Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

South County GC Closed

Options
1484951535456

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 319 ✭✭Gambino


    Russman wrote: »
    Does this person know they are the problem ?

    Anyway, lets say they get around the problem of this one person, which in fairness should be easy enough to do - I know I wouldn't want to be in a club where I knew the owner didn't want me there.
    I can't see how the owner can be stopped from doing it again. If he is on a committee that looks at applications and lets say he's outvoted, whats to stop him throwing the rattle out of the pram and saying "its my land and my club, I'll do what I f--king like" anyway, regardless of any "agreement" that might be in place ?

    I've a mental image of Richard Harris in The Field :) "Its my field"
    I have to assume he/she - or they - do know.

    The scenario you paint of a future situation is possible, but that is why an agreement on the precise procedure would be needed. What would stop him breaking it would be the loss of affiliation.


  • Registered Users Posts: 427 ✭✭one ill cat


    Gambino wrote: »
    I don't know who it is and I don't know if it is just one. However that seems to be the general whiff of what is doing the rounds and this was also said from the top table last night. There was an assumption that it centred on one prominent individual but I have also heard that being denied.

    However the presence of one, two or "some" current members seems to be the reason whay JK wasnt to start from scratch. Someone hinted earlier that there is some connection to the removal of the machinery the night the club closed. I know nothing about that.

    The idea that it is only one individual didn't come from the top table tbh. In fact the Captain openly said that Richard Kavanagh wouldn't name the person(s) when he spoke to the committees last week.

    I was at that committee meeting and can confirm that is the case. It happened just as it was told.


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,865 ✭✭✭Russman


    Seems to be at an impasse then, if the owners won't name the person(s) they won't let in. How is anyone to resolve it if they don't know who the issue is with ?

    The conspiracy theorist in me wonders if this person actually exists or is a ruse by the owners to ensure they get a new club of their own with a semi plausible justification for not using the existing SCGC vehicle.

    Or maybe, like every club, there's one or two committee members who are absolute d--kheads and everybody knows who they are.

    Wonder if all those types could be persuaded to join the one club far, far away...........


  • Registered Users Posts: 427 ✭✭one ill cat


    Also, for the record, as Peter said last night, the procedure for 'vetting' new members is a different matter altogether. All golf clubs have this process & there have been no objections to this that I've heard. There's no reason why there couldn't be a representative of the Kavanagh family on such a panel going forward.

    The sole issue is picking & choosing who from the existing membership who can remain as members. Don't forget that the club (SCGC) still exists & those who were members of this club the day the course closed remain as members today until/unless they instruct their committees to transfer their handicap to a new 'home' club. To 'ban' a person/people would mean expulsion from a club they're currently a member of purely because the landlord doesn't want them which is not allowed by the GUI.


  • Registered Users Posts: 319 ✭✭Gambino


    Also, for the record, as Peter said last night, the procedure for 'vetting' new members is a different matter altogether. All golf clubs have this process & there have been no objections to this that I've heard. There's no reason why there couldn't be a representative of the Kavanagh family on such a panel going forward.

    The sole issue is picking & choosing who from the existing membership who can remain as members. Don't forget that the club (SCGC) still exists & those who were members of this club the day the course closed remain as members today until/unless they instruct their committees to transfer their handicap to a new 'home' club. To 'ban' a person/people would mean expulsion from a club they're currently a member of purely because the landlord doesn't want them which is not allowed by the GUI.

    I understand all that which is why I said the departure would have to be voluntary. Of course it would help if the person or persons concerned knew they were in that situation. Giving JK blanket jurisdiction over existing members wood be against both GUI and basic fairness. If we misunderstood that last night then apologies but I was listening as intently as I could but it want always that easy to hear, or to follow.
    But I find it hard to believe that the "unwanted"members are unaware of who they are.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭Ding Ding


    I heard about a group of lads who went to spain on a golfing trip earlier in the year. The lad who was driving the bus crashed it into a wall. They dusted themselves down and hired another bus after paying the insurance excess. Then they had a discussion about whether to let the same guy have another go in the driving seat.
    They decided against it and went with a new driver and had a great trip.

    Now in SC, does anybody think it's wise to let the guys or their co-drivers who crashed the bus have another go. No, this would not be sensible and it would be best not to let them anywhere near the keys.

    So a clean sheet would seem to be a better option. Affiliation might take a little while but does this really matter so much. It might be possible that people's old handicap would stay valid until the new club is established. Even if not, sure members could still play comps in their own club and miss opens for a while. At the moment they are missing all golf in their old course.

    I think it's well beyond time to rid ourselves of the ghosts of the past, after all this has been given as the reason why many have already left in various ways.

    People need to realise they don't own the golf course. How would Ben Dunne react if people went to his gyms and presented him with a list of preconditions on how he was to run the place. 'and Ben, we'll also decide who's allowed into your gym'

    The scattering is well underway based on the significantly smaller turnout last night, hopefully some of this down to notice. Others might join it based on behaviour of captain.


  • Registered Users Posts: 19 cherryman


    Russman, You are the only one who sees the real picture and how it is likely to play out. Why would anyone join a course where at a whim a member could be told to ".F*** off my land and my course". Some of the contributors here are dreamers who think that once they get back there everything will be fine. If that is how they feel then they should go back and join the new club and maybe they can make it work , however I personally would not take such a risk.


  • Registered Users Posts: 427 ✭✭one ill cat


    Ding Ding wrote: »
    I heard about a group of lads who went to spain on a golfing trip earlier in the year. The lad who was driving the bus crashed it into a wall. They dusted themselves down and hired another bus after paying the insurance excess. Then they had a discussion about whether to let the same guy have another go in the driving seat.
    They decided against it and went with a new driver and had a great trip.

    Now in SC, does anybody think it's wise to let the guys or their co-drivers who crashed the bus have another go. No, this would not be sensible and it would be best not to let them anywhere near the keys.

    So a clean sheet would seem to be a better option. Affiliation might take a little while but does this really matter so much. It might be possible that people's old handicap would stay valid until the new club is established. Even if not, sure members could still play comps in their own club and miss opens for a while. At the moment they are missing all golf in their old course.

    I think it's well beyond time to rid ourselves of the ghosts of the past, after all this has been given as the reason why many have already left in various ways.

    People need to realise they don't own the golf course. How would Ben Dunne react if people went to his gyms and presented him with a list of preconditions on how he was to run the place. 'and Ben, we'll also decide who's allowed into your gym'

    The scattering is well underway based on the significantly smaller turnout last night, hopefully some of this down to notice. Others might join it based on behaviour of captain.

    Is your stupidly long story getting at the board or the committee?

    And for the record, not one person has stated that if they open their own club, they can't let in who they want. Perhaps, being the die hard SC fan that you claim to be, you could actually pay attention & stop going off on a tangent.


  • Registered Users Posts: 159 ✭✭carman2011


    As before we do not have the BRS system so please forward this email to as many SC members that you might have in your contact list.

    Yours in Golf
    Peter Burke
    Hon. Sec. Men's Committee

    email is here.....

    Dear member
    I have been contacted twice today by Mr Pat Kavanagh once this morning and again this evening. Mr Kavanagh told me that he and his Brother John do not want The South county golf club or it's committees to be organised at their facility.
    He also informed me that they have selected a committee for their new golf club. As you will be aware this runs contrary to everything promised or alluded to at last nights meeting. At this stage there is no option to return as a club to the facility and the Kavanagh brothers have terminated the discussion.
    The joint committee will call a meeting of members in the near future to decide on our options.
    Best regards
    Captain Michael Moore


    Just got the above 2 mins ago......


  • Registered Users Posts: 427 ✭✭one ill cat


    cherryman wrote: »
    Russman, You are the only one who sees the real picture and how it is likely to play out. Why would anyone join a course where at a whim a member could be told to ".F*** off my land and my course". Some of the contributors here are dreamers who think that once they get back there everything will be fine. If that is how they feel then they should go back and join the new club and maybe they can make it work , however I personally would not take such a risk.

    Agree completely. I really haven't seen anything in the last few days that would suggest there is any hope of this working going forward.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 159 ✭✭carman2011


    Given what was said by pk last night, and the email that has now just come out, I'm sure people can now start the see the sh1t the committee have had to put up with the last few weeks.


  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭Ding Ding


    cherryman wrote: »
    Russman, You are the only one who sees the real picture and how it is likely to play out. Why would anyone join a course where at a whim a member could be told to ".F*** off my land and my course". Some of the contributors here are dreamers who think that once they get back there everything will be fine. If that is how they feel then they should go back and join the new club and maybe they can make it work , however I personally would not take such a risk.
    Valid point, I think there's more risk with continuation of old setup, less with new. Kavanaghs are biz people, they realise that there are marketing issues around kerping ghosts of the past. They won't be going around turfing people out, that not what biz people do.

    My fear is that scattering has been so widespread since 1st citywest meeting that the remaining cohort is


  • Registered Users Posts: 78 ✭✭Ding Ding


    Ding Ding wrote: »
    I heard about a group of lads who went to spain on a golfing trip earlier in the year. The lad who was driving the bus crashed it into a wall. They dusted themselves down and hired another bus after paying the insurance excess. Then they had a discussion about whether to let the same guy have another go in the driving seat.
    They decided against it and went with a new driver and had a great trip.

    Now in SC, does anybody think it's wise to let the guys or their co-drivers who crashed the bus have another go. No, this would not be sensible and it would be best not to let them anywhere near the keys.

    So a clean sheet would seem to be a better option. Affiliation might take a little while but does this really matter so much. It might be possible that people's old handicap would stay valid until the new club is established. Even if not, sure members could still play comps in their own club and miss opens for a while. At the moment they are missing all golf in their old course.

    I think it's well beyond time to rid ourselves of the ghosts of the past, after all this has been given as the reason why many have already left in various ways.

    People need to realise they don't own the golf course. How would Ben Dunne react if people went to his gyms and presented him with a list of preconditions on how he was to run the place. 'and Ben, we'll also decide who's allowed into your gym'

    The scattering is well underway based on the significantly smaller turnout last night, hopefully some of this down to notice. Others might join it based on behaviour of captain.

    Is your stupidly long story getting at the board or the committee?

    And for the record, not one person has stated that if they open their own club, they can't let in who they want. Perhaps, being the die hard SC fan that you claim to be, you could actually pay attention & stop going off on a tangent.

    Committee a continuation of the board, don't you think captain was being directed by someone sitting close by. Sorry for length of story. Here's a shorter one - only a fool makes the same mistake twice!


  • Registered Users Posts: 17 lw3


    There are only 2 options re Captains email. Try and move club on mass to another course or disband the club.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭ArielAtom


    Game over. I hope the kavanaghs are happy pumping money into their be pay and play facility. Can't see it being open this time next year. It will cost them €500,000 plus to get it there and €10.00 green fees won't pay the bills. I hope the have lots of money in the mattress


  • Registered Users Posts: 19 cherryman


    From what happened last night and today we can now start to understand what the committee and the board have had to put up with over the past few years. I just do not understand how a group of volunteers could have put up with such behaviour for so long. I just hope the newly selected committee appreciate what they are facing.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭ArielAtom


    I'd love to know who is on the newly selected committee!!!!


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭ArielAtom


    If there is one!

    Well the mail says they have selected one. Note selected not elected. A new dictatorship beckons.


  • Registered Users Posts: 366 ✭✭sodbuster77


    ArielAtom wrote: »
    If there is one!

    Well the mail says they have selected one. Note selected not elected. A new dictatorship beckons.
    Pat and John must be the new committee.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭ArielAtom


    Pat and John must be the new committee.

    And Jimmy.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 366 ✭✭sodbuster77


    ArielAtom wrote: »
    Pat and John must be the new committee.

    And Jimmy.
    Ah yes The Troika


  • Registered Users Posts: 24 chuckieamc


    This is a great shame. I left the meeting early last night as I just decided I wasn't all that interested in continuing membership amid so much turmoil. But I did believe that something would probably be sorted out eventually. Would now seem like a lost cause after that email. Feel genuinely sorry for all involved and hope the members find new homes soon.
    Happy golfing, wherever everyone ends up...


  • Registered Users Posts: 427 ✭✭one ill cat


    Ding Ding wrote: »
    Committee a continuation of the board, don't you think captain was being directed by someone sitting close by. Sorry for length of story. Here's a shorter one - only a fool makes the same mistake twice!

    Given your speech last night, I think it's fair to say you're happy to see the committee go. However, fwiw the person you're referring to above couldn't actually make it to the committee meetings of the last few weeks. And they weren't at the meeting with Richard Kavanagh.

    EDIT: fwiw = for what it's worth
    As your account was only created to influence this thread, you may not be aware of normal 'forum abbreviations'.


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭ArielAtom


    Does anyone know who the newly hand picked committee will be? Serious question?


  • Registered Users Posts: 427 ✭✭one ill cat


    ArielAtom wrote: »
    Does anyone know who the newly hand picked committee will be? Serious question?

    I don't know yet, although golf club committees aren't secret committees so I imagine we'll soon know. Tbh, I'm not hugely interested either way but I'd imagine such details would be known soon enough.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11 Blue for Ever


    lw3 wrote: »
    There are only 2 options re Captains email. Try and move club on mass to another course or disband the club.

    I believe there a at least two good offers on the table from tier 1 clubs to move on mass. However a lot to be looked at here regarding available teetimes, retaining affiliation, cost, etc.


  • Registered Users Posts: 606 ✭✭✭Tin_Cup


    Just a quick query guys but as I was aware you couldn't have two clubs affiliated to the GUi playing from the same course. Just wondering if someone could confirm or deny ?


  • Registered Users Posts: 2,577 ✭✭✭ArielAtom


    Tin_Cup wrote: »
    Just a quick query guys but as I was aware you couldn't have two clubs affiliated to the GUi playing from the same course. Just wondering if someone could confirm or deny ?

    You can afaik have two clubs out of one course. Hibernian operate out of K club.


  • Registered Users Posts: 14 oscar555


    ArielAtom wrote: »
    You can afaik have two clubs out of one course. Hibernian operate out of K club.

    Isn't the arrangement at the KClub based on the fact that there are two courses at the KClub? One club, one course is the rule but there are exceptions allowed under certain circumstances - Kilternan at South County GC for example. In response to the recent post meeting submissions, the Kavanagh's will struggle to operate the club as a pay & play facility in the current climate. There are too many courses out there offering inexpensive golf so the attraction of 'cheaper' golf is not what it was 10 years ago. There is still a deal to be done here but there will need to be concessions on both sides.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 5,865 ✭✭✭Russman


    oscar555 wrote: »
    There is still a deal to be done here but there will need to be concessions on both sides.

    Quite possibly there is.
    But from an outsider's perspective, and with all due respect, I don't want to insult anyone, but realistically, who would touch SCGC with a barge pole now, given the history ? It seems IMO the existing membership pool (that haven't taken flight) would be the only market.

    If you're a non member thinking to join a club in the c€1k to €1.3k range, why would you go somewhere with a contrary landlord when you can pick from a myriad of member owned clubs within a 5 or 6 mile radius ?

    Even if a deal is reached, that whole situation is only waiting to blow up again when one of the landlords takes it into his head or has someone putting ideas into his head for him.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement