Michael Campbell's Restricted PGA Tour Status

FrankoSport · Jan 29, 2006

Greetings ...

Because of a 2003 incident (click-on here to read story) , 2005 US Open champion Michael Campbell is on restricted PGA Tour status until the end of 2008.

Being limited to only 10 starts per year is bad enough. But consider what the count of 10 includes - The four Grand Slam Majors, the three official money World Golf Championships and the Players Championship.

That leaves just two starts - and Campbell has already played one, the season opening winners-only Mercedes Championships. The remaining start will be at Arnold Palmer's Bay Hill Classic.

Including the Majors, the Players and the WGC's in the count of 10 is ridiculous. If it were up to me, I'd have the restriction rule work this way --

A: A player may only start in 5 regular PGA Tour events (3 open and 2 invitational -OR- 2 open and 3 invitational) per each year on restricted status. The Mercedes Championships will count as an invitational.

B: The 4 Majors, 3 WGC's and the Players are excluded from the restriction count.

C: While on restricted status, the player will not be eligible for (1) Special Temporary Member status, (2) Non-Member Top 125 Equivilancy exempt status and (3) the Tour Championship.

None of the articles I've read say anything about Campbell's options once the restriction period is over. I bring this up because - assuming he's "home free" beginning in 2009 - one option would be to join the PGA Tour as a full-time member for 2009 and 2010, using his 2005 US Open victory for exempt status.

We'll see!

EdZ · Jan 29, 2006

That is lame.

The guy won the U.S. Open. Let him play.

FrankoSport · Jan 30, 2006

Greetings ...

Thank you.

I've posted this at several online discussion sites - many would side with you that Campbell should have more playing opportunities, while others feel that he got just punishment.

I agree with the arguments that Campbell deserved to have certain rights and priviledges taken away.

I disagree with the PGA Tour's method of punishment. Let me re-quote my 3 original suggestions, plus add a 4th --

quote:
A: A player may only start in 5 regular PGA Tour events (3 open and 2 invitational -OR- 2 open and 3 invitational) per each year on restricted status. The Mercedes Championships will count as an invitational.

B: The 4 Majors, 3 WGC's and the Players are excluded from the restriction count.

C: While on restricted status, the player will not be eligible for Special Temporary Member status, Non-Member Top 125 Equivilancy exempt status or the Tour Championship.

D: While on restricted status, the player will not be permitted to use Exemption Category 24 - Top 10 and Ties from the previous PGA Tour regular open event.

As some of you may know, I do a lot of tinkering with PGA Tour procedures and rules. I've conjured up some models where international pros could play in as many as 20 PGA Tour events per year - The Majors, Players Championship and certain other "special" events included - without having to be PGA Tour members -AND- without sacrificing membership on their home tours (Campbell's is the New Zealand-Australian circuit). Sadly the rules for that type of scenario would have needed to have been established about 10 or 20 years ago.

wanole · Jan 30, 2006

Rules are rules. When do you stop letting people exempt from the rules? Who decides who doesn't have to adhere to them and who does? He used an exemption already that let him play when he wouldn't have been able to otherwise. I already think they let to many people have exemptions. Everyone should have to qualify the same way IMO and let monday qualifiers exist at all tourney's.

EdZ · Jan 30, 2006

quote:Originally posted by wanole

Rules are rules. When do you stop letting people exempt from the rules? Who decides who doesn't have to adhere to them and who does? He used an exemption already that let him play when he wouldn't have been able to otherwise. I already think they let to many people have exemptions. Everyone should have to qualify the same way IMO and let monday qualifiers exist at all tourney's.

Rules are only useful when enforced. Something all citizens should give great thought to these days.

My point on Campbell is that his situation is really about 'which' rules apply. Doesn't winning the U.S. Open give an exemption?

Ozgolfer · Jan 30, 2006

Who is really getting hurt here? USA golf fans more than Campbell I suspect. They are being prevented from seeing the winner of their open. Campbell is missing the Memorial, which he wants to play, that is probably all. He has commented that he wanted to stay on the European Tour. It seems unfair that the British Open is counted as an event in the ten. After all it is part of his designated tour.

EdZ · Jan 31, 2006

FrankoSport - perhaps you can answer this one for me. If I were to go out and win the U.S. Open, having worked my way through all the stages and not having been in or on any events or tour before - what would my status be the following year on the PGA tour?

FrankoSport · Jan 31, 2006

Greetings ...

You have the option of joining the PGA Tour for the remainder of the current year, as well as for the next five years after. If you do elect to join, it has to be done soon after the win (not sure how soon), or before the start of the next Tour season.

EdZ · Jan 31, 2006

quote:Originally posted by FrankoSport

Greetings ...

You have the option of joining the PGA Tour for the remainder of the current year, as well as for the next five years after. If you do elect to join, it has to be done soon after the win (not sure how soon), or before the start of the next Tour season.

So the begining of that five years, and its terms of being able to be on tour, start as of your victory? correct?

So in this situation I describe, what would I need to do to stay on tour those 5 years? Would the answer be any different if the same facts hold, but I am from any country other than the U.S.?

Regardess, why should anything I have done (or not done) before winning the U.S. Open be relevant to the terms of a what would otherwise be a 'clean slate'?

redan · Feb 1, 2006

It may be that the money you win doesn't count? Depends if you won the US Open as an amateur or pro? [of course as amateur you wouldn't win any money] But I seem to recall that there can be some weird stuff about the money....

EdZ · Feb 1, 2006

True.... plenty of 'weird stuff' around money... tough to 'follow' the money sometimes.