'Change Isn't Always A Good Thing' - Does Keegan Bradley Have A Point Over Ryder Cup Envelope Rule Or Would Altering It Just Create More Problems?

When Viktor Hovland was forced to withdraw from the singles session at the 2025 Ryder Cup, it brought to light a rule that has so rarely been implemented over the course of the past 50 years that plenty of people had forgotten it existed.

The 'Envelope Rule' sees both captains place the name of one of their own team into a sealed piece of paper within an hour of the second day's play concluding, and that golfer is withdrawn from the singles matches on the final day should a member of the opposition be unable to go.

However, if everyone is fine to play, the note is destroyed and no one ever has to find out who was inside. Since being introduced in 1979, all but three envelopes have been destroyed.

One was in 1991 after America's Steve Pate was injured in a car accident days before the event began while the other - strangely - occurred two years later after Sam Torrance sustained a foot injury.

Fast forward 32 more years and Viktor Hovland's neck issue caused the envelope rule to be instigated for just the third time, with Harris English the unlucky party to have his Ryder Cup cut short.

Plenty of people asked whether the envelope rule should be changed due to possibly short-changing the event and robbing the opposition player of his opportunity due to external circumstances.

After initially calling the rule "strange" but accepting it for what it was before play began on Sunday, Bradley demanded in his post-event press conference that the rule must be altered before Adare Manor in 2027.

He said: “I have a few ideas [on how it could be changed], but I'm not going to tell you right now.

"I mean, the rule has to change. I think it's obvious to everybody in the sports world, in this room. Nothing against Viktor. But that rule needs to change by the next Ryder Cup.”

Does the envelope rule have to change or could it remain as it is? Should it be tweaked, what would that look like? A handful of our writers have had their say...

Nick Bonfield

I do think the envelope rule should be changed. Generally in individual sport, it's simply considered bad luck if an injury gets in the way and I think the person who withdraws should lose the point.

In a tennis final, the title isn't shared if one of the players goes down injured. However, golfers dream their whole lives of competing in a Ryder Cup and may only participate in one during their career.

It seems grossly unfair for the chance to contest the singles and potentially put in a career-defining performance to be taken away. To that end, I'd be in favour of each team having a reserve player. I think it's the most sensible solution.

Matt Cradock

To begin with, I feel that the US side arguing about the envelope rule is just an excuse to cover up their performances. It's something that has been in place for over 50 years. Both captains agreed with it pre-Ryder Cup and teams have used it before, so to argue it needs changing is slightly childish in my eyes.

Admittedly, there maybe other ways to sort out the issue of a player withdrawing but, as of now, I believe there isn't any reason to change the envelope rule, as it's the fairest way of sorting out the issue of players being unable to play.

Okay, you could argue that there could be a 13th man, which could have been Alex Noren or Nicolai Hojgaard for the Europeans, who could have stepped in if needed.

However, if that 13th man wins against a player who is one of the 12, this would no doubt cause more arguments, with the captain simply going 'well, he shouldn't be here, he's not part of the 12.'

Whatever method is in place will cause arguments, but you like to think a player isn't going to lie to get out of playing. Golfers want to feature in a Ryder Cup, they're not going to feign injury to miss it...

Elliott Heath

I don’t think changing the envelope rule would be a cause of too much concern, and it could well be amended before the next Ryder Cup in Ireland. Keegan Bradley, who it has to be said signed the captain’s agreement prior to Bethpage, clearly wants it amended.

I do not think it should be changed to forfeit the match and award the point to the side who does not have an injury, as that is not fair. For example, the USA should not have been awarded a full point for Viktor Hovland’s withdrawal, and I can’t believe this is how it operates in the Solheim Cup.

I think the captains should select a reserve player. Let them become part of the team, hit balls for an hour or so everyday and be there just incase of an injury. Nicolai Hojgaard was on-site at Bethpage and could have easily stepped in for Hovland on Sunday, for example. Some will point to Alex Noren, too, but he was busy with his vice-captaincy duties.

I am sure someone like Nicolai, Harry Hall or Matt Wallace would still have been honored to join the team as a reserve and get the career experience of what a Ryder Cup is like.

Jonny Leighfield

I don't think the rule should be changed at all. It has so rarely been an issue at previous Ryder Cups anyway and Keegan Bradley calling for it to be changed after the event simply stinks of sour grapes.

If it was such a problem, why didn't he bring it up beforehand? It really seems out of character for Bradley to complain about the rule post-event, too. Additionally, I don't think Luke Donald would have said the same thing if the shoe was on the other foot.

In a situation which is less than ideal anyway, the current solution is arguably the lesser of all the evils, with the Solheim Cup solution just grossly unfair and reserve players arguably taking away from the prestige of making the 12.

I also wonder whether, further down the line, the altered rule could be abused as teams suddenly find an underperforming player has a sore back on Saturday evening and is replaced.

While I understand and appreciate some rules could do with updating from time to time, I don't think this is one of them. Change isn't always a good thing...