[Gib_Papazian]

Ah, but David,

I have come to believe that menopausal women are often stricken with a sort of psychological disorder - so I'm inclined to give them (as a group, not individually) a pass for knucklehead choices.

If General Petraeus was sleeping with his wife's best friend, then your comparison would hold agua, but he was not.

I'm not trying to rail against infidelity, I understand how that occurs every day.

Men do stupid things every day also. But as a man, I am not speaking out of turn to state that Norman broke THE CODE. Don't break the code homie. That don't fly.

I've never been a chick, but my observations are that the fairer sex is far more prone to irrationally emotional decisions in the throes of middle-aged madness.

Plus, most guys are smart enough to try and talk their friends out of doing something stupid. Women are too busy being "supportive" and sympathetic to grab each other by the ears and shake some sense into them.   

   

[David_Tepper]

Gib -

I will grant you that. My guess is the reason you don't see many men in the "self-help" section of bookstores is that they are too dumb to realize they need some help!

DT

P.S. In certain quarters, the otherwise saintly Tom Watson is viewed as being guilty of the same transgression as Mr. Norman.     

[JMEvensky]

P.S. In certain quarters, the otherwise saintly Tom Watson is viewed as being guilty of the same transgression as Mr. Norman.   
 

I was wondering why this never came up in the Ryder Cup captaincy discussion.

To Gib's point,when the menopausal(?) woman is Chris Evert,things are exponentially more public.

[David_Elvins]

Aren't Norman and Evert just guilty of being themselves?

I find it hard to believe that the Florida social set was unaware of the fact that both of them were always a bit slutty.

Not sure why their previous behaviour was more tolerable.

[Greg Gilson]

I opened this because, as an Aussie, I retain a passing interest in most things norman.

Having skimmed through i am now annoyed at the time i've wasted reading these last half dozen+ posts. It's embarrassing. why would you guys post this kind of stuff publicly on a GCA website? What in the world does this stuff you are ranting about have to do with GCA? Join another site if you want to continue wringing your hands & tut tutting each other and leave GCA to GCA.

[Bob_Huntley]

I opened this because, as an Aussie, I retain a passing interest in most things norman.

Having skimmed through i am now annoyed at the time i've wasted reading these last half dozen+ posts. It's embarrassing. why would you guys post this kind of stuff publicly on a GCA website? What in the world does this stuff you are ranting about have to do with GCA? Join another site if you want to continue wringing your hands & tut tutting each other and leave GCA to GCA.

Greg

Why on earth didn't you stop reading after the post?

Bob

[BHoover]

Greg,

I don't have an opinion about Norman's private life (except I will say that he can't seem to stay out of the tabloid limelight). However, I thought it was in poor taste to host his Shark Shootout the same week as the Australian Open. As an Australian, what do you think of that? Does Norman do anything to support golf in Australia? I'm not being sarcastic, I'm honestly curious.

[Gib_Papazian]

Greg,

I just want to make sure I'm clear, so please correct me if I am wrong:

A Treehouse greenhorn, who does not yet know where the bathroom is located - with 43 whole posts - is essentially ordering the following people off this website:

David Tepper - 5781 Posts
JM Evensky   - 1908 Posts
David Elvins  -  2083 Posts
Uncle Bob     -  5754 Posts
Armenian      - 1630 Posts (14 years)

So, some newbie Beet Eater, drinking Fosters out of a sippy cup feels entitled to scold the Provost and everyone in the faculty lounge. Lovely having you here and so glad Ran handed you the combination to the hatch. How did we ever get along all these many years without your moral piety and guidance?

[Greg Gilson]

Bob H:

Kept waiting for it to come back to the topic

Brian H:

Good question. I'll PM you seperately if i can work out how

Gib P:

Thanks for the note. Interesting turn of phrase. I didn't know that there was such a clearly defined pecking order here or that Newbies, Juniors, Aussies or just me are regarded as you describe. If it appeared i was ordering anyone out of the treehouse that wasn't my intent. I just thought it was a GCA treehouse and we were all supposed to stick more or less on topic? You guys are more than welcome to hold that kind of debate - i just think there's a more appropriate place for it where those who are interested in GCA, Norman, Medallist etc don't have to trawl through it.

[JLahrman]

I'll stick up for Greg. I don't mind some OT threads, but this one has gone way off the rails.

Let's keep in mind, Pat Mucci (of all people) actually took advice from another poster and removed his original post that started the descent. This thread has entered Real Housewives territory, and I'm glad Greg pointed it out regardless of how many posts he has.

That said, it's Ran's site and he can remove this thread or keep it if he so chooses.

My apologies for helping to keep this discussion on the first page.

[David_Tepper]

Greg Gilson -

For better of worse (and believe me, it often is for worse ), discussions here do sometimes veer off in directions never expected or intended. It is the nature of the beast.

In this case, the reason might be that, while very few of us here have actually seen or played the Medalist course, almost all of us have some impression of Greg Norman, especially given his rather large public persona.

DT

   

[Greg Clark]

The relevant question is still what the thought process was behind bringing in Weed when Norman apparently offered his services for free, and with him having such a strong association with the club.  And also what the views of Mr. Dye are in regards to this development.  The obvious assumption is that the board felt Weed would do a better job than Norman's group, but hopefully someone can shed some more light on the subject.  I am very curious on Pete Dye's views and involvement in this.

[Bruce Katona]

Pat Mucci may be onto something as he stated there may be more to the Norman resignation @ Medalist than made the article.

As we all are not club members, we may never know.

My only comment on GN's personal life is that unfortunately men sometimes think with an incorrect part of their anatomy.....that fact has ruined far better men than me.

[Dave McCollum]

More gossip about this over on Geoff Shack's site.  See letter from Jim Kaat.

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/

[David_Tepper]

Dave McCollum -

Here is a direct link to the item on G. Shackelford's website:

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2012/12/23/medalist-tizzy-shark-wants-his-shark-returned.html

DT

[Howard Riefs]

Dave McCollum -

Here is a direct link to the item on G. Shackelford's website:

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/homepage/2012/12/23/medalist-tizzy-shark-wants-his-shark-returned.html

DT

Blistering critique...

If Greg had not de-Dyed it and it had the management team in place it has today, I would never have resigned. Many of us thought it should be one of the great clubs in America of which to be a member. For me, there's only one person who prevented that. Greg Norman. It's sad. He was the greatest golfer on the planet, charismatic, attractive, a magnetic personality. His mismanagement of the Medalist and his comments about many issues in recent years have caused me to look at him as a pathetic figure. Sad but true.

[Patrick_Mucci]

More gossip about this over on Geoff Shack's site.  See letter from Jim Kaat.

http://www.geoffshackelford.com/


Dave,

I've played golf with Jim Kaat at the Medalist.
He's a very nice fellow to play with.
We had a very enjoyable round.
He's also a very low key guy.

Bruce,  you're correct 

[Kevin Lynch]

The relevant question is still what the thought process was behind bringing in Weed when Norman apparently offered his services for free, and with him having such a strong association with the club.  And also what the views of Mr. Dye are in regards to this development.  The obvious assumption is that the board felt Weed would do a better job than Norman's group, but hopefully someone can shed some more light on the subject.  I am very curious on Pete Dye's views and involvement in this.

I think the letter from Jim Kaat on Shack's site answers your initial question.

From the beginning if this saga, I had a gut feeling that the reason Greg's "free" service was declined was because it was his cumulative work that needed to be undone.  Kaat's letter seems to confirm that.

Given that, it makes perfect sense that they would bring in a former Dye co-worker to perform the restoration.  Ultimately, I suspect they weren't concerned about losing the "Norman" part of the "Dye/Norman" design label.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Kevin,

More than architecture is involved.

[Anthony Butler]

The Shackelford post at least sheds some light on what actually went down at the club.... so this thread is taking a positive turn from Pat Mucci and Gib (short for Gibberish?) Papazian's lazy moralizing on Greg Norman's wandering pee-pee.

Perhaps there is a connection between Norman's inability to take constructive criticism, his serial marrying of well-travelled blondes and his often bizarre public statements, but having read about 1000 Mucci/Papazain posts over the last few years, I'm not expecting the insight needed to tie the Shark's character flaws together in one neat package will be forthcoming from either of those two...

Once Shark undergoes a few more business/life reversals, I imagine Bryant Gumbel will send in Frank DeFord to get to the bottom of it all, or Bill Simmons will make it one of the two times he pays attention to golf each year. Until then, tying Norman's shortcomings as a human being to his ability to design golf courses, strikes me as mindless-and pointless-speculation.

At the end of the day... to borrow one of Shark's favorite phrases... we can only hope that any additional time he finds on his hands is not spent figuring out how to further 'improve' New South Wales.

[Mike_Young]

The Shackelford post at least sheds some light on what actually went down at the club.... so this thread is taking a positive turn from Pat Mucci and Gib (short for Gibberish?) Papazian's lazy moralizing on Greg Norman's wandering pee-pee.

Not really Anthony.  There is a lot more to this than is being discussed or guessed.  Probably best just to let the members handle it.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Anthony,

Let's just say that Gib and I are enlightened/informed and that you're in the dark on this issue and most others.

The situation at the Medalist isn't remotely connected to Greg's ability to take constructive criticism, but keep guessing and maybe, like a blind squirrel............

[David_Elvins]

At the end of the day... to borrow one of Shark's favorite phrases... we can only hope that any additional time he finds on his hands is not spent figuring out how to further 'improve' New South Wales.

So you have given up trying to defend his work at NSW, Anthony? 

[Gib_Papazian]

Anthony,

I've waded through an innumerable number of your posts too and frankly cannot think of one that made any impression on me - either intellectually or with a clever turn of phrase. If the only spice you have on your rack is corn starch, I guess everything looks like it needs more filler.

And did you come up with the "Gibberish" line all by yourself? A real literary card you are, not sure if I can keep up with the pace of your rapier wit. That stated, I've got to give you a little bit of 'dap on this thread. Picking a fight with me and Mucci at the same time is manly. I call that bold talk for a one-eyed fat man, but manly. Hope you like the taste of lead. Hitler tried to fight a two-front war too.

If you'd like to get into a pissing contest, I'm happy to dye your Mary Janes bright yellow. I take lots of vitamins. 

As long as we are in a mood for speculation, it is likely the Medalist got tired of Norman's self-absorbed pomposity and public antics. America has an incredible tolerance for arrogant, entitled superstars with a penchant for media grandstanding and making a spectacle of themselves. However, once the scales of bullshit vs. payoff reach a tipping point on the former, the aforementioned diva is unceremoniously dumped in the "has been" pile and covered over with manure. High society, particularly, has a low threshold for yacht sails made of dirty laundry.

The "lazy moralizing" crack pisses me off. Maybe you were not paying attention when the fallout from Tiger Woods' string of dalliances turned the professional game into a vulgar, lurid circus. If you cultivate the image of a false idol on the masthead of our great game, then you'd better either comport yourself like a gentleman, or learn some discretion. Porking the local dumbass barmaid does not fall under the category of discrete.

Greg Norman is one of the most recognizable faces - in golf and business - on the planet. His (now) ex-wife played the role of "America's Sweetheart." Both are prominent members of the Blue Blood community down there. Both - because of arrogance, stupidity and selfishness - shit an enormous oil slick and rubbed everybody's nose in it. They are entitled to do as they please, but a couple of superstar public figures - icons of the last two "relatively" clean sports left - acting like tabloid tramps is beyond the pale.

And why do I seem to have an emotional opinion?

Let's put it this way - since you're too f*cking dim to pick up on this: Those of us who have been dragged into a very public mess starring a sexual sociopath and a disturbed ex-spouse are uniquely qualified to express disgust and horror watching a man or woman, just like you and me, subjected to unimaginable humiliation. And if you have a problem with my opinion on the subject, kiss my ass.                 

[noonan]

It is amazing how serious we are taking the Shark, his relationship with the club, and the sordid way he lives his life

[Tags:]

Tags:

[Tags:]

Tags:

Call to undefined function theme_linktree()