makes it clear that the threat of suspensions/bans for players is what drove LIV to be forced into paying large guaranteed contracts, and that it is making players unlikely or unwilling to leave. So it sounds like that was BS from GN. Which is what we all believed anyway, but the filing definitely takes the wind out of that statement from GN. 

 

That's my $0.02 anyway. 

 

The goal here is to get a preliminary injunction and get those players into the FEC, which will embolden more players (who think they can now get away with it legally) to jump ship for the rest of the fall while this all gets sorted out. Therefore, even if LIV ultimately loses this lawsuit, if they can actually get a short-term win by getting these players back into the FEC, it can help them become established enough to get a critical mass of top-shelf players on board. 

 

Also remember, I am not a lawyer lol 😉 

 

 

Great points here.  One other thing to think about is actual damages.  The players said they want to play less golf, not more.  They are contractually obligated to play 14 LIV events plus “numerous” international series events according to an interview Norman gave a couple weeks back.  I have no idea what “numerous” means but let’s just say it is 6.  Everybody but Phil (I think he’s the only one) needs to play 15 PGA Tour events a year.  I’d be curious if any of the players doing this has ever played 35 times in a calendar year.  If they have not, then one argument is there aren’t damages (or they are pretty small) in that they weren’t going to be able to play LIV and maintain their PGA status anyways.

 

I would be very surprised if injunctive relief is granted as what we are really talking about is money and that can be solved once the merits of the case are heard.

[bladehunter]

11 minutes ago, getitdaily said:

Me and the braves. Me and the Michael Jordan era.

 

I haven't watched a baseball game in over a decade. Been longer since I watched an NBA game.

 

I haven't watched the ncaa tourney in 2 or 3 years...not even a single game. 

 

College football, with all the $$$ and NIL invading has Me losing interest big time.

 

I still watch the tour. I watch it because of no name guys who can win an event and completely change their lives. I watch because there's no guarantees. 

 

LIV is doing to golf what $$$ has done to every sport. It may not be long before I just stop watching golf too. Especially with cable costing what it does and all the absolute garbage in TV shows, movies, etc.

Absolutely.   I watch for the purity of competition.  I remember vividly when canseco Maguire and bonds started juicing home runs.  Everyone cheered.  Except me. I yelled at the TV for them to ban the bums.  Remember I had sosa on my team.  I couldn’t stand to watch him either.  
 

then you get the giant cry babies in basketball like Labron.  If he played against an 80s-90s piston , Celtics or bulls defense. They might have literally put him out of the game on a stretcher.  But now they part the lane to let him get another highlight dunk.  
 

i see LIV as them parting the lane , stopping the defense -or struggle of the game , and making it all highlight material. 
 

well that’s what kills it.  When everyone is fat and exceptional.  Then nobody is . The struggle is what makes the win.  

Edited August 4, 2022 by bladehunter

[UncleJohn’sBand]

19 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

 

 

How does it play out that the PGAT has essentially barred/banned Phil (and perhaps others) from his ability to make income doing what he does, playing golf?  He can't go play PGAT events, he presumably cannot play Champions or DP Tour events.  His only option is LIV at the moment, and during the weeks between events he is unable to be employed doing what he does.

 

If it can be demonstrated that the PGAT controls and blocks his ability to play golf for money does that come into play?

 

(Now I completely get Phil has plenty of cash to live on.  This is a question more posed from a legal perspective as opposed to the reality of the situation.)

I think this is where the players and LIV are going to lose the monopoly argument. 
 

Phil COULD go to the Asian tour, presumably the DP World Tour, LIV Golf, the Sunshine Tour, the AustralAsian Tour, the Challenge Tour, the Gpro Tour, the Adam’s Tour, and the Putt-Putt world champions tour if he so chooses to play golf and make money. The PGA Tour has suspended him from their events and the benefits of them, not from the game itself. For Phil to say they are limiting his ability to do his job by suspending him is a very flimsy argument. Hell, PReed is on a jet as we speak to Asia to “grow the game” on the Asian tour. 
 

TLDR:

The TOUR has not banned any of these players from the game of golf itself, just their sanctioned events. 

[Pastit]

5 minutes ago, lowndes said:

Great points here.  One other thing to think about is actual damages.  The players said they want to play less golf, not more.  They are contractually obligated to play 14 LIV events plus “numerous” international series events according to an interview Norman gave a couple weeks back.  I have no idea what “numerous” means but let’s just say it is 6.  Everybody but Phil (I think he’s the only one) needs to play 15 PGA Tour events a year.  I’d be curious if any of the players doing this has ever played 35 times in a calendar year.  If they have not, then one argument is there aren’t damages (or they are pretty small) in that they weren’t going to be able to play LIV and maintain their PGA status anyways.

 

I would be very surprised if injunctive relief is granted as what we are really talking about is money and that can be solved once the merits of the case are heard.

Slightly more complicated maybe with WR points, schedules and WGC/ major qualification. 

[khalespace]

27 minutes ago, smashdn said:

(Now I completely get Phil has plenty of cash to live on.  This is a question more posed from a legal perspective as opposed to the reality of the situation.)

Don't underestimate compulsive gamblers, they can lose a lot of money in a short time.

[woodriff]

Just a shot in the dark question regarding the LIV suit. 
 

Cannot the PGA in some way prove that LIV, with their monetary resources, that this was a hostile takeover of PGA resources, and the PGA is trying to protect those resources? 
The players that moved to LIV did so of their own accord. The PGA rules are clear. I’m not sure that they really have a case. 

[NJBigFish22]

28 minutes ago, Pastit said:

Thanks but are you sure there was an application for interim relief and not just a threat from Westwood/ Poulter et al ? I may be wrong but I thought the DPWT withdrew the ban - possibly avoiding costs until a trial or settlement. 

Several players were issued a stay by courts to participate in Scottish Open.

 

https://www.si.com/golf/news/branden-grace-joins-three-other-liv-members-in-genesis-scottish-open-field

[getitdaily]

2 minutes ago, NJBigFish22 said:

Several players were issued a stay by courts to participate in Scottish Open.

 

https://www.si.com/golf/news/branden-grace-joins-three-other-liv-members-in-genesis-scottish-open-field

Different court system there than the US.

[RobS]

The only sure winner in litigation will be the law firms representing both sides.  It will be months if not years of both sides racking up hourly billings.  I believe Gibson Dunn's partner rates are around $2k/hr and the other firms involved are in a similar neighborhood.  The curtain will be pulled back on all of the players named and both Tours.  It's not like this is an altruistic case of the common man against a corporate giant.  It's groups of wealthy people and organizations fighting for money and power.  Pro golf and golf in general has long been saddled with an elitist imagine and this just further reinforces that.  No one wants to hear guys squabbling over how many more millions and opportunities they 'deserve' except for the tragedy whores.  

Does anyone remember the baseball strike in '94?  While this is obviously a different scenario, it may have the same net effect in turning off the fans to the pro game.  The fact that guys can make tens of millions of dollars playing a game that 99% of the golfing public chooses to play at their own expense is a phenomenon in itself.

[lowndes]

1 minute ago, getitdaily said:

Different court system there than the US.

and from what I can tell very different membership rules.  Arbitration for one as an arbitrator is who allowed them to play.

[mogc60]

38 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

 

 

How does it play out that the PGAT has essentially barred/banned Phil (and perhaps others) from his ability to make income doing what he does, playing golf?  He can't go play PGAT events, he presumably cannot play Champions or DP Tour events.  His only option is LIV at the moment, and during the weeks between events he is unable to be employed doing what he does.

 

If it can be demonstrated that the PGAT controls and blocks his ability to play golf for money does that come into play?

 

(Now I completely get Phil has plenty of cash to live on.  This is a question more posed from a legal perspective as opposed to the reality of the situation.)

Go play state opens. They are open to anyone to qualify. Many have senior divisions too. He can’t play PGA Section events because he’s not a class A member and can’t play the tour because he doesn’t have a membership. He made his choice given all the facts. 

[Pastit]

12 minutes ago, UncleJohn’sBand said:

I think this is where the players and LIV are going to lose the monopoly argument. 
 

Phil COULD go to the Asian tour, presumably the DP World Tour, LIV Golf, the Sunshine Tour, the AustralAsian Tour, the Challenge Tour, the Gpro Tour, the Adam’s Tour, and the Putt-Putt world champions tour if he so chooses to play golf and make money. The PGA Tour has suspended him from their events and the benefits of them, not from the game itself. For Phil to say they are limiting his ability to do his job by suspending him is a very flimsy argument. Hell, PReed is on a jet as we speak to Asia to “grow the game” on the Asian tour. 
 

TLDR:

The TOUR has not banned any of these players from the game of golf itself, just their sanctioned events. 

Sorry, this argument doesn’t work for me. It’s about any restriction and freedom to work IMO. 

[bscinstnct]

40 minutes ago, smashdn said:

 

 

 

How does it play out that the PGAT has essentially barred/banned Phil (and perhaps others) from his ability to make income doing what he does, playing golf?  He can't go play PGAT events, he presumably cannot play Champions or DP Tour events.  His only option is LIV at the moment, and during the weeks between events he is unable to be employed doing what he does.

 

If it can be demonstrated that the PGAT controls and blocks his ability to play golf for money does that come into play?

 

(Now I completely get Phil has plenty of cash to live on.  This is a question more posed from a legal perspective as opposed to the reality of the situation.)

 

He reportedly signed to play on a rival golf tour for $200 MM guaranteed.

 

The liv is a tour. 8 events, 14 next year.

 

How can he argue the “banned him from his ability to make an income playing golf”

 

If he’s making 200MM playing golf?

[MtlJeff]

6 minutes ago, bscinstnct said:

 

He reportedly signed to play on a rival golf tour for $200 MM guaranteed.

 

The liv is a tour. 8 events, 14 next year.

 

How can he argue the “banned him from his ability to make an income playing golf”

 

If he’s making 200MM playing golf?

 

Maybe LIV has these guys classified as Food and Beverage directors , like Ace Rothstein in "Casino"

 

They're not making any money playing golf!