Mantis Toboggan wrote: » Over 70's have been told to cocoon. I doubt that will be lifted before golf resumes.
Just Saying wrote: » Its pretty clear and outlined on Gov.ie
thecomedian wrote: » Tell me what is the government’s position on the over 70s?
Mac_Lad71 wrote: » If golf club members wish to travel more than 5km to play golf that's up to them. It's not up to the GUI, individual golf clubs or other golfers to police this. It's the Gardai's job to police the country, so let them get on with. There's no law which says over 70's have to stay indoors. It's just a recommendation. How hard is it to understand this?
Blud wrote: » Question for you Greebo. Garden centres open the same day as golf courses. Are they only open to people within 5km? Genuine question, I dont know the answer. If I can travel 25km to a garden centre, then surely I can for golf too.
GreeBo wrote: » The GUI have no control over the current 5km law that exists within Ireland...why would they reference something that they have no control over? Whats the ambiguty? Do you think that if the GUI said 10Km that you could travel 10KM to play golf and ignore the current laws of the country?
GreeBo wrote: » Again you arent answering my question regarding what is the "big question for golfers over the past week"? What is it that the GUI could tell them that the government hasnt already?
Just Saying wrote: » That is absolutely correct.Many people will glance through it and see no reference to 5km or over 70s and assume that restrictions don't apply.
prawnsambo wrote: » I think you misread me, judging by your very first sentence. The rest of your post derived from that and although it was wonderfully written and fascinating in itself, it doesn't apply to my post. The GUI response to the question was wishy-washy imo.They just can't seem to bring themselves to actually quote the law.
GreeBo wrote: » How is the law in any way wishy-washy around this? If the GUI came out and said they restricted members from travelling more than 2KM would you obey it or would you defer to the government restrcitions? Equally if the GUI said 10KM, would you ignore the government and defer to the GUI? What if the GUI also said that you couldnt travel faster tham 10km/h to get there? I'm guessing you would ignore that one too. There is zero need for confusion on this one lads, you are all just looking for some magical excuse to play before the restrictions are lifted.
thecomedian wrote: » The GUI can only govern matters on golf. Travelling to and from a golf course is none of their business.
Carazy wrote: » The current restrictions are unprecedented and I would have thought that they would have at least got mentioned once in the protocol. The fact that they didn't and it has been a big question for golfers over the past week is disappointing. I think supplementary memo with a FAQ sheet would be welcomed before next week.
Carazy wrote: » The bit I'm missing is where are the current restrictions on travel mentioned in the protocol? I see the absence of such to be purposely ambiguous. The phase diagram is formatted similar to the government's phasing but lacks one of the foremost restrictions, that being of travel for non essential sport or social activities.
GreeBo wrote: » The GUI document clearly outlines a return to play protocol, in pretty fine detail to be honest. Which bit of "within 5km" is a grey area for you exactly? Between us all I reckon we can clear it up for you. The only question a member has is "do I live within 5km of the club?" Nothing else matters, if this answer to this is "no" then you cant play.
Carazy wrote: » The GUI's protocol could have been a great document with guidelines that it was either Black or White as to who was permitted to play golf on the 18th of May. The announcement was structured to include a Grey area. They purposely omitted the government details relating to distance travelled and age which has left members with the same questions as they had last week. The rest of the protocol is very much common sense and a lot of which was being undertaken by clubs prior to the closure order
GreeBo wrote: » Explain how its ridiculous though? You cant just rant away if you cant explain your reasoning! People are up in arms that the GUI hasnt reminded people to obey one specific law, even though that is not and has never been their remit. Why would the laws around covid-19 be any different to any other laws, like killing someone?
thecomedian wrote: » That’s a ridiculous post. Are you just trying to stir things up again??
GreeBo wrote: » But they arent chickening out! The government has them covered. Are golf clubs also chickening out ny not reminding you that killing people is bad?
prawnsambo wrote: » Yeah, don't disagree with you. You can park beside another car in Tesco's car park. But I would note that you are controlled entering and leaving the shop and there's a limit to how many people can be in it at one time. Which I suspect is the rationale behind the longer tee time intervals. Literally specifying the number of people who can be on the course at the same time. But the 5Km thing is (as Kevin Markham said), the elephant in the room that has everyone perplexed. And even that reply above is very wishy-washy. It's not government 'policy'. It's the actual law of the land.
CalamariFritti wrote: » And thats where I have an issue with it. So is distancing (government policy applicable to society generally). And it is deemed within your personal responsibility to ensure that happens. Like it is in the tesco car park for example or down at the beach car park where people do their 5km exercise. But apparently in the golf club it isn't. Here we have to control the numbers in the car park by by introducing mad group sizes and intervals. But on other equally relevant restrictions (5km for example) we chicken out.
downthemiddle wrote: » It is the legal equivalent of suing yourself.http://www.hassettconsidine.ie/published-articles/36-february-2010-sports-clubs-and-the-law.html The first important point to note is that a member of any sports club who voluntarily participates in club activities accepts the risks that are inherent in the sport or activity itself. There is no legal obligation on the club to provide insurance cover, so the responsibility of ensuring that cover is in place rests with the individual member. Therefore, if a member is registered on a team and participates in training or games then he or she does so at his or her own risk. The club rules/ constitution will contain sections on membership and in the vast majority of cases there will be a requirement that a subscription be paid annually in order to qualify as a full member. Although it is every club's ambition to ensure that all of its members are fully paid up members, this is often not the case. If an unregistered member is allowed onto club property, he or she will be a member of the Public. In the event of any such person sustaining an injury on club property, he or she will most likely identify the club trustees and executive as Defendants because in most cases they are the legal owners of the club property.
