Opening of "No-Food" pubs pushed out again

Darn place were in now put us in the restaurant part and not near the TVs for the match

jesus a roar in a pub for the Liverpool goal how I missed that

Deleted User wrote: »

Celtic/Ra pub close by opened on Monday. They don't do food, and none of their customers seem to care about social distancing either. Couple of garda cars drove by on Monday afternoon and did nothing, watched them shut a pub in limerick on the news not long after. Why are they only shutting some pubs and leaving others open?

Manpower (or lack thereof) would be my guess.

There's a ferocious amount of toasted sandwiches being left uneaten.

Elmer Blooker wrote: »

I have heard that 'this is no ordinary virus' and it certainly must be when you cannot get it when a €9 meal is put in front of you. Who needs a vaccination when a €9 meal will do the trick?

I am still interested to hear of anybody's suggestions of what law they would put in place to differentiate between the 2 businesses. The meal one is out for 50+ years, I think it is quite clever.

ShooterSF wrote: »

It amazes me how hard the govt are trying to push the message of the importance of masks and it is still struggling to get through, but the message that a meal makes you invincible to the virus (one I haven't seen any politician suggest) seems to have got through to lots of people. Often the same ones that miss the mask message.

The meal does not make you invincible to the virus. :eek:


Its allows some business owners to act as restaurants to allow them to open in phase 2 of the reopening plan.
Pubs are in phase 3 and are not open yet, only restaurants are open, and restaurants serve food, and if you want a drink with your food, so be it.

Suckit wrote: »

But you must agree it is a fairly ridiculous rule/law.

I don't and plenty others seem to feel the same. I am sick to death of this feigned ignorance about it. Do people think they are looking smart by appearing to be dumb/ignorant? because it is backfiring big time.

rubadub wrote: »

I am still interested to hear of anybody's suggestions of what law they would put in place to differentiate between the 2 businesses. The meal one is out for 50+ years, I think it is quite clever.

There are meal requirements relating to children being allowed on pub premises which I also think are quite sensible.

I thought the phrase "eating is cheating" was widely known...

rubadub wrote: »

I don't and plenty others seem to feel the same. I am sick to death of this feigned ignorance about it. Do people think they are looking smart by appearing to be dumb/ignorant? because it is backfiring big time.

It is ridiculous.

Especially if you believe that eating a €9 sandwich over a 105 minute visit to a pub is somehow beating the eating is cheating bs..
Sick of the 'eating is cheating' being applied to this, it has very little to do with it.

Those that are intent on going out and getting bladdered in 105 minutes, will do so anyway. The pubs that are letting people in for longer than 105 minutes will do so anyway.
I am not an advocate for the pubs reopening, but if you are going to allow some of them to reopen because people can order a €9 'meal' and leave it sitting there in their desperation to get a pint, and not allow the others to open, then shut them all down.
Either take it seriously and do that, or do it half- heartedly arsed and allow some to open and some not to.

Eating is cheating is irrelevant imho.
I haven't been to a pub since January, and have no intention of going to one soon, but if I did fancy a pint, I wouldn't need to neck a shedload of them and hope a sandwich would help me stand straight and be less careless about the pandemic.

Ridiculous law/rule whatever it is.

ShooterSF wrote: »

Ok here is the issue though, assume you keep all pubs closed until we can open them all as you say. Now in that scenario are restaurants still closed? If not you are gonna have outcries from bars that can open as restaurants and the same members of public cracking "jokes" about how a few beers and a meal in a restaurant is fine but not if it has a bar counter. There is just no winning.

Yep, restaurants too.
I have witnessed more people drunk coming out of the restaurants than the pubs, as a result of the amount of drink that they have over the course of their meal.

But I am not suggesting that scenario.

I'm just of the opinion that one rule for some and another for the others is ridiculous.

Pubs that don't serve food can be made to 'behave' like a restaurant. If a punter starts getting too messy (in the 105 minutes) stop serving them. It's easier to see them now then ever. It's more acceptable to cut them off for obvious reasons.

There are many better ways to implement this rule than the way it is being done now.

rubadub wrote: »

fantastic :rolleyes: so can you answer the question, sounds like you can easily do it if you think the current laws are so ludicrous surely you can come up with better.


do you even know what "eating is cheating" means? not sure how you can say it has very little to do with it. I am starting to worry that people are really not feigning ignorance here... are people really that ignorant about the relationship between food & alcohol?!!

Do you think that the current method is the best way to go about this?
When lockdown happened it was a quick solution. They have had months now to come up with alternatives, I haven't really given it much thought to be honest.

How many drinks do you think that people are having in the 105 minutes, and how much food do you think they are eating that will help?
They are supposed to leave the premises then, which presumably would be before anyone started to show the effects of the alcohol that they just drank, unless it was large amounts very quickly.
Each pub/premises could be treated on an individual basis.

A strike system, get your sh*t together or you are suspended from opening for x amount of time.
It would allow all pubs to open, and as it would apply to restaurants too, they would have to also watch who they are serving.
assuming people are going from one pub to the other, then it is up to the public or appointed staff to monitor the people that are abusing it.
If they are going from pub to pub, (for the pubs that are at least adhering to the 105 minutes) then it is unlikely that they are eating in every place, they are just thinking of it as an entrance fee, so they also risk being barred.
It's not hard to come up with a system that would help prevent the rules being abused, especially if pubs wanted to stay open and possibly keep their licence.

I for one am well aware what eating is cheating means, but I do wonder if other people are feigning ignorance when they think it is being adhered to and helping, or if they are just living in a little bubble they like to call their special place.

rubadub wrote: »

seems to be a very clear and simple NO for both, no surprise there. Tiresome...

IF you had read the entire post you would see that I have replied to both. One I am pretty sure is not a question, but I have replied with my suggestions.
I made a conscious decision to start the previous post with a question, as I am aware there are many who just scan posts.
Still not answered mind you, must have gone back to the special place where that false sense of security must be surreal.

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Celtic/Ra pub close by opened on Monday. They don't do food, and none of their customers seem to care about social distancing either. Couple of garda cars drove by on Monday afternoon and did nothing, watched them shut a pub in limerick on the news not long after. Why are they only shutting some pubs and leaving others open?

Because its police by facebook and twitter now, local Garda told me they are under pressure to follow up on the curtain twitches complaining in social media. They have enough regular stuff to be getting on with as it is.

PTH2009 wrote: »

honestly cant see wet pubs opening on the 10th Aug

They will make up some BS reason for cause they're scared of a rise in numbers before the supposed return of schools. Pub owners should open up in protest if it happens

Yeah one gombeens protest lasted a few hours. A national hero he was.

stephenjmcd wrote: »

Well I've been in a well known Galway city venue for 4 or 5 hours tonight and they may as well just open as normal.

No requirement to have food, gardai came in and walked back out.

A general sense now that the whole food requirement is complete non sense

Has any health expert come out and explain the food thing

Its doesn't stop people getting drunk