Response from the Links Trust to my email

[Neil_Crafter]

After hearing that Mark Bourgeois had emailed the Links Trust to register his protest/concerns, I did the same.

I have now received a reply from Laurie Watson, the media manager for the Links Trust. While friendly and all that, it appears they can see nothing wrong with what they are doing, and emphasise the fact that they are doing them to "maintain the challenge" for elite players. Other users come second, ie the paying punters that keep him in a job. I'm sure Laurie would be pleased to hear from more of us so let him know (politely) your thoughts.

Dear Mr Crafter,

Thank you very much for your email entitled “Changes to the Old Course” today (29 November 2012).

I am the External Relations and Media Manager for St Andrews Links Trust and I have enclosed the press release issued on behalf of the Trust last week outlining the detailed improvements to the Old Course over this winter and next.
 
These changes have been agreed by the St Andrews Links Trustees, Links Management Committee and The R&A Championship Committee and are the result of months of planning, preparation and consultation.

As I am sure you will appreciate any announcement regarding the Old Course always generates a huge amount of interest such is the history, prestige and affection with which the course is held across the globe. The course has always evolved and the parties involved in these improvements believe that these changes will continue to build on that history.

I would like to take this opportunity to assure you that fundamental to the decision to making these improvements, through their completion and beyond, has been a commitment to maintaining the challenge of the course for elite tournament players and the thousands of golfers who play here each year whilst always remaining true to the special character of the Old Course.

I will keep your letter on file and would be happy to add your contact details to my mailing list should you wish to be kept updated of any information regarding the proposals for the Old Course. Please let me know if you would wish to be added, it is a secure list and would not be used for any other purpose.

Thank you for taking the time to contact St Andrews Links Trust, whilst you have voiced concerns in your email I sincerely hope we can welcome you to the Links in the years to come.

Kind regards,

Laurie

 
Laurie Watson, External Relations and Media Manager
St Andrews Links Trust | Pilmour House | St Andrews | KY16 9SF | Scotland
T: +44 (0)1334 466610 | F: + 44 (0)1334 479555 | M: +44 (0) 7919 946064
E: Laurie.Watson@standrews.org.uk | W: www.standrews.org.uk   

[Jud_T]

That's funny.  I just got the same form letter.  What are the odds...

[Neil_Crafter]

Jud, well I didn't think they would personalise their replies to us so I suppose its not unexpected. Wonder if an attempt at an email exchange would elicit a reply that was not a form letter?

[Ronald Montesano]

Man, those guys love their run-on sentences...do they pretend to have any grammatical foundation?

[Tim Martin]

Neil-I admire your commitment to maintaining the architectural integrity of TOC. I guess I will give the Links Trust an A for the quick reply and an F for the canned response although I am far from surprised. It saddens me that the British Open which only finds it's way to TOC once every five years in the current rota is considered more important than it's relevance as both a landmark and treasure to the great game of golf.

[Patrick_Mucci]

Neil,

They sent you a nice polite acknowledgement and informed you that they were proceeding as intended.

The owners have made their decision and there's nothing that anyone can do to change their minds or the outcome.

Isn't this just a replay of what happens to classic courses scheduled to host the U.S. Open ?

[jeffwarne]

Neil,

They sent you a nice polite acknowledgement and informed you that they were proceeding as intended.

The owners have made their decision and there's nothing that anyone can do to change their minds or the outcome.

Isn't this just a replay of what happens to classic courses scheduled to host the U.S. Open ?

Pat,
You are 100% right.
They've made their decision and are already well underway.
They felt they consulted all that matter and got the only approvals they need.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised if the worldwide criticisms, comments, and surprise at altering the Old Course hasn't surprised them a little bit, and at least caused them to pause and rethink phase 2 and whatever future plans they were contemplating.
It's hard to stop work already underway(without admitting wrongdoing), but one can save face by not doing future work, or reducing its scope.

[Ronald Montesano]

Joe Passov agrees with them:  http://www.golf.com/courses-and-travel/changes-old-course-st-andrews-much-ado-about-nothing

[Patrick_Mucci]

Jeff,

I think it would be naive of us to think that they didn't contemplate disapproval from the outside world when they made the decision to proceed.

They knew they were going to get flack............. And didn't care.

I believe that they think that they know what's best and that the outside world doesn't.

Call it institutional arrogance if you like.

But, this isn't the last of it.

The disfiguring of great old courses in the name of restoring the challenge to the best players, which was made obsolete by the advent of modern hi tech, which itself is the fault of the same governing bodies that now seek to compensate for their errors by modifying great golf courses instead of addressing the real culprit, the ball and equipment.  How ironic.

[jeffwarne]

Jeff,

I think it would be naive of us to think that they didn't contemplate disapproval from the outside world when they made the decision to proceed.

They knew they were going to get flack............. And didn't care.

I believe that they think that they know what's best and that the outside world doesn't.

Call it institutional arrogance if you like.

But, this isn't the last of it.

The disfiguring of great old courses in the name of restoring the challenge to the best players, which was made obsolete by the advent of modern hi tech, which itself is the fault of the same governing bodies that now seek to compensate for their errors by modifying great golf courses instead of addressing the real culprit, the ball and equipment.  How ironic.

Patrick,
I'm pretty sure you're right.
 

Go ND, Go DAWGS

[Bruce Leland]

"...The disfiguring of great old courses in the name of restoring the challenge to the best players, which was made obsolete by the advent of modern hi tech, which itself is the fault of the same governing bodies that now seek to compensate for their errors by modifying great golf courses instead of addressing the real culprit, the ball and equipment.  How ironic.

Pat:  very well put. The tragedy in the truth of this phenomenon is that when it finally sinks in the game we all love will be irreparably harmed.

[John Mayhugh]

They knew they were going to get flack............. And didn't care.

I believe that they think that they know what's best and that the outside world doesn't.

Call it institutional arrogance if you like.

But, this isn't the last of it.

The disfiguring of great old courses in the name of restoring the challenge to the best players, which was made obsolete by the advent of modern hi tech, which itself is the fault of the same governing bodies that now seek to compensate for their errors by modifying great golf courses instead of addressing the real culprit, the ball and equipment.  How ironic.

The first part of your comments perfectly explain the way this was communicated.  Make the changes before there is time to organize any meaningful debate.

The last paragraph is what is so sad.  If any course, anywhere, should have been able to resist this - it was The Old Course.  The Links Trust had essentially no risk of the R&A dropping the course from the Open rota.  The leadership there could have said no, and lost nothing. 

[Chris Kane]

The owners have made their decision and there's nothing that anyone can do to change their minds or the outcome.

'The owners' did no such thing. St Andrews Links is a public facility owned by the local community. Its the Trustees (appointed by statute to manage the facility) who made the decision. 

[Tim_Cronin]

Maybe we should call this outfit the St. Andrews Links Mistrust from now on.

[Patrick_Mucci]

The owners have made their decision and there's nothing that anyone can do to change their minds or the outcome.

'The owners' did no such thing. St Andrews Links is a public facility owned by the local community. Its the Trustees (appointed by statute to manage the facility) who made the decision. 

Chris, the trustees are the owners.

Trustees govern and administer trusts, they are the power and the effective owner/s

[Tim Bert]

Joe Passov agrees with them:  http://www.golf.com/courses-and-travel/changes-old-course-st-andrews-much-ado-about-nothing

I don't know why but this was my favorite gem from his piece... "he's earned the street cred to tinker with the Old Course."

So they've got the travel editors (unless I misunderstand Joe's and Matt's roles) from Golf and Golf Digest on their side as "no big deal" so all must be right in the world.

[Howard Riefs]

Man, those guys love their run-on sentences...do they pretend to have any grammatical foundation?

7 paragraphs
9 sentences
305 words

Painful prose.