golf question

PARlance

GreeBo wrote: »

The OP didnt say "I think someone has cheated, what should I do?"
If that was anywhere in the thread I would have locked/deleted it hours ago.

At this point guilt has been established/admitted, its the severity/length of the punishment thats in question and that the OP is seeking input on.

In a previous post I mentioned that perhaps its a new club where the members/committee are not that experienced in club matters, its very possible that the members on here are far more qualified to give input than a new committee in a new club.

We have plenty of committee members, captains, etc on here who's advice I would value.

I would value their advice too. I'd be interested to see if the approved of the OP/Captain of a club starting a similar thread.

Would love to go tit for tat on this but I've just one question.

Would it be ok for OP to name the club in question and the players in question.

/edited out

callaway92

1) People who believe that the op is actually a club captain - Get real. It's clearly a junior/student member in a spot of bother now wondering what's gonna happen

2) A club captain (I would hope) wouldn't have terrible spelling & grammar like what he has posted itt so far.

Almaviva

callaway92 wrote: »

1) People who believe that the op is actually a club captain - Get real. It's clearly a junior/student member in a spot of bother now wondering what's gonna happen

2) A club captain (I would hope) wouldn't have terrible spelling & grammar like what he has posted itt so far.

Something doesnt feel right about this thread alright. Above is a good guess.

If he is a junior he should be suspended until next year. If an adult, then suspension of competitive playing rights, and decline to renew their sub whenever the period he/she is paid up to ends.

Russman

Almaviva wrote: »

Something doesnt feel right about this thread alright. Above is a good guess.

Reading through it again, I think you're probably right.

Benny Cake

In the event that they are suspended would they be entitled to a refund on their subs?

Dubl07

Benny Cake wrote: »

In the event that they are suspended would they be entitled to a refund on their subs?

:pac: and a photo in the club newsletter.

Ilik Urgee

ajcurry123 wrote: »

I would value their advice too. I'd be interested to see if the approved of the OP/Captain of a club starting a similar thread.

Would love to go tit for tat on this but I've just one question.

Would it be ok for OP to name the club in question and the players involved?

*Here's how I see the meeting going down tonight*

:D

Captain:
Lads, I've done my research, I registered an account on boards.ie today and set up a thread. Ilik Urgee and FixdePitchmark (trying to pick out the funniest usernames) are both Captains of their Clubs...well, at least they said they were, tis an internet forum after all so can't really be sure....
Anyway, Ilik Urgee reckons we go for 6 months
FixdePitchmark reckons 3 months....
So lets go for 4 months so?
All in agreement, Ok, motion approved!
Could someone please minute this meeting.

Minute taker interrupts: Does he spell that YOURGee or URGee?

Why should it be my name used in a frivolous and off the cuff manner? Post Reported:mad: :pac:

For what it's worth, I'd give 'em 12 months. It's a very fine line on the anonymity, it really depends on who's reading here.

Can the GUI interject in these "special" scenarios and give them a ban without the club ever having to issue one?

PARlance

Ilik Urgee wrote: »

Why should it be my name used in a frivolous and off the cuff manner? Post Reported:mad: :pac:

For what it's worth, I'd give 'em 12 months. It's a very fine line on the anonymity, it really depends on who's reading here.

Can the GUI interject in these "special" scenarios and give them a ban without the club ever having to issue one?

Edited that out... Only then did I spot the smiley face after the angry one... Ah well, tis gone now anyway

Almaviva

Benny Cake wrote: »

In the event that they are suspended would they be entitled to a refund on their subs?

Doesnt really aply. Suspension would be from competitive golf. Best, avoiding any potential legal wrangling would be to let their membership run, allowing them normal use of the course until the end of their current membership period. Then simply end their membership.

golfwallah

squek wrote: »

I am the captain. The gui dont give advice on such matters.

I find it hard to believe that the GUI don't give advice on such matters.

How do you know this?

I've always found the GUI to be very helpful in guiding clubs regarding golf issues.

Are you really a club captain?

realgolfgeek

callaway92 wrote: »

1) People who believe that the op is actually a club captain - Get real. It's clearly a junior/student member in a spot of bother now wondering what's gonna happen

2) A club captain (I would hope) wouldn't have terrible spelling & grammar like what he has posted itt so far.

And this is exactly why I said it was FISHY

Topper Harley

Regardless of the OP's motives am I the only one who thinks this talk of 12 month suspension is a bit harsh.

This is a bizarre comparison but bare with me... Luis Suarez racially abuses someone and bites someone else (serious issues outside of the sport he is playing). He does so in full view of millions of people including kids who he is a role model for and gets suspended for a matter of weeks.

Now, I'm not for a second condoning what has allegedly happened in the OP's club and I agree that the spirit of the game needs to be upheld and that an example should be made of the culprits but I hate the idea of discouraging people from playing golf.

And so, I'd suggest a 1-2 month ban and a stern warning about their future conduct and also impose some other sanctions, such as forcing the culprits to "volunteer" to spend a few hours each month filling in divots on the course...or something...

Dubl07

Topper Harley wrote: »

Regardless of the OP's motives am I the only one who thinks this talk of 12 month suspension is a bit harsh.

This is a bizarre comparison but bare with me... Luis Suarez racially abuses someone and bites someone else (serious issues outside of the sport he is playing). He does so in full view of millions of people including kids who he is a role model for and gets suspended for a matter of weeks.

Now, I'm not for a second condoning what has allegedly happened in the OP's club and I agree that the spirit of the game needs to be upheld and that an example should be made of the culprits but I hate the idea of discouraging people from playing golf.

And so, I'd suggest a 1-2 month ban and a stern warning about their future conduct and also impose some other sanctions, such as forcing the culprits to "volunteer" to spend a few hours each month filling in divots on the course...or something...

Luis Suarez is an international, professional player in a contact sport. He cheated in the heat of the moment as far as we know and was sanctioned.

These golfing boys/men are two-bit amateurs who deliberately sought to deceive their co-members in order to gain a petty advantage in a club situation.

I'd name and shame them and kick them out of the club along with a press-release to the local paper. If that's how they behave in a social, sporting environment, what kind of ethics do they have in personal or business matters?

PARlance

Topper Harley wrote: »

Regardless of the OP's motives am I the only one who thinks this talk of 12 month suspension is a bit harsh.

This is a bizarre comparison but bare with me... Luis Suarez racially abuses someone and bites someone else (serious issues outside of the sport he is playing). He does so in full view of millions of people including kids who he is a role model for and gets suspended for a matter of weeks.

Now, I'm not for a second condoning what has allegedly happened in the OP's club and I agree that the spirit of the game needs to be upheld and that an example should be made of the culprits but I hate the idea of discouraging people from playing golf.

And so, I'd suggest a 1-2 month ban and a stern warning about their future conduct and also impose some other sanctions, such as forcing the culprits to "volunteer" to spend a few hours each month filling in divots on the course...or something...

A judge can decide, based on the willingness of a victim to forgive or not, to cut off the hand of a person found guilty of theft in Saudi Arabia....
That's the far end of the spectrum.
Why don't we comprise and just give them a 2 week ban but chop of a few fingers.


Personally I don't think the length of ban is a massive issue, I'd suspect it's something that will stick with them for life.

stockdam

Topper Harley wrote: »

Rit harsh.
This is a bizarre comparison but bare with me... Luis Suarez racially abuses someone and bites someone else (serious issues outside of the sport he is playing). He does so in full view of millions of people including kids who he is a role model for and gets suspended for a matter of weeks.

This ain't a football forum. Suarez was not charged with any racial abuse by any court of law so be very careful. People dive in with leg breaking tackles occasionally, there are spear tackles in rugby, people call people names. Most of the above are not planned.

What we are debating here is planned and blatant cheating. What would anyone say if a professional walked off at the first hole but then handed in a marked card. Obviously he'd be caught as the marker would know but I'd guess that people would suggest that both pros should be kicked out of the tour for at least a year.....maybe for life.

Here we have an example of two people who are in a private club who cheated.......not just a nudge of a ball marker but a complete fabrication of a score. I can't see anything other than expulsion. I'd stretch to a ban from all competitions for a year at minimum.

The club must trust that players do not cheat. I cannot see how anyone would want a member back who did this.

For Paws

Firstly, the OP looks 'fishy' to me too.

Secondly, IF the OP is genuine, asking for advice on boards is not going to solve his problem. Asking for advice on any subject on here is grand, as long as you're prepared to sift through 101 different opinions.

Thirdly, discretely contacting other Club Captains and taking a consensus opinion would be be my advice.

Lastly, imo the members concerned should be suspended from competition for the current year, and the renewal of their membership (should they choose to re-apply) be subject to serious consideration.

Edit ; In the UK it is common to have Associations of Past & Present Club Captains in a region.
Perhaps an email /letter to such an association might be the wisest, and most discrete course.

Russman

For Paws wrote: »

Lastly, imo the members concerned should be suspended from competition for the current year, and the renewal of their membership (should they choose to re-apply) be subject to serious consideration.
.

Totally agree with a heavy punishment but is this possible ? I thought in most member owned clubs, once you're in, you're in ? I guess it depends on each club's own rules and status, but I'd imagine its fairly unusual and fraught with legal dangers.

GreeBo

For Paws wrote: »

Firstly, the OP looks 'fishy' to me too.

Secondly, IF the OP is genuine, asking for advice on boards is not going to solve his problem. Asking for advice on any subject on here is grand, as long as you're prepared to sift through 101 different opinions.

Thirdly, discretely contacting other Club Captains and taking a consensus opinion would be be my advice.

Lastly, imo the members concerned should be suspended from competition for the current year, and the renewal of their membership (should they choose to re-apply) be subject to serious consideration.

Edit ; In the UK it is common to have Associations of Past & Present Club Captains in a region.
Perhaps an email /letter to such an association might be the wisest, and most discrete course.

why are you assuming he is looking for a solution?
Perhaps he is just looking for input from like minded individuals, especially if they are aware of similar circumstances.

It seems to me that lots of poster are making the (bizarre) assumption that, assuming he is legit, the OP is going to toddle off back to the club and say "well the boards.ie lads said X, so X it is"
Dont you guys solicit advice from people in your normal day to day lives?
Do you act blindly on this advice, or, depending on who its from, weigh it and take on board or disregard as you see fit?

Why not give the OP the same benefit of the doubt you yourselves would want?

golfwallah

GreeBo wrote: »

Why not give the OP the same benefit of the doubt you yourselves would want?

Because he has said that the "gui dont give advice on such matters", whereas article 4.1.5. of the GUI Constitution states:
"4.1.5 To provide to Clubs advice and assistance (other than financial) in all matters appertaining to golf".
http://www.gui.ie/leinster/about-us-(1)/union-constitution-2013.aspx

Moreover, I have received advice from the GUI on many golf issues, both on the phone and in person, from their officials. I'm quite sure that if the OP actually did look for advice from the GUI, he would get it.

GreeBo

golfwallah wrote: »

Because he has said that the "gui dont give advice on such matters", whereas article 4.1.5. of the GUI Constitution states:
"4.1.5 To provide to Clubs advice and assistance (other than financial) in all matters appertaining to golf".
http://www.gui.ie/leinster/about-us-(1)/union-constitution-2013.aspx

Moreover, I have received advice from the GUI on many golf issues, both on the phone and in person, from their officials. I'm quite sure that if the OP actually did look for advice from the GUI, he would get it.

A fair point, but is he not still entitled to seek opinions from others, namely us?
The very fact that you have experience getting advice from the GUI somewhat proves the point imo.

/edit
by benefit of the doubt I meant how he would handle our input, not whether or not he is who he claims to be.

SnowDrifts

GreeBo wrote: »

A fair point, but is he not still entitled to seek opinions from others, namely us?
The very fact that you have experience getting advice from the GUI somewhat proves the point imo.

So because the previous poster has sought advice from the GUI, you think proves your point that a club captain is perfectly entitled to seek advice from members (unknown and unverified) of an internet forum?

I'm still surprised that you think that is an appropriate course of action. There has been so many points made here as to the contrary but you don't seem to be taking anything on board.

PARlance

GreeBo wrote: »

why are you assuming he is looking for a solution?
Perhaps he is just looking for input from like minded individuals, especially if they are aware of similar circumstances.

It seems to me that lots of poster are making the (bizarre) assumption that, assuming he is legit, the OP is going to toddle off back to the club and say "well the boards.ie lads said X, so X it is"
Dont you guys solicit advice from people in your normal day to day lives?
Do you act blindly on this advice, or, depending on who its from, weigh it and take on board or disregard as you see fit?

Why not give the OP the same benefit of the doubt you yourselves would want?

Well I made the hyperbola (that was indeed a joke to reflect what I felt is the ridiculous nature of the situation) that you are deriving your "well the boards.ie lads said X, so X it is" from....
If you think that I was making the assumption that I felt he was actually going to go back and do this, then that is truly a bizarre assumption by yourself.
I'd have thought a moderator with plenty of experience would have been able to see the :D that prefaced the scenario and gathered that it was a joke.

Clutching at straws there to assist your point.

Could you answer an earlier question I posed to you.

Would it have been ok for the OP to stat the players by name in this thread?

GreeBo

SnowDrifts wrote: »

So because the previous poster has sought advice from the GUI, you think proves your point that a club captain is perfectly entitled to seek advice from members (unknown and unverified) of an internet forum?

I think it proves the point that we have knowledgeable people on here who can give informed opinions.
The OP is perfectly entitled to seek advice from whomsoever he chooses.
Whats being known and verified got to do with anything?
Advice is advice, the OP can choose to take on board or ignore any and all the posts on here, just as they can do when they ask someone for advice in person.

SnowDrifts wrote: »

I'm still surprised that you think that is an appropriate course of action. There has been so many points made here as to the contrary but you don't seem to be taking anything on board.

I think getting as much advice in a situation this unusual and important as this one is a wise choice.

Also I dont see many actual points being made against it.
So far all I see is "the people involved might recognise themselves"
To that I say a big fat "and"?
Your own point seems to consist of the fact that people are (somewhat) anonymous on here...again, I say so what?
What other points do you feel have been made against asking for advice on here?

GreeBo

ajcurry123 wrote: »

Well I made the hyperbola (that was indeed a joke to reflect what I felt is the ridiculous nature of the situation) that you are deriving your "well the boards.ie lads said X, so X it is" from....
If you think that I was making the assumption that I felt he was actually going to go back and do this, then that is truly a bizarre assumption by yourself.
I'd have thought a moderator with plenty of experience would have been able to see the :D that prefaced the scenario and gathered that it was a joke.

Clutching at straws there to assist your point.

Could you answer an earlier question I posed to you.

Would it have been ok for the OP to stat the players by name in this thread?

Sorry but I have no idea what any of the bold bit is talking about!:o

No as its not ok to name specific people on here without their permission, especially when linking them to something negative.

I dont however see how that relates to the OP asking for advice.
If someone can link this thread to a specific incident, well then by definition they already knew about the incident, so whats the problem?

SnowDrifts

GreeBo wrote: »

Whats being known and verified got to do with anything?

Do you remember "conno"? Well, there could be 50 connos on here. That is what I mean by unverified and unknown. You equating contacting the GUI (a known body sanctioned to deal with such issues) to looking for advice from what could be 50 connos - there lies the problem.

DuckSlice

I have to say this has got all very boring. What's the matter with him seeking advice on here? What does it matter if the club or the cheats are named. Personally I would want them named like I said before.

I just can't see the problem asking advice. People come on here asking for advice on what clubs should they buy, what shaft should I buy, am I using the right balls. I would say none of us( to my knowledge) on here are able to answer these questions nor qualified to say what equipment they should buy. What's the difference?

GreeBo

SnowDrifts wrote: »

Do you remember "conno"? Well, there could be 50 connos on here. That is what I mean by unverified and unknown. You equating contacting the GUI (a known body sanctioned to deal with such issues) to looking for advice from what could be 50 connos - there lies the problem.

Sorry but you are way off the mark here. I did not equate the two at all, ever.

As I said in my previous post, its up to the OP to take on board or disregard any advice received on here, in exactly the same way we all do everyday.

Again, why not give the benefit of the doubt that he is smart enough to weigh any advice he gets on here?

You recently started a thread looking for advice on getting a club valued, did you blindly follow the advice of posters on here or also do your own research?
Why do you think the OP would act any differently than you?

SnowDrifts

GreeBo wrote: »

Sorry but you are way off the mark here. I did not equate the two at all, ever.

As I said in my previous post, its up to the OP to take on board or disregard any advice received on here, in exactly the same way we all do everyday.

Again, why not give the benefit of the doubt that he is smart enough to weigh any advice he gets on here?

You're equating the two here

GreeBo wrote: »

A fair point, but is he not still entitled to seek opinions from others, namely us?
The very fact that you have experience getting advice from the GUI somewhat proves the point imo.

And you seem to be focusing on the wrong point. The issue is not whether he will or will not act on the advice, it is that he should be contacting the GUI and his committee and then, if needs be, contact captains from other clubs.

Asking unknown and unverified members of an public internet forum how long a suspension should he dish out for a rules breach is just not the way to go.

PARlance

GreeBo wrote: »

Sorry but I have no idea what any of the bold bit is talking about!:o

Don't be embarrassed

GreeBo wrote: »

It seems to me that lots of poster are making the (bizarre) assumption that, assuming he is legit, the OP is going to toddle off back to the club and say "well the boards.ie lads said X, so X it is"

Who is making this bizarre assumption?
I threw in a joke about this, it wasn't an assumption, it was a joke.
I don't see anyone else assuming that he is going to go back and say this...

You used that joke to back up your argument, suddenly "lots of posters are making the (bizarre) assumption".... Really? Where are they.

GreeBo wrote: »

No as its not ok to name specific people on here without their permission, especially when linking them to something negative.

I dont however see how that relates to the OP asking for advice.
If someone can link this thread to a specific incident, well then by definition they already knew about the incident, so whats the problem?

I just think it's a very grey area.
We don't know that the OP is a Captain at all, I doubt it very much and I think you have you're own doubts too.
What if he is just a trouble maker, a trouble maker who may be aware that two lads in his club are under review, now they could easily be under review for a much lesser offence, the fact that the OP is free to put it out there that two members have admitted guilt to blatant cheating could be muck that sticks to these people.

GreeBo

SnowDrifts wrote: »

You're equating the two here


And you seem to be focusing on the wrong point. The issue is not whether he will or will not act on the advice, it is that he should be contacting the GUI and his committee and then, if needs be, contact captains from other clubs.

Asking unknown and unverified members of an public internet forum how long a suspension should he dish out for a rules breach is just not the way to go.

No Im not. Im stating that the OP is entitled to solicit advice from wherever he sees fit. Obviously he will assign different weight to each advice based on his opinion of the source, again, exactly the same way we all do every day on here.

He is asking for advice, not asking what the punishment should be, there is a big difference. This is the point I was making to AJ. People seem to be assuming that he will just act on what people say here, which to me is a bizarre assumption, as noone else responds to advice that way.

Im confused as to what you see the purpose of this forum to be since you seem to have a problem with us being unknown and unverified?
Why do you ask for advice on here so?

GreeBo

ajcurry123 wrote: »

Don't be embarrassed



Who is making this bizarre assumption?
I threw in a joke about this, it wasn't an assumption, it was a joke.
I don't see anyone else assuming that he is going to go back and say this...

You used that joke to back up your argument, suddenly "lots of posters are making the (bizarre) assumption".... Really? Where are they.

Well the crux of the argument against it seems to be that he shouldnt be asking unknown people what to do. My counter to that is that he is not asking what to do, he is asking for advice. I cant see any problem with someone asking for advice, unless people believe that he will blindly follow the advice received on here. If thats not the concern, then what is?

ajcurry123 wrote: »

I just think it's a very grey area.
We don't know that the OP is a Captain at all, I doubt it very much and I think you have you're own doubts too.
What if he is just a trouble maker, a trouble maker who may be aware that two lads in his club are under review, now they could easily be under review for a much lesser offence, the fact that the OP is free to put it out there that two members have admitted guilt to blatant cheating could be muck that sticks to these people.

Indeed we dont, which is why we dont allow people to name names in these situations.
So your concerns, while worthy, are invalid for this thread. no club or person has been named so there is no damage to anyones reputation.

SnowDrifts

GreeBo wrote: »

No Im not. Im stating that the OP is entitled to solicit advice from wherever he sees fit. Obviously he will assign different weight to each advice based on his opinion of the source, again, exactly the same way we all do every day on here.

He is asking for advice, not asking what the punishment should be, there is a big difference. This is the point I was making to AJ. People seem to be assuming that he will just act on what people say here, which to me is a bizarre assumption, as noone else responds to advice that way.

Im confused as to what you see the purpose of this forum to be since you seem to have a problem with us being unknown and unverified?
Why do you ask for advice on here so?

It's the exact same as not being allowed to ask for legal advice over in the legal forum - you see a solicitor.

It's the exact same as not being allowed to ask for medical advice over in the medicine forum - you see a doctor.

I'm not writing off the opinions and experience of all posters on this forum, but a club captain should not be coming on here seeking advice as to how long to suspend a member. He consults the GUI, his committee and as a last resort, other captains. Not a online golf forum.

GreeBo

SnowDrifts wrote: »

It's the exact same as not being allowed to ask for legal advice over in the legal forum - you see a solicitor.

It's the exact same as not being allowed to ask for medical advice over in the medicine forum - you see a doctor.

With respect, its completely different from those two scenarios.
Those rules exist to prevent severe difficulties for boards.ie should someone act on advice (legal or medical) and incur damages.
They are regulated professions where indeed verified credentials are required before you can give advice.

I think you will have to concede that that advice on the *length* of a ban is in no way similar to the above.

As I stated previously, if the OP was looking for advice about what constituted cheating/breach of rules etc then perhaps this thread would have been moderated differently.

Maybe you were right hours ago, we will have to agree to disagree on this.

SnowDrifts

You're right - they are not similar to the above - I was merely trying to highlight that for the OP's situation, there are several traditional avenues that should be taken and that looking for advice on here is not the way to go. I don't believe that the GUI was contacted. I also doubt the OP is a captain of a club at all.

But yes, agree to disagree.

DuckSlice

finally!

Arsenium

Squek..how did your committee meeting go? Did you take on board the advice given out here? I'd be interested to hear.....

For Paws

2 other things occur (on mature consideration) to me ;

The alleged offenders in question could well be members of boards & of this forum, reading & responding to this thread.

Members of this forum are not routinely asked their opinion on the lengths of bans, and are therefore not in the ideal position to render informed advice.

Deise Vu

It is a sad sign of the times that people seem more concerned with the legal implications of possible slander rather than the substantive issue: blatant outright cheating. As has been pointed out earlier, the alleged offence is not putting down an incorrect score on one hole or nudging a ball in a bad lie in a spur of the moment, it is a pre-conceived, calculated plan to deceive. If you want to get legal, that is an altogether bigger offence. This particualr offence is also far easier to prove than an incorrect score. The signer didn't play on his own so someone else can verify whether the signee was there or not. Thats the signer bang to rights. The signee can claim it was done without his knowledge. Good luck with claiming that in a court of law, especially if he turned up for the Presidents day knowing he hadn't submitted enough qualifying cards.

All that needs to happen is to hold the meeting and ask the members in question have they any defence. As there is likely no defence, their position in the club is completely untenable, you could not trust anything they would hand in, therefore a permanent ban is the only logical outcome.

I would consider mitigation if there was an abject apology and if they were young and stupid and on the practical grounds that the ultimate sanction might mean anyone else in a similar situation with deep pockets might just try and fight it. But I would be absolute in letting them know that it was a life ban with mitigation. The offence goes to the heart of the game: the honesty of the participants.

GreeBo

Deise Vu wrote: »

It is a sad sign of the times that people seem more concerned with the legal implications of possible slander rather than the substantive issue: blatant outright cheating. As has been pointed out earlier, the alleged offence is not putting down an incorrect score on one hole or nudging a ball in a bad lie in a spur of the moment, it is a pre-conceived, calculated plan to deceive. If you want to get legal, that is an altogether bigger offence. This particualr offence is also far easier to prove than an incorrect score. The signer didn't play on his own so someone else can verify whether the signee was there or not. Thats the signer bang to rights. The signee can claim it was done without his knowledge. Good luck with claiming that in a court of law, especially if he turned up for the Presidents day knowing he hadn't submitted enough qualifying cards.

All that needs to happen is to hold the meeting and ask the members in question have they any defence. As there is likely no defence, their position in the club is completely untenable, you could not trust anything they would hand in, therefore a permanent ban is the only logical outcome.

I would consider mitigation if there was an abject apology and if they were young and stupid and on the practical grounds that the ultimate sanction might mean anyone else in a similar situation with deep pockets might just try and fight it. But I would be absolute in letting them know that it was a life ban with mitigation. The offence goes to the heart of the game: the honesty of the participants.

That would be a concern for me too...how do you ever trust these guys again?

You could stipulate that they never play with each other again but still I think it would be hard for them (rightly so) to get rid of the smell of cheating.

Almaviva

GreeBo wrote: »

That would be a concern for me too...how do you ever trust these guys again?

You cant. Once a cheater, always a cheater.

realgolfgeek

Almaviva wrote: »

You cant. Once a cheater, always a cheater.

I wouldn't agree with that, people (can) change

Dubl07

But golf is a game of trust. I'd never play with either of these lads again.

Ilik Urgee

I've played golf with a lad who was banned for not handing in cards and will do so again. The lad learned his lesson and felt dejected and ashamed on the golf course any time he met a fellow member.
Not saying these lads should be defended but people can change.

realgolfgeek

Dubl07 wrote: »

But golf is a game of trust. I'd never play with either of these lads again.

It is a game of trust.

I'd also be extremely cautious ... but at the same, if they admit, own up and apologise, take the punishment (whatever it may be), then life goes on.
If it happens a 2nd time, well..that's a different story.

we all f*ck up at some stage ... well, I have anyway

Dubl07

People can change behaviour in the short term under keen observation but their fundamental ethos may not. Some have theorised that these are juniors. If that's the case I'd penalise their parents with a three-month ban. If they're older, penalising their sponsors for membership wouldn't be out of the question if I had an input into the process.

Jimdagym

Dubl07 wrote: »

People can change behaviour in the short term under keen observation but their fundamental ethos may not. Some have theorised that these are juniors. If that's the case I'd penalise their parents with a three-month ban. If they're older, penalising their sponsors for membership wouldn't be out of the question if I had an input into the process.

Now we are getting absurd. Penalising the parents? Get a grip.

realgolfgeek

Dubl07 wrote: »

People can change behaviour in the short term under keen observation but their fundamental ethos may not. Some have theorised that these are juniors. If that's the case I'd penalise their parents with a three-month ban. If they're older, penalising their sponsors for membership wouldn't be out of the question if I had an input into the process.

lol

Dubl07

Read my post. I said if they're junior members, penalise the parents as well. From whom do they learn self-entitled behaviour?

realgolfgeek

Dubl07 wrote: »

Read my post. I said if they're junior members, penalise the parents as well. From whom do they learn self-entitled behaviour?

I did read your post.
Penalising the parents for the juniors actions is the most absurd thing I've read on this forum, let alone this thread.

Ilik Urgee

Dubl07 wrote: »

Read my post. I said if they're junior members, penalise the parents as well. From whom do they learn self-entitled behaviour?

Would that not be defamation of character? You can't just go handing out bans willy-nilly in these cases.
How many juniors have you seen playing with their parents on course? Not many is my answer.