[AldilaMan]

Originally Posted by TheDoc

Sounds like he was but on observation.

There are a few players in my club that usually always come in winners on team events and during winter with placing in. They are pretty much regarded as cheating ****s.

In recent years they get cut on observation every winter and then reverted back for the summer, when you regularly see their names.

I'm pretty confident they are cheats, as is pretty much everyone else.

And in team events all play together, conviniantly always winning prizes.

I always find it sad, ironic and pretty pathetic that when they get cut, they have a big dirty moan that its against the rules, and they shouldnt be getting cut with placing in.

Simply adding more weight to the fact they are cheating ****s.

Golf is a self improvement game, the biggest reward is your handicapp coming down.

Unfortunately the club is a bit weak when it comes to simply calling them out. I'd very much like for one of the commitee to play with these players on a regular basis to ensure they are on the straight and narrow.

Its seems to happen in every club, unfortunately it seems every club is just shy about calling them out : /

And we all know who they are

[Russman]

Originally Posted by Villain

Indeed, a player at my cub got cut a shot on yearly review, challenged it and got it back only to win the first Medal of the year and get cut a shot...

Nothing really wrong with that. He wins a singles, breaks CSS and gets cut, simples.
Yearly review cuts are not meant as a means of preventing someone from winning.

[Villain]

Well it depends, someone gets a cut and argues against it because they believe their handicapp was correct then goes and proves himself wrong looks rather silly imo

[Russman]

See, thats the argument i don't necessarily agree with. If his cut on yearly review was backed up with evidence from the previous year, then fair enough. The fact it was rescinded suggests it wasn't backed up when queried. I know according to the rule its based on the "opinion" of the handicap secretary, but in practice there usually as to be some evidence of performance. Its the cuts that are a result of bar talk that I disagree with or the whole notion of "....sure everyone knows he should be lower...." that I think are wrong.

It'd be different if it was a team even he won, I generally don't see a problem with singles results, they tend to take care of themselves IMO.

It also depends on the score he shot. Whether he won or lost depends on what everyone else shot on the day. I don't think it makes him look silly at all. Maybe he wanted to get lower of his own accord. I think it shows the way the system was intended to work. You shouldn't be cut to prevent winning, someone has to win each week.
Just my thoughts anyway

By the way I have no idea who the person is or of the club involved.

[Villain]

Well I won't get into here but let's just say a LOT of people would think his handicap should be much lower

[tayto lover]

Originally Posted by Villain

Well I won't get into here but let's just say a LOT of people would think his handicap should be much lower

Then why don't they cut him on general play ?

[Villain]

Most handicap committees don't think they can, especially based on the case that is been taken that this thread is about.

It's very hard to prove that someone is minding their handicap, golf and the handicap system is based on trust and that can be a big flaw, plus it can be hard to tell those people who appear to be minding their handicap from those who just have a bad reputation.

[Goldenjohn]

Any judgement on this case?

[elberry]

10 million??? Is this a windup?

[abff]

Originally Posted by elberry

10 million??? Is this a windup?

I wish it was.

Unfortunately, we live in an increasingly litigious society where law firms are prepared to make ludicrous claims on behalf of their clients in the hope of getting some nuisance money from the defendants' insurers.

And before anyone accuses me of libel, I'm not for a minute suggesting that that's what's happening in this case.

[tayto lover]

Have the judges gone on a years holiday. It's taking some time for them to decide this case.

[abff]

Originally Posted by tayto lover

Have the judges gone on a years holiday. It's taking some time for them to decide this case.

No idea what's causing the delay. I tried googling it and found a huge number of hits from around the world, but nothing about an outcome.

Incidentally, the plaintiff is representing himself in this case so my comment about law firms taking on such cases is clearly not applicable in this matter. Nor is it as prevalent (yet) in this country as in some other jurisdictions.

I'm just thankful that I have good neighbours as I know too many people who have suffered from the consequences of having over litigious neighbours and I guess there are just some people who feel much more strongly than most about certain matters and are prepared to pursue their convictions to the bitter end.

[Andy Dunne11]

this wont be the first time this fella has seen the inside of a court room. there is evidence on this on google if you look for it.

[Hibrasil]

Originally Posted by elberry

10 million??? Is this a windup?

I did promise to let those with an interest in the case know when the judgement was released....... the judgement was delivered this morning... it was lengthy... I understand.....almost 2 hours......The result was that the plaintiffs case was dismissed.............he did not prove his case......I understand also he told the judge that the judgement was wrong.......and...you've guessed it ...... my understanding is that costs were awarded to the Golf club and the Golfing Union of Ireland.....rumour has it that a number of cases were queuing up - against the GUI - if this case was successful......no doubt this will be a source of discussion for some time to come..

[MP62]

Originally Posted by Hibrasil

I did promise to let those with an interest in the case know when the judgement was released....... the judgement was delivered this morning... it was lengthy... I understand.....almost 2 hours......The result was that the plaintiffs case was dismissed.............he did not prove his case......I understand also he told the judge that the judgement was wrong.......and...you've guessed it ...... my understanding is that costs were awarded to the Golf club and the Golfing Union of Ireland.....rumour has it that a number of cases were queuing up - against the GUI - if this case was successful......no doubt this will be a source of discussion for some time to come..

It seems your . button is broken/stuck.