LIV Golf has officially joined the legal fight against the PGA Tour. An amended lawsuit was filed Friday in U.S. District Court in Northern California, in which Jason Kokrak and Abraham Ancer gave up as plaintiffs but LIV Golf Inc. was added to the list of seven golfers still filing against the PGA Tour.
That list of golfers includes three – Matt Jones, Talor Gooch and Hudson Swafford – who recently lose the temporary restraining order heard that it would allow them to play in the FedEx Cup Playoffs, which began two weeks ago in St. Jude Invitational. The other four include Phil Mickelson, Bryson DeChambeau, Peter Uihlein and Ian Poulter. Pat Perez and Carlos Ortiz previously waived as plaintiffs, bringing the original number down from 11 to seven plus the inclusion of LIV Golf.
LIV Jumping in golf has several meanings. The organization and its CEO, Greg Norman. has always been committed to helping golfers who want freedom as it relates to where they play golf.
“It wasn’t a threat; we anticipated it,” Norman said earlier this year after the PGA Tour refused to issue player rights to the first few LIV Golf events. “All the players I said: We’ve backed you. We’ll defend, we’ll reimburse and we’ll represent – as simple as that.”
The PGA Tour typically grants up to three releases per year to players on other tours but has not issued even one of the LIV Golf events. In the revised complaint, LIV Golf joins Mickelson and six other players still suing the PGA Tour on the grounds of antitrust and monopoly power, according to AP.
In the revised complaint, LIV Golf argued that without a favorable ruling, “the ability to maintain a meaningful competitive presence in the marketplace would be undermined.” LIV Golf alleges the PGA Tour’s restrictions have forced it to increase the cost of contracting players and not allowing them to recruit others for fear of punishment. It also claims the tour forced LIV Golf to delay its launch to 2022 and have a smaller schedule in its first year.
The PGA Tour’s limitations are introduced because it needs to know what it’s selling to both broadcasters and sponsors, which will certainly come into play when this is the case. According to the PGA Tour handbook, releases can be specifically denied as the commissioner (in this case Jay Monahan) sees fit.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Commissioner may refuse any particular request for a release if he determines that such a release would cause the PGA Tour to breach its related commitment to the tournament sponsor or would materially and unreasonably harm the PGA Tour and its sponsors. In addition, the Commissioner shall be entitled, but not obligated, to grant additional release when he determines that doing so would not unreasonably prejudice the PGA Tour or the sponsor concerned.
There are a lot of complicating factors at work here. The PGA Tour argues that it is simply trying to preserve its product, and LIV Golf will argue that it is abusing its monopoly power to discourage competitors from entering the market. The problem with some of those arguments, as pointed out by Judge Beth L. Freeman during a TRO hearing a few weeks ago, is that LIV Golf is actually LIV Golf. yes entered the market, beating out big winners like Brooks Koepka, Dustin Johnson, Mickelson and DeChambeau.
There are many ways this could play out in the weeks and months that follow. All of them will be very interesting. The trial is not set for the case until early 2024, but there will continue to be movement (and potentially fireworks) as the battle for the future of golf continues with the PGA Tour trying to fend off not just these seven players and theirs. claim but also a tournament backed by an almost limitless pool of resources.
