GAJTKA: Golf Might Need Villains, But Shinnecock Scene Didn’t Sizzle

Simply from a golf perspective, Wyndham Clark’s U.S. Open triumph at Shinnecock Hills could be interpreted as a classic feel-good sports story.

An athlete who had previously reached a championship peak went through a multi-year slump, only to dig himself out with a change in technique and an adjustment of equipment. Then, he zooms on top early in a major competition, shows significant signs of wobbling, but ultimately prevails by holding off a challenger in a close finish.

That’s the good stuff, right? That’s what we like as sports fans.

Except when we don’t. Except when we don’t have warm feelings about the person behind the performance. Then the calculations change.

And, hey, that’s all fair. I’m not about to become the thoughts and feelings police. But I will say it’s one thing to root against a team — that’s the crux of the whole sports industrial machine — and another to pull against an individual.

Factor in the inherent menace that an angry crowd can levy on an athlete ‘protected’ by a thin rope, and you get a scene that’s downright uncomfortable. That can be good theater, especially when you’re watching from home, but anyone who remembers the assault of tennis star Monica Seles in the ’90s can tell you it just takes one crazed person to destroy the whole thing.

I’m not trying to be dramatic, just reminding that golf is built on that pact between player and spectator, although I’m sure the visible New York police presence over the weekend at Shinnecock helped keep the cauldron from boiling over.

Since the advent of LIV Golf and the subsequent departure from the PGA Tour of several of what we might call polarizing characters, there’s been a lament that pro golf needs villains to keep it interesting. I don’t disagree, but the very nature of golf requires a governor on the level of disdain we’re accustomed to in other (usually team-oriented) sports.

Moreover, even if we factor in the non-golf aspects of Clark’s second U.S. Open crown, you could find some redemptive aspects to the story.

Or at least something relatable.

I think most of us have handled situations poorly in our lives, albeit maybe not as publicly as Clark’s Oakmont temper tantrum. Golf Digest’s Shane Ryan astutely referred to Clark as a man who “carries himself as a work in progress,” which I think has a tendency to break our binary-loving brains. We want someone to be ‘good’ or ‘bad,’ without the understanding that we’re all somewhere in between.

Regardless, the scene out in the Hamptons was downright weird in its hostility to the champion. Despite our collective cries for an honest-to-goodness protagonist-antagonist dynamic, I’m not sure golf is better when a major winner gets a smattering of applause on the 72nd green.

Maybe that’s why golf seems to default to ‘good guys’ narrative. Outside of the Ryder Cup, this whole rooting-against-success thing doesn’t seem to work. In the end, in stroke play the golf course is the opponent, not the guy who you’d prefer didn’t win.

Call me old-fashioned if you like. I’m no huge Wyndham Clark fan, but whatever we saw and heard at Shinnecock didn’t work for me. I don’t think I’m alone, either.

The U.S. Open is typically the highlight of my golf-viewing year. This year was an exception. We’re on to Royal Birkdale.