Calendar An icon of a desk calendar. Cancel An icon of a circle with a diagonal line across. Caret An icon of a block arrow pointing to the right. Email An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of the Facebook "f" mark. Google An icon of the Google "G" mark. Linked In An icon of the Linked In "in" mark. Logout An icon representing logout. Profile An icon that resembles human head and shoulders. Telephone An icon of a traditional telephone receiver. Tick An icon of a tick mark. Is Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes. Is Not Public An icon of a human eye and eyelashes with a diagonal line through it. Pause Icon A two-lined pause icon for stopping interactions. Quote Mark A opening quote mark. Quote Mark A closing quote mark. Arrow An icon of an arrow. Folder An icon of a paper folder. Breaking An icon of an exclamation mark on a circular background. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Caret An icon of a caret arrow. Clock An icon of a clock face. Close An icon of the an X shape. Close Icon An icon used to represent where to interact to collapse or dismiss a component Comment An icon of a speech bubble. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Comments An icon of a speech bubble, denoting user comments. Ellipsis An icon of 3 horizontal dots. Envelope An icon of a paper envelope. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Camera An icon of a digital camera. Home An icon of a house. Instagram An icon of the Instagram logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. Magnifying Glass An icon of a magnifying glass. Search Icon A magnifying glass icon that is used to represent the function of searching. Menu An icon of 3 horizontal lines. Hamburger Menu Icon An icon used to represent a collapsed menu. Next An icon of an arrow pointing to the right. Notice An explanation mark centred inside a circle. Previous An icon of an arrow pointing to the left. Rating An icon of a star. Tag An icon of a tag. Twitter An icon of the Twitter logo. Video Camera An icon of a video camera shape. Speech Bubble Icon A icon displaying a speech bubble WhatsApp An icon of the WhatsApp logo. Information An icon of an information logo. Plus A mathematical 'plus' symbol. Duration An icon indicating Time. Success Tick An icon of a green tick. Success Tick Timeout An icon of a greyed out success tick. Loading Spinner An icon of a loading spinner. Facebook Messenger An icon of the facebook messenger app logo. Facebook An icon of a facebook f logo. Facebook Messenger An icon of the Twitter app logo. LinkedIn An icon of the LinkedIn logo. WhatsApp Messenger An icon of the Whatsapp messenger app logo. Email An icon of an mail envelope. Copy link A decentered black square over a white square.

COMMENT: The battle between the DP World Tour and LIV players turned into a rout

Ian Poulter led the challenge to DP World Tour sanctions which have been upheld by an independent panel.
Ian Poulter led the challenge to DP World Tour sanctions which have been upheld by an independent panel.

In the end, it was unequivocal.

I’d heard from many sage voices in the game over the last year that the LIV players would win their case against the DP World Tour and be allowed to continue to play there without sanction.

Instead, the decision of the Sports Resolutions arbitration panel is a rout, the other way.

The DP World Tour and Keith Pelley have been vindicated, and the LIV players’ challenge “failed, their appeals…dismissed in their entirety,” in the words of the judgement.

Even further, the panel ordered the original £100,000 fines blocked by an injunction last July must now be paid within 30 days.

Effectively a ban of LIV players

It’s not an outright ban of LIV players, although is what it will become, effectively. At £100,000 a pop for every tournament clash – and they are contractually compelled to play all 14 LIV Golf League events – they’ll surely just relinquish tour membership.

Even the Saudi PIF’s ‘bottomless pit’ of cash can’t possibly countenance paying £1.4m a player, every year, to a rival tour.

And while Pelley was not definitive in his comments, it also surely ends LIV players’ involvement in the Ryder Cup. They won’t be able to garner enough qualifying points, and Luke Donald isn’t going to spent a wildcard on them.

There’s been some suggestion that the DPWT would have been better off losing the case and thereby access to LIV players would remain. Pelley said he ‘vehemently’ disagreed with that view.

The fact that the Tour pursued this so vigorously shows what the chief executive, the tour’s board, the tournament committee and the wider DPWT membership thought of that notion.

And it’s bogus anyway. Dustin Johnson, Phil Mickelson, Cameron Smith, Bryson DeChambeau and other prominent LIVers were never going to become DPWT regulars.

Patrick Reed, as an honorary tour member might play the odd event. But as Pelley correctly identified, it would only be those with significant OWGR points.

The old guard – Lee Westwood, Ian Poulter, Paul Casey, Martin Kaymer, Sergio Garcia, Graeme McDowell and Henrik Stenson – had a short remaining shelf-life. With the notable exception of Westwood, few of them were really that loyal to regular DPWT events.

One tricky situation at the Dunhill

Johann Rupert playing with Lee Westwood at the Dunhill Links.

There is one tricky situation. Johann Rupert, the man who bankrolls the Alfred Dunhill Links Championship, has publicly expressed his opposition to banning LIV players.

Specifically, one would assume, his fellow South Africans Louis Oosthuizen, Branden Grace and Charl Schwartzel. But there’s surely something in the fineprint where those players could still play the Dunhill on invitations.

There will be other sponsors loathe to lose a prominent figure. Kaymer in Germany, Stenson in Sweden, Garcia in Spain, perhaps.

But in most cases it’s really just one individual. It’s hard to see it being a deal-breaker.

Pelley still has plenty work to do. Particularly a way to make the ‘strategic partnership’ with the PGA Tour more effective for the DPWT. The US tour is looking inward in its own defensive measures against LIV.

But this is a massive victory for the ‘established’ game, no question. And perhaps a pointer to where the case between LIV and the PGA Tour is headed. Once it finally (if at even does) makes a California court sometime in 2024.