Monday Morning Halfback: Bidding farewell to the World Cup; was DeChambeau cheating at the Open?

Open this photo in gallery:

Jamie Ross is the Sports editor of the Globe; Cathal Kelly is the national sports columnist.

Jamie: Cathal, tell me how you’re feeling. Spain has won it. You just spent the last month criss-crossing Canada and the United States, chasing a soccer ball around. Did you get to kick one, even once?

Cathal: At the opening game of Euro 2008 in Switzerland, they seated us right behind the home dugout.

Early on, a ball was kicked into the stands at me. I caught it. Then I just kind of froze there, staring at it.

Some 10-year-old ball boy is standing 15 feet away making frantic ‘give it to me’ gestures with his hands. For just a second, I thought about keeping it (which, to be clear, is not an option). Had it been the final, I might have taken off running.

Open this photo in gallery:

Why Spain will win the World Cup

So no kicking ever. But once upon a time, a catch.

How am I feeling now? Amazed at how well this turned out. I figured it would come off fine. These operations are too big to be allowed to fail. At worst, they become gradually more dreary.

But this one had it all – great logistics, co-operative weather, fantastic matches, lots to talk about. That third-place game on Saturday may have been the best of all (minus any stakes).

What moments stood out to you? Highlights? Lowlights? When someone says ‘World Cup 2026’ to you in 10 years’ time, where will your mind immediately go?

Open this photo in gallery:

J.R.: Like all major sports events we cover, the World Cup was run through an ancient Sports Editor lens that filters for inconveniences, larger headaches, and potential A1 stories. It is passed from generation to generation, like an heirloom. Sort of a best-and-worst-case scenario finder.

It flagged a pile of ways this tournament could’ve made life miserable (logistics, hotel and flight prices, terror threats, stadium collapses, whiny columnists, etc.), but only one of those came to be an issue.

At some point in the middle, about when Canada was eliminated, I was able to let my guard down a little bit and enjoy it.

When I look back, I think a personal highlight will be seeing Ronaldo’s last World Cup goal in person. We’ve all read your columns on the issue, so let’s not go there. But was there anything that surprised you about this one? You’ve covered this event for, what, decades?

C.K.: My first one of these was 2006. So decades, plural. Good Lord. It starts out a trickle and becomes a flood. Kind of like the Canal St. subway stop when it started raining on Saturday.

Cathal Kelly: The winners and losers of this year's World Cup on and off the pitch

With me, it’s never the sports I remember. It’s little flashes of stuff that happen while I’m away covering the sports. An album I was listening to then, or something I read, or the bar we found. That sort of thing.

What surprised me? The way in which a thing that was spread out felt so cohesive to so many people. I suppose it’s a function of the prices. If you’re the sort of person who can afford $1,500 for a ticket, what’s an extra plane ride tossed on your credit card bill?

I will miss the tournaments in which all the matches/events took place within a doable train journey of one another. Back at that first one – Germany 2006 – you could reasonably cover a game a day.

That model has gone the way of the Dodo. This World Cup was the stake in its heart. The next one – Spain/Portugal/Morocco/Uruguay/Argentina/Paraguay – will take it to a whole different level.

Open this photo in gallery:

Can’t wait for World Cup 2058 Arctic/Antarctica/Lunar Station No. 3.

This is possible because these sorts of events are broadcast events first, second and third, and live events a distant fourth. Going to sports (as well as playing many of them) is becoming an experience exclusive to the wealthy.

Do you see any of that as an issue going forward? Or will the huddled masses be satisfied absorbing this sort of thing as digital content, a little like Winston Smith doing his morning calisthenics?

J.R.: I’m routinely gobsmacked at how people in my life can afford homes in Toronto, but every month someone in my social circle figures it out.

The World Cup, the Olympics, the Maple Leafs – when you look at the sticker price (and, worse, secondary market prices) most people should be priced out of these events by now. But some way, somehow, they always figure it out.

Canada Soccer looks to the future at CONCACAF U-20 Championship

I don’t believe it’s 40,000 multimillionaires a night sitting in obstructed-view seats with their faces painted, either. There are plenty of mes and yous in those bleachers and what used to be called the cheap seats. Someone once told me that someone once told them not to spend on material goods, but on experiences. I think there is some wisdom in that.

C.K.: All I can tell you is that if I had to pay for my own seat, it’d either be that or meet my monthly nut. And I owe money to some dangerous people – the natural born killers who work in banking.

You must be right. I look at the prices to go to this thing, and then I look at the people who are there. They aren’t walking around in monocles and smoking jackets. It’s a lot of parents and kids. That’s thousands and thousands of dollars for three hours of fun. Or maybe they’re all getting freebies?

I expect the economics of this would be more of a flashpoint if the modern televisual experience of sports wasn’t so fantastic. All those ultra-luxury boxes are purpose designed to recreate the same experience you get at home, minus the hassle of getting in and out of the stadium. So why leave?

Open this photo in gallery:

Now that the soccer’s going on vacation, other sports will get a chance to breathe. One thing that caught my attention – Bryson DeChambeau’s ‘cheating’ scandal at The Open.

What was notable to me wasn’t the alleged infraction – stepping on tall grass so that it wouldn’t impede his backswing – but DeChambeau’s colleagues’ reaction to his reaction (a temper tantrum). A bunch of them seem to genuinely hate the guy – Rory McIlroy in particular.

If memory serves, you’re a DeChambeau fan. Mount your defence of him.

J.R.: It was comically obvious that he was improving his lie, stomping around the fescue like he’s trying to put out of a fire. My thing about it is: so what? They should be allowed to improve the lie if the ball doesn’t move. I do it all the time. You think the 99 on my scorecard changes to 101 when the round is over? No chance.

I think you should be able to remove any and all impediments from your backswing, or something obstructing the path of your upcoming shot, so long as you can do it with your bare hands. No caddy assistance. Sapling in your target line? Rip it out of the ground, penalty free. As for accusing me of being a DeChambeau fan … hold on, I’m trying to figure out how to do a print version of Brooks Koepka eyeroll meme.

Meanwhile, he did have one supporter. The man on top of the leaderboard after three rounds, Sam Burns, who ended up third when it was all over.

C.K.: I can picture poor Bryson now, huddled over his phone, compulsively rubbing his lucky protractor: “If I’ve lost Jamie, I’ve lost the rest of the rabble, too.”

I like your approach to the rules of sports. It explains your devil-may-care attitude when it comes to editing. It’s like a newspaper section overseen by Nilhilists: ‘Baby trees? Who needs ‘em? We’re all dying anyway.’

I’m looking forward to further exploring your suggestions for how to improve sports. Next week: Penalties for slashing – why? And would the sticks be better if they were lined with razor blades?