What's in a Name?

My journey to the KLM Open soon afterwards was made undesirably interesting by being tossed around in one of the sponsor's aircraft in continuous turbulence on the approach into Amsterdam’s Schiphol airport. The pilot deserves mention in despatches and life membership of the European Tour for his skilful and smooth (all things are relative) landing. I arrived at my hotel late on the Tuesday night to be informed by my taxi driver that the house opposite was a "sex house".

Anyhow, the week was quiet in comparison, although once again the missing stars weren't missed at all as Messieurs Luiten, Jiménez and Dyson amongst others provided royal entertainment and another thrilling climax.

While all was peace and tranquility in Europe, America was reverberating to the unsavoury sounds of “Oscillate-gate”. Much has been said and written, but to me the case is cut and dried. If a player attempts to remove a pine needle, pretzel or discarded cigarette-end from beneath his ball he is taking a chance. Isaac Newton would tell you that the likelihood of the ball oscillating (which, according to the Rules of Golf, means returning to exactly the same position) is quite remote. The normal procedure for the vast majority of honest, upright professionals is that if they think the ball might have moved, they would call over the fellow competitor who is marking their card, discuss it and if there was a smidgen of doubt either take a one-shot penalty and replace the ball, or call for a referee, who, not having seen the incident, would probably outline the procedure and leave it to the player's discretion as to how he should proceed.

Of course, if there is known TV evidence, then that would automatically be used to give a categoric ruling. In Tiger Woods' case, he thought he was judge and jury and he came down in favour of the defendant. Thankfully the Court of Appeal ruled otherwise.

Two things strike me about the video that he had been unaware of. Firstly his hand lingered for a long time after he had tried to move whatever it was underneath his ball. Was that not the lingering hand of a guilty man? Secondly, there is no doubt from the blown up images that the ball did move, and the fact that he continues to protest his innocence merely lowers him even further in the eyes of right-thinking people.

Woods' long time Agent Mark Steinberg once accused me, in derogatory fashion, of asking a "tabloid" question, when I was working for BBC TV. Woods – who was being paid shed-loads to appear –was at the beginning of a three-week run in Britain and Ireland that was culminating at the Ryder Cup, and whose whole body language said "get me out of here", had lost at the 33rd hole of the World Match Play contest at Wentworth to the highly unfancied Shaun Micheel. I had heard comments outside the ropes, and indeed even the BBC's Andrew Cotter in commentary questioned Tiger's commitment, so in the greenside interview that followed I said to Tiger, "The cynics might say that you weren't trying your hardest but I suspect that's not the case?" He gave me a very curt response and after another couple of questions we went our separate ways: me to the TV Production office, where I was congratulated by my editor and producer on a job well done. I thought no more about it until I got a call from the producer at about nine o'clock that evening to say that he had just come off the phone after an hour of ear-bending from Steinberg, who had Tiger alongside him. I was forced to apologise (I'm not quite sure what for) at which point Mr Steinberg brought up the "tabloid" bit.

I now have a few more "tabloid" questions for the pair of them, but I know I have got a fat chance of asking them, let alone getting a straight reply. Jack, I am convinced your record is safe. The golfing gods will have it no other way.

Finally, well played Henrik Stenson on winning the FedEx Cup. Years ago he lost a very considerable sum of money to the Ponzi crook Allen Stanford. He richly deserves this latest epic success.