The game of golf invites strong opinions. On one hand are those harmless creatures who love the sport so passionately that for them all good things of life pale in comparison. But those who oppose it, and their number is large, spare no scorn to berate it.
Some worthy opponents of the game include William Wordsworth who said, “Golf is a day spent in a round of strenuous idleness” and Mark Twain who famously called it “a good walk spoilt.” An unknown lady echoed their views when she wished to be buried on a golf course, so that her husband would visit her grave.
The anti-golf movement got a fillip recently when Hugo Chavez, the Venezuelan President called it as a bourgeois sport and mocked the use of golf carts as a symbol of laziness of the golf players. Now that there is a move to include it in the Olympics, the golf debate seems to have livened up. Chief arguments levelled against the game are that it is elitist, discriminatory and hazardous for environment. Elitist because it is an expensive sport and only a selected few can get the membership of a club.
Why discriminatory? Because, till a few years ago blacks were not allowed membership of many golf clubs in the USA and even today, women are denied the membership of the St. Andrews, world’s oldest golf course and Augusta club in the US, which is the home to the annual Masters championship.
Coming to the environmental question, acres and acres of land must be cleared of natural growth to develop a course and large quantities of precious water are consumed in its maintenance. However, the advocates of the sport have come up with convincing counter-arguments.
“How can you call a sport that developed as a pastime for the shepherds, elitist?” they ask and quote the examples of international players who began their career as caddies, the foremost being Seve Ballesteros who is the son of a farmer and himself a former caddy.
In fact, to drive home the point they compare golf with equestrian events and go on to ask as to what is more expensive a golf set or a horse.
As to the point that it is not a people’s sport, a player of some standing has said that in Scotland, where golf was born, even today, rich and poor go out in families to the links to play golf as elsewhere they go to parks for picnics.
The discrimination argument doesn’t really hold water because women’s golf is a thriving sport, and if golf is included in the Olympics, a women’s competition would be a part of it.
As to the environmental argument the counter is that by turning a patch of land into a golf course, you add to the greenery. It is true that some trees have to be cut but on the other hand new plantations take place on the fringes and to line the fairways.
Water consumption remains an issue but course designers are already working on water economising ways of course maintenance.
But while all other arguments against golf being included in the Olympics can be refuted, there is one for which there is no answer. It is that golf is only a game and not a sport. Why because as John McEnroe said, “If it’s a sport, you’ve got to run at some point.”