Gordon with Isao Aoki and Gordon's son Thomas at the Senior British Open, 2003, played at Turnberry.

M oney is a scarce resource, particularly where amateur golf is concerned. Aspirations and expectations of golfing unions and associations around the world are high, no less so than the quality of service expected by their constituents. And yet, historic anomalies and numerous vested interests often complicate the administrative landscape.

I t has been interesting, therefore, to follow recent happenings in Canada and Australia where the historic division between the administration of men's and women's amateur golf may soon be bridged. In the case of Canada, it is being done voluntarily, whilst in Australia there is a sense that government pressure with regard to future funding of amateur golf may be the most persuasive element. In passing, I would make the observation that in the two largest golf playing nations of the world (by far), Japan and the United States, the administration of both men's and women's golf has always been the responsibility of a single entity.

T he Royal Canadian Golf Association ("RCGA"), responsible for men's amateur golf in Canada, has always stood apart from the Canadian government, and enjoys a meaningful annual revenue stream generated by the Canadian Open, membership levies or dues, and sponsorship arrangements, particularly with Bell but also the likes of Bank of Montreal Financial Group. The Canadian Ladies Golf Association, on the other hand, does not have the 'cash cow' of a national open. It is the RCGA that conducts the Women's Open Championship, an LPGA Tour event.

T he structure in Australia is different, most notably at the elite level where the Australian Golf Union ("AGU"), responsible for the men's game, may have become a victim of its own success. The AGU has overseen an extraordinary conveyor belt that has produced remarkable talent for the past decade, but the costs of maintaining it, principally in the form of the Australian Institute of Sport, is not insignificant and has been borne to a material extent by the Australian government. The Australian Open, once part of the schedule of all serious minded professionals and conducted by the AGU, is now staged when a television company dictates and presumably does not generate the income it once did, relatively speaking. To safeguard government funding, and for the benefit of the game in Australia as a whole, an amalgamation appears likely.

T he transitions taking place in Canada and Australia lead me to ponder the question of funding for amateur golf worldwide. Certainly, one needs to draw a clear distinction between funding for the elite golfer and financing growth of the game generally. In the case of the former there is more likely to be corporate sponsorship available, if only because the benefactors are anxious to be early to the mark identifying and associated with the next Tiger Woods (if that is at all possible). As regards the latter, it is a much harder 'sell', most acutely outside the United States. And yet, should the game not grow, there will be a lot of people looking for alternative employment.