LIV Disputes PGA of America CEO's Claims About World Ranking Application

Another board member of the Official World Golf Ranking has commented publicly on LIV Golf’s application for world ranking points.

For the second time in the last two weeks, a board member of the Official World Golf Ranking has commented publicly on LIV Golf’s application for world ranking points while also being critical of the controversial league.

Seth Waugh, the CEO of the PGA of America, which is in charge of the PGA Championship next week at Oak Hill Country Club, is one of the seven members of the OWGR board that has had LIV’s application for 10 months.

The OWGR has offered little in the way of comments on LIV until recently.

In an interview with the Times of London, Waugh questioned LIV’s business model and suggested that LIV has been slow to react to requests for information —which LIV denies.

Waugh said that the OWGR is waiting for the latest LIV response to their application.

“There are certain parts of their structure that can be solved by math, but there may be some pretty fundamental things that are harder,’’ Waugh told the Times. “There’s the potential conflict with the team aspect and then access—how do you get relegated and promoted?

“They had our latest response weeks ago and we haven’t heard back. They have made a bad assumption that this will be a quick process. It never has been. Every application has taken a year-plus as far as I’m aware.

“I can’t speculate [on how long it will take] because they have not responded. They might have to solve things as well, and it’s not clear whether they’re willing to.’’

Two weeks ago, USGA CEO Mike Whan, also a member of the OWGR board, told Sports Illustrated “we’re not just rushing in to figure this out, because it’s different.’’

“There are some things about LIV that you could probably address mathematically,’’ Whan added, “and there’s a couple of things at LIV that are a little bit more challenging to just slide a player in and make sure that you’re being fair to all the other players, and all of the tours around the world.’’

LIV Golf pushed back on Waugh’s assertion that it has not responded, saying they twice received correspondence from the OWGR this year, each time answering the questions put forth while also asking for more clarification on what is needed to comply.

“At the end of April, we received a letter from OWGR which asked for us to further clarify some points that we have already addressed, as well as some additional queries they have pertaining to the financials of our business model,’’ a LIV Golf spokesman said in a statement given to Sports Illustrated. “We have asked them to clarify why they need that information and they haven’t responded that email or our queries.

“We have also been categorial that we are willing to make adjustments, but to this point, they have not provided any direction. The last letter we received states they are still in ‘further deliberations’ regarding our application, with no clear path forward.

“We welcome and look forward to their response.’’

The format and access to LIV Golf is an issue with the OWGR. While 48-player fields and 54-hole events do not appear to be the major sticking points, the lack of access to LIV Golf and—more recently—the team concept have come under scrutiny.

LIV has a locked 48-player field this year with changes only made due to injury. The only way onto the circuit this year was via finishing among the top 24 in a season-long points race in 2022, being recruited by team captains or one spot that went to Zimbabwe’s Scott Vincent, who was No. 1 on the International Series Order of Merit.

Next year, LIV has announced a season-ending “promotions event’’ that will see three players earn a spot in the LIV Golf League via a four-day qualifying tournament. They will be joined by the top player in the International Series, with the four lowest-points earners on LIV—who are not contracted—relegated off the tour. Those players will be allowed to compete in the Promotions event.

It is possible that the OWGR does not believe that to be enough access, and LIV officials have said previously they are willing to look at alternatives. LIV Golf also has no weekly qualifying system in place.

Waugh also mentioned the team format as a concern. LIV has an individual competition but the business model is 12 four-man teams, whose top three individual scores count toward the team total for each round.

“Their logic about the team play being something significant that people I think can get behind I think is flawed,’’ Waugh said. I don’t think people really care about it. And I don’t see how it’s a survivable business model.

“They can fund it for as long as they want to, but no matter how much money you have, at some point burning it doesn’t feel very good. I don’t see they are accomplishing much.’’

LIV Golf is supported by the Public Investment Fund, Saudia Arabia’s sovereign wealth fund which is set to have assets totally more than $600 billion.

The only way forward, Waugh believes, is some sort of settlement of a lawsuit involving LIV and the PGA Tour.

“It seems logical to me, then that you would work towards some sort of agreement,’’ Waugh said. “I hope the game comes back together in some form.’’

The PGA will see 18 LIV players—pending the health of 2010 champion Martin Kaymer, who recently returned from surgery. The organization invited all LIV players who were ranked among the top 100 in the world—as has typically been its custom—and also extended an invite to Paul Casey, who is 131st in the world but missed last year’s PGA due to injury.

“The good news is the Masters went first and set the stage for, frankly, civility,’’ Waugh said. “That’s the one we want. Nobody died, right? I lived in a world of disruption my whole business career and disruption is generally healthy. It makes you better, and the game is better.

“I don’t think division is good for the game. Hopefully, it’s good for those individuals that have made whatever decisions they have, but the game has moved on. It’s amplified those who have stayed and the ones who have left have largely disappeared from the landscape—in terms of an exposure perspective.’’