GOLF

Taranaki Daily News, 12 February 1931, Page 12

GOLF

AMATEURS IN GOW.

BLURRED LINE OF DEMARCATION.

(By Harry Vardon.—Special to News.)

The professional has a legitimate interest in the question as to what constitutes an amateur in golf, because he likes to know in what circumstances recruits may be brought ihto his ranks. And it seems to me that the problem is steadily becoming more and more complicated. Mr. Bobby Jones has announced his withdrawal from tournaments for the reason that he thinks he may have infringed the definition of an amateur by contracting to make talking pictures of golf instruction, his fee for which is said to be over £50,000Obviously, however, great doubt exists as to whether this is to be regarded as professional teaching. It is reported that the executive committee of the United 'States Golf Association met recently, when it was thought that reference would be made to the subject in view of the position which Mr. Jones has held for several years as a member of the committee. As the matter was not mentioned, it is presumed that the committee considers that Mr. Jones remains an amateur, and therefore eligible to continue in office. The secretary of our own Royal and Ancient Club is reported to have made a statment that he cannot express an opinion as to whether the. work undertaken by Mr. Jones is a breach of the amateur definition. Meanwhile, our authorities have prohibited a team of ladies from accepting a scheme of hospitality for a tour in Florida. -That, it is officially announced, would' entail loss of amateur status. SALESMEN ON THE COURSE. Truly is the line of demarcation one big blur. Now barred from the amateur ranks (this clause came into force a few years ago) is any player who, because of his' skill at the game, receives a salary from a firm dealing in golf merchandise. It must strike most people as being very hard to condemn these men and yet allow complete liberty of action to others who, interested in the sale of stocks ahd shares, take advantage of their rounds of golf to recommend friends to buy. It may not be only to such a person’s good to do so; it may be to the good of his friends. But the. fact remains that it is business.

I have heard of amateur golfers—very good amateur golfers, too —who, if questioned on a subject of which they are reputed to know a good deal, advise a cotfipanion on the links to buy a certain kind of motor car, or a certain somebody's cohl, or a certain firms wines and spirits. They do not disguise the fact' that they are interested jn trade. Their friends are aware of it. Consequently, the asking and giving of advice are mutual exchanges. There is nothing in them to jeopardise the amateur status of either party. One is perfectly willing to receive the information and the other is perfectly willing to give it. Bqt now consider the amateur who is interested in the sale of golf suits, golf shoes and golf balls. Is it possible to differtntiate between him and the amateur who is ready to recommend the purchase of certain motor cars, coals or vines? There may be a distinction, but .it is a cjistinction with very little difference ' The truth of th? matter is that no governing body in sport ever has devised the perfect definition of an amateur. Probably none ever will.

I believe that the Royal and Ancient Club has attained as hear perfection as any controlling body of a game by the process of making the definition as simple as possible. It says that an amateur golfer is one who, after attaining the age of 18 years, has not carried clubs for hire, or received any consideration for playing or . for teaching the game, or for playing in a mat,ch or tournament, or . played for a money prize in' dny competition. The only carpjng point is that concerning the sale of golf goods. AN IMPOSSIBLE IDEAL. Whether the definition of an amateur is abused I do not know, but I hij.ye a very definite idea that any attempt to improve it would lead mostly to complications and injustices, without doing any good. Dr. Samuel Johnson once said something to the effect that “doubtless the Lord could hdve produced a fiuet- fruit than the strawberry, but doubtless He never did.” Doubtless, on the same line of reasoning,' there could be a better definition of an amateur golfer than that which now prevails, but doubtless there never will be. Everybody’s idea of perfection is im* possible of attainment. Some people, by the accident of fortune, can play golf every day if they wish to do so. Others can play only at week-ends. This may be a rank injustice, but nothing Short of Bolshevism will ever stop it. and we seem to have soared above Bolshevism. The best for which we can hope'is that differences on the question, of the amateur’s status may be as small as possible, and in no game have they been so small »s in golf, ' ' Until recent years the United States definition was stringent in the extreme. It provided that an amateur golfer wag one who had not accepted any fee, gratuity, ’ money, or its equivalent, a? a for the performance of any act or service arising in connection with the game of golf, and went on to cite the following as violations of the rule: —

Playing or teaching the game for pay. This included playing for a money prize or accepting travelling Or living expenses for playing ov'er a course or taking part in a contest or exhibition. (This is still a violation here and in America.)

Making or repairing golf clubs, balls, or other articles for pay. Laying-out, constructing, supervising, or giving advice concerning the lay-out, construction or upkeep of a golf course, or any part thereof, for pay. These two latter rulings were abandoned when the present definition was adqpted.