Golf podcasts

I think it is anyway - for a 5er a month. They regularly have Gary Murphy on too, who is great. They could do with getting some more guests - for some reason they can't get Rory, haven't been able to get Seamus Power in quite a while and Shane Lowry hasn't been on in over a year either. They must have p*ssed off someone!

I listen to NLU too and really like it, and it's very different to Golf Weekly. Where Golf Weekly is better is you have professional journalists doing the interviewing - the difference between Joe or Nathan interviewing vs Soly is night and day. I also like the unique perspective of Peter and Gary - they're not managing a brand or image so can say what they like, and for me the insight from "journeyman" type players is always interesting as we don't often get that. You usually only hear from the most successful people.

The more you know about something the more you realise that the people you'd have thought were experts are nothing of the sort. I watch some of the rugby matches with my brother in law who's a high level rugby referee. Some of the punditry drives him crazy because they don't always seem to even know the rules. The forward pass one being the best example - my understanding of it was that it's thrown from point A to point B and point B can't be further up the pitch than point A. I saw this broken all the time and could not for the life of me understand why it's ignored so often. The actual rule is that the ball has to be thrown in a backward motion, so the throw is all that matters. If the ball goes forward because of wind or the throwers forward momentum that's irrelevant. So when they pause the replay and draw the line across the screen he puts his head in his hands. As for hurling I'd have some knowledge although an awful lot less than the pundits. But nonetheless, some of what you hear them say is so wrong. I heard all about Waterford under Derek McGrath not being able to score / make chances. We were averaging the highest scoring tallies in the country at the time and scoring more goals than anyone. Honestly, I sometimes wondered if these lads were actually watching the games.

We definitely have to take sports punditry with a massive pinch of salt. And journalism in general - it has changed massively in the last 10-15 years and for the worse. Everything has to be online and instant. I know a few journalists from my college days and if something happens it has to be on your site in 10 minutes. There's no time to verify, research, proof read, etc. An hour later you might have a semi decent article on it, but back in the days of newspapers you'd have a day or half day to get this story, whereas now it's an hour. And you had lots of Sunday papers where you'd have a week to research and write a story, so it would be a comprehensive well researched article. The demand for that has fallen through the floor. And the willingness to pay for it is tiny. Anyway, I'm rambling, this has nothing to do with golf so I'll shut up.

Usually only NLU for me. Used to listen to Golf Weekly too but I wouldn’t in a million years pay to listen to Peter Laurie or Fionn Davenport 😂

Haven’t seen it mentioned but The Pepper Pod with Eddie Pepperell and Andrew Cotter during lockdown was fantastic.

The Hack It Out break 80 series is really dredging for topics, but I still find it interesting. They were talking the other day about how amateurs fare from 250 yards away on the fairway when they take it on vs when they "play safe". For a 5 handicapper, they're more likely to bogey the hole (or worse) when they play safe. Now we can scrutinise the figures, I'm sure there's more to it than the surface stat. When people decide to go for it or not they'll consider what danger there is around the green. So those times they go for it it's likely to be an easier hole ultimately. However, it does emphasise to me the misunderstanding people seem to have when they talk about playing safe. There always seems to be this assumption that when you lay up you are taking the danger out of it. Whereas in one way you're bringing the danger of another shot into the mix! You could completely mishit it or just leave yourself in completely the wrong spot for an approach. That was a stat for a 5 handicapper, a higher handicapper would obviously not be as strong going for a green from 250 yards. But they also wouldn't be as reliable laying up! As a rule of thumb for me, regardless of your handicap if there's minimal danger in hitting it as far down as you can, I think that's the best play. If the worst you'll be in is a greenside bunker, go for it. If it's a lake, don't be a fool!

Another stat I liked was where a 5/15 handicapper (sorry, I can't remember which) becomes more likely to 3 putt than 1 putt. This was 15 feet. I was happy to hear this as I suspected it was around this distance, but always felt a little bit like a chicken for being more concerned about my second putt on this distance than my first. But now I think it makes sense!