The Match: Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson ahead of showdown at Shadow Creek

This piece was not easy to write. Truth be told, I am basically ambivalent when it comes to The Match. I have no interest in watching it, I find the ostentatious wealth banter nauseating and believe a line was crossed when the two protagonists, both Californians, posed for photographs in front of towers of bank notes at a time when their home state is burning.

Yet there is a positive - the promise that an unspecified percentage of the obscene money involved will go to charities chosen by Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson. It's difficult to argue passionately against an event if it will make someone's life better and ultimately do nobody any harm.

The Match: Key information

Host course: Shadow Creek, Las Vegas, Nevada

Tee-off time: 2000 GMT (midday local)

How to watch: In the US, $19.99 will buy you pay-per-view TV coverage; at the time of writing there is no UK broadcast available so the best option may be to close your eyes and imagine something really bad for approximately five hours (Editor's note: Sky Sports have confirmed that they will provide coverage from 8pm free to subscribers)

Still, it's hard to ignore the various issues brought about by this stage performance, one which clashes with golf's World Cup, a bona fide event played on one of Australia's finest Sandbelt courses. So here goes: here is what is wrong with The Match and, briefly, what is right about it.

1. Rivalry, what rivalry?

Phil Mickelson is a golfing legend, the darling of US crowds; in fact one wonders what he'd have to do to upset his fans. "Lie and be racist!" I hear you cry, but there's quite strong evidence at the moment that such an approach will have a limited impact on popularity.

Mickelson, who to my knowledge is neither a liar (well...) nor a racist, has caused a few less objectionable stirs in recent years, but he's still arguably the player who commands the most goodwill from spectators.

On the course, he cheated at Shinnecock during the US Open. "Cheaters never prosper!" I hear you cry and again, I'd ask you to study the evidence and stop yelling at me. Mickelson was not disqualified as he ought to have been. He done the crime, guv, and he basically got away with it.

Off the course, there was that whole FBI thing but who believes the FBI and the NSA and the CIA these days? He may have done it, he may not have done it. The fact is Phil Mickelson creates billions of jobs for Americans and if you fall out with him, it'll be to the benefit of China and Russia.

Yes, Mickelson is popular and he can do little wrong. But he's not Tiger Woods, and he has never been Tiger Woods. When they write about Tiger Woods after he's finally called time on his extraordinary, game-changing career, they ought not to write about rivalries. When Tiger Woods was at his best, there simply weren't any.

Of course, there was animosity. Woods and Mickelson were and probably remain very different characters, each flawed, each supremely gifted. Their infamous partnership under Hal Sutton at the Ryder Cup underlined that they don't or at least didn't mix. Had The Match been staged then (and someone had offered to pay the viewing fee), I would likely have watched it.

Now, not even the most cutting of Tiger zings piques my interest. These are not has-beens, but they're not what they were. All acrimony has disappeared and with it, all intrigue too.

2. It clashes with Have I Got News For You

I must admit, Have I Got News For You is not what it was. At least Phil and Tiger have conjured a degree of enthusiasm for the cause here, enthusiasm which appears only in flashes during BBC One's prime-time satire. Merton can't even be bothered to wear a cravat anymore, while Hislop's lawyer joke is as tired as the rigging.

But there is a chance, particularly with Andy Hamilton on the panel and David Mitchell presenting, that HIGNFY will raise a smile. Perhaps they'll spin The Wheel of Utterly Grotesque and Uninteresting Sporting Events and land on The Match, at which point Hislop will do a funny like saying 'Tiger Wood, is that his name?' and Merton will turn that into an innuendo and maybe, just maybe, they might even let the lady comedian do a bit.

Something like that, anyway. Enough to keep it in the Radio Times and me off Twitter and the poor 20-somethings charged with running the Mickelson/Woods accounts, blissfully unaware of the cliff edge they're careering towards and the emptiness on the other side. #CapitalOnesTheMatch

3. Grown men trying to be down with the kids

Seriously, who do they think is watching? Are Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson at all aware of how hideous they look to grown adults the world over? Are they both having the biggest joke at the expense of dopes like me who actually have to write about this?

Maybe, or else they're just out of touch and a bit, well, witless. Tiger, after all - and I should stress here that I love Tiger Woods The Golfer - says Nickelback are his favourite band and, earlier this year, chose to wear a tank top with his cap backwards on two separate occasions. He plays video games relentlessly and it would not be shocking were he to borrow a line from ex-footballer Michael Owen, who once declared that he doesn't like films because they're not realistic.

You want to hear more from Owen, don't you? "That’s my problem with films: I just can’t believe it," he said. "I sit there, thinking, ‘I wonder how many takes that took?’ and ‘is that a stuntman?’ The big action fights are so far-fetched I shake my head in disbelief: people shooting each other, rolling over with bullets just missing them, jumping off of trains. How can anyone believe that?"

Owen ought to have a look at Tiger's Augusta drop from 2013 if he wants to see something truly unbelievable.

4. Golf as an elite sport

Shadow Creek is technically a public course, but it costs an enormous amount of money to play and tee-times are, by all accounts, extremely difficult to come by. "If you happen to be a past or present US president, own a few gold records or an Oscar statuette, or perhaps wear an NBA Championship ring on your finger, you can find your name on the tee sheet on any day," wrote golf.com's Pat Ralph.

I admit that part of the Masters' mystique is that one does not simply walk into Augusta, but there's no mystique around Shadow Creek. It's just an expensive golf course in Las Vegas, the like of which doesn't get anyone excited about the sport of golf. All it does is serve to underline the commonly-held view that golf is for rich people, ideally male, ideally white. Tick those three boxes and you'll be fine; fall down on any of them and you very well may not.

Of course, Tiger Woods has done more to change that perception than just about anyone in history. There will be a time to celebrate that fact, first when he retires and then, one day, when he dies - assuming he does in fact die. I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if he is the last man standing when the sun finally swallows our silly little spinning top.

But here, before he reveals his immortality, the player who raises millions for charity each year has missed a trick. This is a man whose foundation does exceptional work for children who perhaps do not get the opportunities they deserve, but handed the platform for a truly game-changing event, an opportunity to showcase that philanthropic side, he's elected instead to help make this something else altogether.

It is remarkable to me that, to quote Ralph again, "only sponsors and VIP guests have been invited to watch the action on site." Why not children, hundreds of children? Why not victims of the Las Vegas shooting? Why not those whose homes have been lost to the California fires? Somewhere within this event there must surely have been room to make it more than a trumped-up head-to-head in an adults-only environment.

5. Gambling

I need to be careful about throwing stones within these glass walls, but what are we to make of these two firing bets at each other, aside from the fact that Phil Mickelson has absolutely no concept of value whatsoever?

Mickelson has wagered, seemingly at even-money, a six-figure sum on his ability to birdie the first hole. It's a par-four, albeit a short-one. Mickelson averages around a birdie every four holes on the PGA Tour; that figure drops to almost exactly one in five when it comes to par-fours. Even allowing for the shift in dynamics - we shouldn't underestimate his ability to make one when he needs one - he's made an exceptionally poor bet here.

Beyond that detail, two exceptionally rich men throwing prop bets at each other is vulgar in the extreme and it promotes recklessness. Golf has typically shied away from gambling associations in the past and now we're to believe that the best way to spice up a TV showdown like this is through gambling? It doesn't sit right - even in Vegas.

6. The World Cup

And here's the one which actually annoys me. To golf fans, the World Cup is not by any means an event of genuine magnitude, but it really ought to be, and it's the best event taking place this week by a distance.

Right now, its home is Australia and for us in the UK, that makes viewing difficult. In America, though, the opportunity is there to make the World Cup an event to look forward to, one to care about winning; one to promote team play, to offer something different to the rank-and-file stroke play events we watch every week, to showcase some of the best golf courses in the world. There is so much more that it could be.

Imagine, then, had Tiger Woods and Phil Mickelson decided to be selfless, rather than self-indulgent. They could have teamed up together, the perfect demonstration of their thawed relationship, to wear the red, white and blue of the USA. They would have ensured tickets sold out within seconds and they would have inspired a generation of golfers - not just in Australia - in a way Matt Kuchar and Kyle Stanley cannot.

Watching Tiger and Phil take alternate shots around The Metropolitan, each performing a Houdini act after a wayward blast from their partner, would've been a real treat even for those of us who watch exceptional shots each and every week. It would have meant something, it would have taught us something, it might even have created something. At the very least it would've been sports entertainment worth paying for.

The World Cup remains an excellent event in their absence, but for all the ill feeling towards The Match there is no denying the pull of both its protagonists. It is an awful waste of their generational, transcendental power to gracelessly prat around at Shadow Creek when they could have made a real difference to their sport, simply by looking beyond sums of money which will make no difference to either man.

7. And finally, the pro

As mentioned, some money will be going to charity and much of the above should be taken in the spirit in which it is meant. I am well aware that these are two outstanding players who have done more for the sport than most ever will. If they want to get richer by playing a meaningless head-to-head, they're entitled to do that. Their platforms have been built by talent, dedication and powers bordering on the super-human; they owe very little to anyone.

Still, it is important for the legacy of each that a good sum of money goes to charity when the final bet, one which Mickelson will presumably lose, has been made.

In fact the hope is that when all this cavorting is over with, whoever comes out on top donates every single penny to causes of their choosing. Only then will The Match have any real meaning.

Related golf links

• Mickelson and Woods up the ante
• More golf news and betting tips
• Sky Bet’s latest golf odds