Athletes are constantly analyzed. The sports media, now 24 hours a day on radio, TV, and social media, loves to decide which athletes, no matter the sport, are winners or don’t quite have “it”. One of the biggest ways is “rings”, “jackets”, “championships, or just being what is known as “clutch”.
Clutch is the ability to come through when it counts most, to bring a team from behind, hit the winning shot or win any game 7. Being clutch a rare talent that goes beyond physical ability. It’s a drive that is unstoppable, powered by the will to win. It’s fighting back in the face of hopelessness.
In a team sport it can be difficult if the collective team around a star is not that good (Dan Marino led the league but never had a solid running game). But in an individual sport, such as tennis, golf or swimming, it destiny falls entirely on one person.
Tiger Woods was dominant for many years, crushing the rest of golf with his incredible talent. After the fall from grace in his personal life and injury he has come back and won some tournaments but ZERO majors in 5 years. Along with that fact Tiger has NEVER come from behind on a Sunday to win a major in his entire career! It’s one thing to be a dominant player, but strange for someone with his talent to never having come back on a Sunday to win a major.
Why does he get a pass on this? Before Peyton Manning, Lebron James, or John Elway won championships they were labeled as having the inability to win the big one.
There appears to be some kind of double standard. Shouldn’t Tiger be labeled after 15 years only winning if he’s ahead going into the final 18? Keeping a lead is one thing, and it’s great, but it takes that something extra to overtake a group in front in a Major. I’d like to hear the sports shows be fair and treat Tiger the way they do everyone else.
And congrats to nice guy Phil Mickelson, after his awful loss in the open, to come from behind today in real clutch showing at the British Open.
