Has the popularity of golf reduced the standards of etiquette on the course?

faceman

stockdam wrote: »

I wasn't having a swipe at the "working class".......I never mentioned class. It was aimed at those people who seem to have no respect whatsoever at the tradition of the game and etiquette. The last time I saw an example I must admit that it just ruined the game for me. We were behind a 4 ball who were all dressed in football tops (nothing really wrong with that in a way) but they played with utter disrespect. [etc]

to be fair, i dont think that example is a good representation of begineers in any club.

rigal wrote: »

I don't think that's snobbery. Clubs just can't open their doors to everyone. There needs to be some form of application/selection process.

Based on what criteria?

Ive been playing golf on and off since i was a teenager and have played in clubs in a number of countries. (Im still crap tho! )

Myself and my friend were the reason ,when we were 16, why the club we were members of introduced stricter dress codes. They didnt like denim but we were only teens so what did we know!

That aside, the game of golf has a history of being an upper class gentleman's game and many traditions even up to recently, (e.g. men only clubs) are still seen in today's society.

Most sports have a dress code in some form or another. I have no issue with a dress code as long as its enforced. Depsite my rebellous younger days i wouldnt wear denim on a golf course now but for the simple reason its not comfortable playing in denim.

Golf clubs are businesses. This talk of letting "anyone" in is nonsense. Elite-ism has no place in modern day society. An application for someone to join a golf club should be no different to joining a gym. However if someone can explain why it should be different, please do.

Dress codes aside, a basic level of etiquette should be expected on a course relating to noise, letting faster parties through, replaced divets etc etc. However it should be up to the clubs to enforce it and perhaps that is where the issue lies. Rules should be included in the membership pack and steps taken to deal with unruly behaviour included.

The price of membership in my experience, hasnt always determined quality of the course.

slumped

copacetic wrote: »

Maybe I am reading this wrong, but this stinks of the worst kind of snobbery? What do you mean by 'ANYONE'?

no snobbery intended - i simply meant that clubs are desparate for money these days and they will let anyone in - whereas in days gone past you had to meet criteria to get in to clubs.

I can remember joining a club 15 years ago and they had a points system in place. You had to get above a certain number of points to be allowed in.

You got points if you lived close to the club, if you already had a handicap etc.

Mister Sifter

One thing worth remembering in all this is that some clubs were set up with the idea of letting people who were previously intimidated by or priced out of existing clubs, get into the game of golf.

rigal

faceman wrote: »

to be fair, i dont think that example is a good representation of begineers in any club.



Based on what criteria?

Ive been playing golf on and off since i was a teenager and have played in clubs in a number of countries. (Im still crap tho! )

Myself and my friend were the reason ,when we were 16, why the club we were members of introduced stricter dress codes. They didnt like denim but we were only teens so what did we know!

That aside, the game of golf has a history of being an upper class gentleman's game and many traditions even up to recently, (e.g. men only clubs) are still seen in today's society.

Most sports have a dress code in some form or another. I have no issue with a dress code as long as its enforced. Depsite my rebellous younger days i wouldnt wear denim on a golf course now but for the simple reason its not comfortable playing in denim.

Golf clubs are businesses. This talk of letting "anyone" in is nonsense. Elite-ism has no place in modern day society. An application for someone to join a golf club should be no different to joining a gym. However if someone can explain why it should be different, please do.

Dress codes aside, a basic level of etiquette should be expected on a course relating to noise, letting faster parties through, replaced divets etc etc. However it should be up to the clubs to enforce it and perhaps that is where the issue lies. Rules should be included in the membership pack and steps taken to deal with unruly behaviour included.

The price of membership in my experience, hasnt always determined quality of the course.

The criteria can be decided by the individual clubs.

You are generalising by saying all clubs are businesses. True some rely heavily on green fees but in private clubs this money can be and is used to drive down member fees and improve the course.

In an ideal world where all golfers respect each other and take it upon themselves to learn the rules, etiquette etc then by all means everyone should be eligible to join a club. But the problem is, this is not the case.

If I paid a huge entry fee and annual sub to a club I wouldn't want them just letting "anyone" in and I would use my rights as a shareholder/member to ensure that there is some form of selection process. Based on my previous paragraph I don't think that's "elitism" or "nonsense".

Re. your points on dress code & denims - I know what you're saying but wearing something that you find comfy isn't going to wash with everyone. It's not like you'd rock up to a course in your trackies and hoody just because you didn't feel like wearing a pair of trousers and polo shirt.

Hobart

slumped wrote: »

no snobbery intended - i simply meant that clubs are desparate for money these days and they will let anyone in - whereas in days gone past you had to meet criteria to get in to clubs.

I can remember joining a club 15 years ago and they had a points system in place. You had to get above a certain number of points to be allowed in.

You got points if you lived close to the club, if you already had a handicap etc.

Again, you are generalising. My club is most definately not "desparate for money", I do know of a number of clubs in financial trouble, but this would be the exception and most definately not the rule.

My club is open for membership, because, my club has memberships free. You still have to meet a list of certain criteria in my club, in fact I do not know of a club wherby you could just simply turn up with €x,000 and walk into it. AFAIK all clubs have a joing policy and interviews are mandatory in all clubs I know off.

stooge

Firstly, I think everyone agress that more people playing golf can only be a good thing. More people playing means more money in the game for development of future players and courses.

As with all sports though there are negatives. More (and a greater variety) of people playing, mean there is going to be a greater range of behaviour.

Certainly the standards of etiquette have reduced overall. This ranges from dress-code to basic courtesy on the course (repairing pitch marks and raking bunkers). But theres also the other end of the argument where snobbery and tradition get in the way of enjoying the game and this could be called a breach of etiquette.

I recently was abroad and played a few courses in this country (where i was told golf has really taken off in the past 5 or so years) ranging from a 'pay as you play' course to a fairly upmarket members only (and occasional guest ). On each course there were quite obviously a mix of people. Some quite old and some obvious beginners. The behaviour of both sets was impeccable.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that maybe the issue isn't the fact more people are playing, it's possibly more to to with society in general in Ireland.



p.s.

One point I want to pick up on though is wearing denim and sports tops etc. If a person makes and effort and is properly dressed they are more likely to follow the rules of the course and have more respect.

copacetic

slumped wrote: »

no snobbery intended - i simply meant that clubs are desparate for money these days and they will let anyone in - whereas in days gone past you had to meet criteria to get in to clubs.

I can remember joining a club 15 years ago and they had a points system in place. You had to get above a certain number of points to be allowed in.

You got points if you lived close to the club, if you already had a handicap etc.

well certainly handicap and living near club are good criteria.

However we all know a lot of it in the past was being from the right place/company, knowing the right people, being the right sex/religion/colour. All of which I'm sure we'd agree is better off left to the past.

faceman

rigal wrote: »

The criteria can be decided by the individual clubs.

You are generalising by saying all clubs are businesses. True some rely heavily on green fees but in private clubs this money can be and is used to drive down member fees and improve the course.

In an ideal world where all golfers respect each other and take it upon themselves to learn the rules, etiquette etc then by all means everyone should be eligible to join a club. But the problem is, this is not the case.

If I paid a huge entry fee and annual sub to a club I wouldn't want them just letting "anyone" in and I would use my rights as a shareholder/member to ensure that there is some form of selection process. Based on my previous paragraph I don't think that's "elitism" or "nonsense".

Golf clubs arent there to make a loss, they must make a profit to sustain themselves.

what should be the selection process? this is the point im trying to get at. It has been mentioned about promimity to club. What has that got to do with it? Are certain locations a bad location to have members joining from? What about areas that dont have golf clubs? Should it be like a credit union and you can only join your nearest one and no other?

I take the point about handicaps, i can understand how that could be part of the criteria. But you are alienating newbies in that case.

Handicaps aside, i fail to what criteria can and should be used to determine an individual's worthiness to join a golf club. If i was to be pendantic, how many clubs assess an individual's health before joining? Surely that is more important than where they live?

Im not trying to be a smart a$$ with my points, its just something i have always felt tarnishes the image of many clubs in ireland and abroad.

To deal with the etiquette issue, perhaps on joining, an individual can only play a round when buddied up with existing members that are there for x many years so they can become acccustomed to club rules etc.

PhilipMarlowe

Interesting topic.

Generally, with the older type of member-owned clubs, you would have to be proposed and seconded by Full Members of at least 2 years standing.
Your application pledges to make yourself acquainted with the rules and bye-laws of the club and the rules & etiquette of the game of golf and also the people proposing and seconding you are responsible for you in this way.

Nowadays in the more commercial clubs, I presume that this is less of an issue, in that the ability to pay is more important than the ability to play.

To flip the coin however, I had been on a waiting list for forever in a club that was up their own you-know-where.... and am very thankful for the growth of commercial type clubs which make the game more accessible.

rigal

faceman wrote: »

Golf clubs arent there to make a loss, they must make a profit to sustain themselves.

what should be the selection process? this is the point im trying to get at. It has been mentioned about promimity to club. What has that got to do with it? Are certain locations a bad location to have members joining from? What about areas that dont have golf clubs? Should it be like a credit union and you can only join your nearest one and no other?

I take the point about handicaps, i can understand how that could be part of the criteria. But you are alienating newbies in that case.

Handicaps aside, i fail to what criteria can and should be used to determine an individual's worthiness to join a golf club. If i was to be pendantic, how many clubs assess an individual's health before joining? Surely that is more important than where they live?

Im not trying to be a smart a$$ with my points, its just something i have always felt tarnishes the image of many clubs in ireland and abroad.

To deal with the etiquette issue, perhaps on joining, an individual can only play a round when buddied up with existing members that are there for x many years so they can become acccustomed to club rules etc.

A club does not need to make a profit to sustain itself. If it breaks even it survives, if it makes a loss they can raise subs, green fees etc to make up the deficit.

It is up to the members/committee at the particular club to decide the selection process. If applicants don't like it they can go elsewhere.

faceman

rigal wrote: »

A club does not need to make a profit to sustain itself. If it breaks even it survives, if it makes a loss they can raise subs, green fees etc to make up the deficit.

which further supports the argument that a golf club is a business

wrote:

It is up to the members/committee at the particular club to decide the selection process. If applicants don't like it they can go elsewhere.

and they would be right to. Its clubs that try assert a level of elitism that give the game a bad name.

rigal

faceman wrote: »

which further supports the argument that a golf club is a business.

No it doesn't.

The same way a charity or not for profit org is not a busniess. A business is set up to make profits, not all golf clubs are set up to make profits. Agreed?

faceman wrote: »

and they would be right to. Its clubs that try assert a level of elitism that give the game a bad name.

Let's get real here - Golf does not have a bad name. It might not be very "PC" to have a selection process but I don't blame clubs for having it.

Do you think the members at Augusta give a toss if you think they're elitist????

I don't think that club has a bad name...

copacetic

I think most people would agree that Augusta has a very bad name in the wider community for racism and sexism. A lot of what people assume golf is about. Golf has quite a bad name amongst non players imo.

faceman

rigal wrote: »

No it doesn't.

The same way a charity or not for profit org is not a busniess. A business is set up to make profits, not all golf clubs are set up to make profits. Agreed?

So what are those golf clubs set up for? Do they keep accounts? What factors determine the salaries they pay, the green fees they charge etc?

wrote:

Let's get real here - Golf does not have a bad name. It might not be very "PC" to have a selection process but I don't blame clubs for having it.

Do you think the members at Augusta give a toss if you think they're elitist????

I don't think that club has a bad name...

copacetic beat me to it on this one.

rigal

faceman wrote: »

So what are those golf clubs set up for? Do they keep accounts? What factors determine the salaries they pay, the green fees they charge etc?

They were originally set up by people who wanted to play golf and not make money from it. That's why it's their pastime and not their day job.

Yes, the Treasurer will keep annual accounts and these will be reported on to the Committee etc. In my previous club the Bar and Restaurant were run by outside contractors and so the club didn't get any of that revenue stream. The only significant income they had was subs and green fees.

I presume there are a lot of different factors that need to be considered in setting green fees - Location, other club's in the area, facilities etc etc.

The Rooster

Most clubs work on the basis that every cent they earn goes back into club facilities. They do not seek to earn a profit - they seek to earn enough to maintain the course and clubhouse and practice facilities to the level desired by the members.

Does anyone know of any club that earns excess profits that it distributes to its shareholders or members?

faceman

The Rooster wrote: »

Most clubs work on the basis that every cent they earn goes back into club facilities. They do not seek to earn a profit - they seek to earn enough to maintain the course and clubhouse and practice facilities to the level desired by the members.

Does anyone know of any club that earns excess profits that it distributes to its shareholders or members?

Exactly. Regardless to how the club distributes profit or what profit level it chooses to aim for, it still highlights that the golf club is a business. It must meet its running costs, salaries, maintenance etc etc.

Anyway its getting slightly off topic to what the OP was about.

rigal

faceman wrote: »

Exactly. Regardless to how the club distributes profit or what profit level it chooses to aim for, it still highlights that the golf club is a business. It must meet its running costs, salaries, maintenance etc etc.

Anyway its getting slightly off topic to what the OP was about.

You're really not going to give up on this "golf clubs are all businesses" thing are you?

Definition of business: An organization operated with the objective of making a profit from the sale of goods or services.

That's not what the golf clubs I'm talking about are. Understanding this is important to understanding what a club stands for.

faceman

Not all businesses have an objective to make a profit.

Maybe you can point out some golf clubs that dont care how much revenue they generate or care about their costs?

rigal

faceman wrote: »

Not all businesses have an objective to make a profit.

Maybe you can point out some golf clubs that dont care how much revenue they generate or care about their costs?

Who said anything about clubs not caring? Just because there is money involved doesn't mean it's a business. I'm sure the local Stamp Collecting club has revenue and expenses - would you say that is a business as well?

faceman

rigal wrote: »

Who said anything about clubs not caring? Just because there is money involved doesn't mean it's a business. I'm sure the local Stamp Collecting club has revenue and expenses - would you say that is a business as well?

I think we've split the heir to its finest point. Im not really sure what your point is now at all. Sorry.

rigal

faceman wrote: »

I think we've split the heir to its finest point. Im not really sure what your point is now at all. Sorry.

Yeah, I think we've finally agreed on something there. I reckon we've destroyed the thread with our debate...:o

slumped

Is it just me or does a lack of knowledge about the rules not drive you mad on the golf course?

People who improve their lies in particular get my goat.

Also, getting back to etiquette, walking on someones putt line really pisses me off.

How hard is it not to do that??

Back on topic now maybe ??

S

The Rooster

slumped wrote: »

Also, getting back to etiquette, walking on someones putt line really pisses me off.

How hard is it not to do that??

Of course I would never do it, but does it really have much of an impact? Chances are the group playing in front of you walked all over your line???

Rules question:
If you land on a tee-box of another hole, but you are beyond the tee-line, do you have to take a free drop or can you play from the tee box? I always drop off, but somebody told me recently they thought there were circumstances where you can play directly..

copacetic

The Rooster wrote: »

Of course I would never do it, but does it really have much of an impact? Chances are the group playing in front of you walked all over your line???

Rules question:
If you land on a tee-box of another hole, but you are beyond the tee-line, do you have to take a free drop or can you play from the tee box? I always drop off, but somebody told me recently they thought there were circumstances where you can play directly..

it depends on the local rule. Without a local rule saying you must drop off a tee box then it is part of the course and you should play it as it lies.

The only reason for the rule is to protect the tee box of the course, it shouldn't be allowed as a local rule imo. Playing the ball as it lies should be a mantra for everyone on the course.

Hobart

copacetic wrote: »

it depends on the local rule. Without a local rule saying you must drop off a tee box then it is part of the course and you should play it as it lies.

The only reason for the rule is to protect the tee box of the course, it shouldn't be allowed as a local rule imo. Playing the ball as it lies should be a mantra for everyone on the course.

Exactly, and that's where this idea of a "pre-joining" test falls flat on it's face. Improving lies is also not allowed, although I cannot remember anybodydoing it blatantly when playing with me. It would be bad form, imo, to not point out that a rule has been broken in that case.

As for rules and the lack of knowledge of them, it is not something that would drive me mad. I carry a copy around with me each year in the bag, and it can be easily referenced in case of uncertainty. But the rules change and some changes need a lot of research in order to be fully familiar with them, so no blame should really be sought in a situation where a genuine "mistake" is made, but a penalty should always be applied.

stockdam

Hobart wrote: »

Improving lies is also not allowed, although I cannot remember anybodydoing it blatantly when playing with me.

Although this is straying off topic and is cheating rather than etiquette......I played with a guy several times who always found his ball in the deepest rough (and I mean knee high) and then he could always get a wood onto the ball when I expected him to hack out with a wedge.

I was very suspicious so once I hung back and watched - he wasn't aware that I was watching him. It looked to me like there was a lot of walking about in circles (to stamp the grass down) and then I saw a tee coming out and the ball being placed on the tee!!!!!!!!

Rather than pull him up I decided not to bother playing with him again.

Sorry let's get back to etiquette rather than blatant cheating.

Etiquette also covers the times when only you know something happened and you declare a penalty on yourself.......just like Paul Casey did in the Masters (how many people would have seen his ball move?). Ok so these are the rules but etiquette is about adhering to them even if you think you got away with it. I think snooker is an example where I've seen a player pull himself up but in most sports the objective almost seems to be about getting away with diving or cheating (sometimes).

jacket222002

stockdam,

you saw somebody cheating and then decided "Rather than pull him up I decided not to bother playing with him again."

In my book you should be suspended for that.

slumped

jacket222002 wrote: »

stockdam,

you saw somebody cheating and then decided "Rather than pull him up I decided not to bother playing with him again."

In my book you should be suspended for that.

I don't agree. Golf is self regualting and while Stockdam witnessed it, it was his call whether to mention it or not.

Suspension - I dont think so!

jacket222002

He had a responsability to mark a card and sign it. He has a duty to other players to ensure that the rules are applied in the group he is playing with.

If everybody took his attitude cheating would flourish.

All talk. No action.

GreeBo

faceman wrote: »

So what are those golf clubs set up for? Do they keep accounts? What factors determine the salaries they pay, the green fees they charge etc?

They do keep accounts but they are not called profit and loss accounts like they would be in a business. They are specifically called Club Accounts as a club is not supposed to make a profit, all monies are supposed to be put back into the club or used for capital expenditure.

stockdam

jacket222002 wrote: »

stockdam,

you saw somebody cheating and then decided "Rather than pull him up I decided not to bother playing with him again."

In my book you should be suspended for that.

Eh? We were playing a friendly round......why should I report him.......he wasn't a member of any club as far as I remember.

So why would you suspend me?

jacket222002 wrote: »

He had a responsability to mark a card and sign it. He has a duty to other players to ensure that the rules are applied in the group he is playing with.

If everybody took his attitude cheating would flourish.

All talk. No action.

We weren't marking cards....in fact I don't think we were playing 18 holes. We weren't playing with anyone else.

You've jumped to a couple of conclusions.

Matt Santos

stockdam wrote: »

Eh? We were playing a friendly round......why should I report him.......he wasn't a member of any club as far as I remember.

So why would you suspend me?







We weren't marking cards....in fact I don't think we were playing 18 holes. We weren't playing with anyone else.

You've jumped to a couple of conclusions.

In fairness this information was not given when you posted the original post.
I am of the belief that anyone that witness's an indescretion has a duty to pull the person up and implement the correct ruling.
Unfortunately, to do this takes a person that is 100% confident in themselves and has the character to face any further questions down the line.
I have had several incidents with people (mostly when playing for the club or in Society Competitions) and as a result people tend to step up the standard of their etiquette and rule knowledge. Not a bad thing!
My opinion to the drop in general manners and honest play is the new inclusion of a different sports person to the game of golf.
Firstly, I do not mean to be generalising but I think that people that originally played Soccer, GAA and other team sports have a problem with some of the finer rules and the implementation of same. They played to win in these other sports and if they got away with an off the ball incident or other rule infractions that was part of the "game".
It makes perfect sense that the same thinking would carry on to the golf course....

OilBeefHooked2

stockdam wrote: »

Eh? We were playing a friendly round......why should I report him.......he wasn't a member of any club as far as I remember.

So why would you suspend me?

We weren't marking cards....in fact I don't think we were playing 18 holes. We weren't playing with anyone else.

You've jumped to a couple of conclusions.

In fairness stockdam it's irrelevant whether you were playing a competition or a "friendly" round. Most newcomers to golf dont know the rules/etiquette, so it's your obligation as his playing partner to point out what he did wrong. Personally I find the majority of new golfers are appreciative of the headups on the rules , but unfortunately there is always going one/two who aren't, so at the very least you have made them aware that what they are doing is wrong.

stockdam

david-k wrote: »

In fairness stockdam it's irrelevant whether you were playing a competition or a "friendly" round. Most newcomers to golf dont know the rules/etiquette, so it's your obligation as his playing partner to point out what he did wrong. Personally I find the majority of new golfers are appreciative of the headups on the rules , but unfortunately there is always going one/two who aren't, so at the very least you have made them aware that what they are doing is wrong.

Who said the guy was a beginner.....he had been playing golf for 20 years or more. It was clear this wasn't ignorance of the rules as he knew them as well as I did. It was blatant cheating and he thought nobody was watching so he could get away with it. Did I need to pull him up to let him know it was wrong? No he knew it was wrong. He wasn't a member so I couldn't report him. Instead my best "punishment" was not to play with him again. It's a bit like pointing out to an armed robber that he shouldn't be carrying a gun. If somebody tees the ball up in the rough then this is so far removed from the rules that pointing out their fault isn't going to work.

Yes it's my responsibility to point out the error (as I do) when the other person will accept and learn. In this case however it was clear to me that pointing it out would be a waste of my time. The guy relied on members signing him in and he never played in competitions. My response was never to sign him in again.

I've found some of the comments strange as they are aimed more at me (without knowing the full circumstances....no I didn't elaborate but that doesn't mean you should fill in the gaps) than the person who cheated.

OilBeefHooked2

stockdam wrote: »

Who said the guy was a beginner.....he had been playing golf for 20 years or more. It was clear this wasn't ignorance of the rules as he knew them as well as I did. It was blatant cheating and he thought nobody was watching so he could get away with it. Did I need to pull him up to let him know it was wrong? No he knew it was wrong. He wasn't a member so I couldn't report him. Instead my best "punishment" was not to play with him again. It's a bit like pointing out to an armed robber that he shouldn't be carrying a gun. If somebody tees the ball up in the rough then this is so far removed from the rules that pointing out their fault isn't going to work.

Yes it's my responsibility to point out the error (as I do) when the other person will accept and learn. In this case however it was clear to me that pointing it out would be a waste of my time. The guy relied on members signing him in and he never played in competitions. My response was never to sign him in again.

I've found some of the comments strange as they are aimed more at me (without knowing the full circumstances....no I didn't elaborate but that doesn't mean you should fill in the gaps) than the person who cheated.

Apoligies if you felt people were focusing more on you than the guy cheating. Like you said already we're straying off topic abit, I'd say everyone who plays golf knows someone like you described earlier and in that case the best course of action is the one you took.

Anyway back on topic.