I’ve been surprised at some of the outrage at the news that Adam Scott has declined to represent Australia at golf in the Rio Olympics.
Adam Scott repeatedly said that he doesn’t think golf should be in the Olympics, often giving detailed reasons for his stance and gave every sign he won’t be a part of the Australian Olympic golf team that plays a 72-hole stroke-play event for individual honours in August.
So when Scott publicly declared he won’t be at the Olympics, the negative response was baffling. South Africa’s Charl Schwartzel and Louis Oosthuizen have also stated that they will skip the Olympic event. Like Scott, citing a busy schedule as the primary reason.
Dawn Fraser’s response was particularly misguided given Scott’s incredible generosity with his time back in Australia the year after he won the green jacket. Not to mention the incredible amount of money Scott has sacrificed over the past 10 years, shunning higher profile tournaments to return to play in front of Australian crowds each year.
Since then, there have been a couple of great articles defending Adam Scott’s position.
Steven Bowditch posted these passionate responses on his Facebook page which drew plenty of support:
Golfweek’s Jim McCabe commended Scott on his decision and Adrian Ballatyne’s piece in Golf Australia Express is a good read and suggests Scott’s only mistake was offering a busy schedule as his reason to skip the event.
The pick of the bunch was Richard Hinds’ response. Originally published in the Daily Telegraph, Hinds lends his wit to the debate in a way that only he can:
That and hang out with the stuffed suits watching athletics and swimming. Accordingly, Scott regards playing Olympic golf with the enthusiasm Usain Bolt might have for running 100 metres on the first fairway at St Andrews. The stage is awe inspiring, the event itself an inappropriate novelty.
The idiotic and ill-informed condemnation of Scott by some says more of the Olympic movement’s inflated sense of self-importance than the champion golfer’s motives or integrity. Predictably, Dawn Fraser was the most vitriolic critic, asking of Scott “How much money do you want?’’ and claiming he was “Not showing much for your country’’.