But here goes.

I am, ladies and gentlemen, a golf snob.

Running contrary to my inherent egalitarian belief that this wonderful sport is one to be enjoyed by anyone and everyone, is my view that, on occasion, golf’s desire to “grow the game” is, in reality, nothing more than a “dumbing-down” process.

Not for the first time, that thought came to mind as I watched a Golf Channel preview show for this week’s Players Championship. As part of the discussion, panellist Mark Rolfing announced that the finish at TPC Sawgrass provides “the best theatre in golf.”

Aye, right Mark.

Quite apart from the fact that this resident of far-off Hawaii has apparently never been to the Old Course at St. Andrews, his contention requires deeper definition. Yes, the closing holes at the Players have produced much drama over the years, but that “entertainment” has invariably been – at least in a golfing sense – more akin to a knock-about, “cream pie in the face” Christmas pantomime than thought-provokingly Shakespearean.

Missing right of the 18th at Sawgrass the punishment doesn't fit the crime. PHOTO: David Cannon/Getty Images.

Which is a pity. Because the course overall is one that asks every player to hit a lot of different shots. You need to draw the second shot to the 2nd green. A fade is required off the 4th tee. There are holes where an iron off the tee is the shot. And there are others where even the best players in the world have to go with driver. So length gets its due reward. Yet there’s a par-5 – the 16th – that is easily in range for anyone in the field capable of hitting two solid shots.

So it’s a course that gives everyone a chance. Which is surely why no one has dominated the place on a regular basis. The list of winners is really diverse, a huge compliment to the late Pete Dye’s design. Which is not to say there hasn’t been some point-missing when it comes to course set-up.

Sawgrass has the sort of green complexes that would allow the elimination of deep rough and create some angles. Right now, scoring is difficult from the middle of just about every fairway, because that isn’t necessarily the best place to be on any given hole. So it isn’t the rough that makes the course so difficult, it is missing the greens in the wrong spots.

The rough thing is especially noticeable on the 18th. While there is no doubt that the tee-shot there is the ultimate test of execution, the long grass on the right-hand side is classic over-kill. In itself, it’s fine. But it does seem a bit like a double punishment for the guy who hits away from the water on the left. Being behind trees is enough. Plus, if there were no rough, the ambitious recovery shot would come into play. Right now, players basically have to chip-out every time. But wouldn’t it be fun to watch guys trying to cut balls round trees, out over the water and back onto the green? Okay, the hole might be slightly easier, but it would also be a whole lot more interesting to watch.

Then there is the notorious par-3 17th. You know, the so-called “island” green that isn’t actually an island? Yes, that one.

"So yes, while the 17th is “great theatre” for those wishing to witness disaster rather than subtlety or skill, the hole is a bad fit. The difference between good and bad is too many shots." - John Huggan.

Even non-golfers tune in to watch what happens on this (in)famous hole, although I suspect most are not so secretly hoping for the golfing equivalent of a car crash. Which is my point. The penalty for just missing the target is brutal and surely too much. On all great holes, hitting good shots means good things will happen. But on the 17th that is true only some of the time. Solid shots go in the water there. Is that really the scenario we want to see so close to the end of such a prestigious tournament?

Plus, in terms of actual shot making, the 17th is actually inherently dull. Every player, no matter his ability or preferred ball-flight, stands on that tee and tries to hit essentially the same shot. There’s not a lot of imagination required. But there is some luck. Two balls landing maybe a foot apart can lead to a birdie and a double-bogey. The line is that fine.

So yes, while the 17th is “great theatre” for those wishing to witness disaster rather than subtlety or skill, the hole is a bad fit. The difference between good and bad is too many shots. We’ve seen too many guys – having played great tournaments for 70-holes – come completely unravelled there. One bad shot that would normally lead to a bogey too often produces a double or triple. That is hardly appropriate in the circumstances and, at least to my high-minded eyes, cheapens the event.

In effect, the 17th is the ultimate commercial hole in an event run by a quintessentially commercial organisation. The prize fund is certainly bigger than it would be if 17 were a “normal” par-3. So it’s a perfect fit for the PGA Tour, but not the USGA. Which is why we’ll never see the U.S. Open at Sawgrass. It’s too hot in Florida in June anyway.