Over here in America (we were in Colorado for the Sprint International), there has been a heavy air of contempt for some star players hanging over the last couple of events. You see, a couple of very good golfers, members of next month's US Ryder Cup team, mentioned money.

Whoops, steady boys, how could you talk about "green backs" in connection with such an honourable, prestigious, patriotic, tear-jerking event? Isn't the honour of wearing the stars and stripes blazer enough? Haven't you got private jet loads of the stuff already, what do you want more for?

Well the media over here had a great couple of weeks worth of "greedy player" bashing. Stories and comments gushed out. Players on, and especially vying for a place in, the US team were "disgusted" that their fellow countrymen could stoop so low as to expect financial reward for representing their country in such an event.

The team captain, the amiable Ben Crenshaw, tried to be diplomatic in a press conference, where he wasn't even wearing a sponsored cap, but eventually gave in to his emotions and let fly verbally at the offending players. Such public squabbling puts Europe one up already, well before the first shot has been struck. It comes as quite a surprise that there has been so much hostility to Woods, Duval and O'Meara for suggesting that they might get a little more than $5,000 for their efforts in the Ryder Cup. This, in a country where the amount of money you accumulate seems to be the only way to assess a person's worth, where the winner take all attitude has created a breed of intensely competitive and successful sportsmen and women.

Have a look at the prize-money breakdown of a US tournament, it declines rapidly after number one. For better or worse, the financial reward system has made America what it is. These money monsters are a product of the system. Is it really such a shock to the American press that the players want a little something for their efforts? I asked one of the top American caddies last week in Medinah if it bothered him that we had to wait like dogs for our masters outside the locker room, that we had not got access to clean toilet facilities with running water. He said it did. But his argument for why we should have access to such amused me.

He said that most of the caddies in the US earned $40,000 plus. What other job where you earned such money failed to provide you with a "pot to pee in". It was only the amount of loot earned that determined whether your right to what I would consider basic human dignity. I didn't get into the pay for play Ryder Cup issue with him.

So then we read that the expenses for running the Ryder Cup in Brookline will be $40 million, leaving a surplus of $23 million. Where is all that loot going? It's rumoured that Celine Dion will sing at the gala opening for 25 minutes. Will she be warbling for the love of the great competition? Or the broadcaster who's giving speeches after some of the many planned dinners. Is he doing it for the love of the Ryder Cup?

There must be an awful lot of junkets on offer to use up a predicted $40 million expense account. Are these special people not showing up for the love of the game? Would the Ryder Cup be a success without the chosen guests, without Celine Dion or the broadcaster's wit and wisdom? Probably.

Would the competition be as memorable if stars such as Woods and Duval voted with their feet and sat out the event? Does the prospect of Garcia versus Bob Estes whet the appetite as much as Garcia/Woods? Probably not.

The Americans have taken a lot of flak already well before the start of the event over this money question. If they happen to lose their third Ryder Cup in a row, I can imagine that the criticism will be unbearable for them.

As for the competition itself, the Americans, as usual, look superior on paper. However, as one of the competitors in last year's Presidents Cup said, they are playing on grass, not paper.

Too often our judgements are based upon tournament playing records. The format of the Ryder Cup with two days of four-balls and foursomes seem to have suited the Europeans in the last couple of contests. Which would suggest that the team idea doesn't fit the Americans as well as the Europeans. This was certainly the case at the President's Cup, where the camaraderie amongst the World team proved decisive. Unlike the present situation with the Ryder Cup, the participants in the President's Cup all had a say in the allocation of a cut of the profits which their contest had produced. It would seem that the new millennium will bring a change to the reward system for the Ryder Cup stars of the future. The projected income for Brookline has obviously raised players' and management groups' awareness of the magnitude of the event. The team jacket will probably weigh a little more next time with a cut of the earnings stashed inside. How to distribute it will be the next bone of contention.