I enjoy watching British sporting events on television. You can catch them in the mountain time zone before lunch, and then you can get on with your day.
But I nearly choked on my oatmeal this morning: golfer Greg Norman had no sooner teed off at Royal Birkdale when the ABC announcers began pursuing the "Norman flop" storyline. For those of you who do not follow professional golf, Mr. Norman entered the final round of the 1996 Masters Tournament with a six-shot lead on a field that had done little to distinguish itself over the first fifty-four holes. But by shooting a seventy-eight, Mr. Norman lost by five strokes his best shot at a green jacket.
This morning, after not having played in the British Open since 2006, he found himself leading by two strokes. But he started off with three bogeys and surrendered his lead to defending champion, and eventual repeat winner, Padraig Harrington. This time around, Mr. Norman was years beyond his prime, playing in gale force winds. Had he been able to win, it would have been nothing less than the biggest story in golf this year - bigger, even, than Tiger Woods' injury. Did falling prey to the elements really warrant disinterring a image a dozen years old? Were there not other angles to take in discussing a man whose fifty-three-year-old contemporaries are using long putters and golf carts, a man who has played fewer rounds of competitive golf this year than the amateurs seeking to emulate his many achievements?
By this afternoon, Sports Illustrated had posted online a story that put all these matters into perspective, past flops included, but for those first few minutes this morning it sure felt like the journalistic establishment preferred the easy story to the right one.
