Time to break away from England Golf ?

[doublebogey7]

England Golf are not "the association of existing golfers with handicaps"...they are the governing body of the sport of amateur golf in England, and as such their remit goes way beyond solely representing the interests of the club golfer. They didn't just have a responsibility to the clubs and club members, they have a responsibility towards ALL golfers and the wider sport and, at the time of iGolfs implementation, the number of "independent golfers" (estimated around 2.3 million) vastly exceeded the number of "club golfers" in England (approx. 647,000 in Feb 2021).

To suggest that England Golf should have only been considering the needs of "club handicap golfers" is simply wrong, and for them to have done so, would have been a dereliction of their duty to the wider sport.

As for whether England Golf should have stood by and let the R&A implement their own scheme....what a potential waste of income that would have been...46,000 current IGolf members, each paying £46 a year...just over £2.1 million, tossed away into the pockets of the R&A instead of their own....now that would have been a disservice to golf.

Not forgetting the marketing value of those 46k

 

[federalexpress]

Not perhaps directly pertinent to the discussion, but I have never forgiven England Golf for its utterly supine representation of our sport during Covid. Even the risk averse Sturgeon had Scots playing golf quicker than us.

By a country mile, the single biggest campaign action was implemented by an individual golfer, the petition to parliament to not ban golf, which I recall was the fastest growing online petition ever.

With an open goal presented to them by someone else, all EG needed to do was grab their opportunity. Instead, the debate that happened was hijacked by any number of other totally non related sports where exemption from a ban would have been a lot more marginal than golf. Other than referencing golf in the introduction, golf was then barely mentioned again.

My opinion, expressed to EG in a letter were that they were either clueless about lobbying- so get some professionals onboard to do it- or more likely they didn't want to rock the boat because their CEO had half an eye on his honours gong....

 

[D-S]

Not perhaps directly pertinent to the discussion, but I have never forgiven England Golf for its utterly supine representation of our sport during Covid. Even the risk averse Sturgeon had Scots playing golf quicker than us.

By a country mile, the single biggest campaign action was implemented by an individual golfer, the petition to parliament to not ban golf, which I recall was the fastest growing online petition ever.

With an open goal presented to them by someone else, all EG needed to do was grab their opportunity. Instead, the debate that happened was hijacked by any number of other totally non related sports where exemption from a ban would have been a lot more marginal than golf. Other than referencing golf in the introduction, golf was then barely mentioned again.

My opinion, expressed to EG in a letter were that they were either clueless about lobbying- so get some professionals onboard to do it- or more likely they didn't want to rock the boat because their CEO had half an eye on his honours gong....

But in hindsight not being allowed to touch rakes or pins but still being allowed to use the door handle to access the clubhouse or toilet seems such a sensible precaution.

If only there had been something like hand sanitiser available to clean your hands after touching a rake or pin.

 

[rulefan]

But in hindsight not being allowed to touch rakes or pins but still being allowed to use the door handle to access the clubhouse or toilet

The former relate to the course (where golf is normally played) but the latter is not.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Not perhaps directly pertinent to the discussion, but I have never forgiven England Golf for its utterly supine representation of our sport during Covid. Even the risk averse Sturgeon had Scots playing golf quicker than us.

By a country mile, the single biggest campaign action was implemented by an individual golfer, the petition to parliament to not ban golf, which I recall was the fastest growing online petition ever.

With an open goal presented to them by someone else, all EG needed to do was grab their opportunity. Instead, the debate that happened was hijacked by any number of other totally non related sports where exemption from a ban would have been a lot more marginal than golf. Other than referencing golf in the introduction, golf was then barely mentioned again.

My opinion, expressed to EG in a letter were that they were either clueless about lobbying- so get some professionals onboard to do it- or more likely they didn't want to rock the boat because their CEO had half an eye on his honours gong....

We were very lucky as golfers to be able to play as much golf as we could compared many other sports who just stopped for a significant period of time - many other leagues didn’t get going again for at least 6 months

There were bigger priorities at the time

 

[D-S]

The former relate to the course (where golf is normally played) but the latter is not.

They both refer to regularly touched surfaces (actually rakes and bunkers a lot less frequently but hey ho) however we were allowed to do one but we were not to do the other, staggeringly inconsistent.

 

[clubchamp98]

We were told though that the virus could not survive outdoors !

 

[wjemather]

They both refer to regularly touched surfaces (actually rakes and bunkers a lot less frequently but hey ho) however we were allowed to do one but we were not to do the other, staggeringly inconsistent.

Only if you ignore the necessity of contacting those surfaces.

There is no absolute necessity to touch a flagstick or rake while playing golf. However, in most places, it's impossible to go to the toilet in any kind of sanitary fashion without touching multiple surfaces.

 

[IanM]

Must be a Forum record.

This thread has gone from whs, to toilet behaviour!

 

[D-S]

Only if you ignore the necessity of contacting those surfaces.

There is no absolute necessity to touch a flagstick or rake while playing golf. However, in most places, it's impossible to go to the toilet in any kind of sanitary fashion without touching multiple surfaces.

And advising people to use hand sanitiser in both situations would be the correct answer.
The risk, due to frequency of contact and indoors versus outdoors, was significantly higher on clubhouse and toilet doors but the use of one was banned one completely- ridiculous in hindsight.
Advising sanitising after contact would have been far better and ingrained better practice in all situations.

 

[rulefan]

And advising people to use hand sanitiser in both situations would be the correct answer.
The risk, due to frequency of contact and indoors versus outdoors, was significantly higher on clubhouse and toilet doors but the use of one was banned one completely- ridiculous in hindsight.
Advising sanitising after contact would have been far better and ingrained better practice in all situations.

Who would you blame for not giving the 'correct' answer?

 

[D-S]

Who would you blame for not giving the 'correct' answer?

The people who gave the wrong answer.

 

[federalexpress]

But in hindsight not being allowed to touch rakes or pins but still being allowed to use the door handle to access the clubhouse or toilet seems such a sensible precaution.

If only there had been something like hand sanitiser available to clean your hands after touching a rake or pin.

I recall when we used to wash post before opening it as we all cowered in fear. It was absurd. This virus was never going to be passed by a brief handling of a rake or a pin, outdoors. It was an airborne virus, and if indoors, more of a chance of catching it. Outdoors? Pretty much no chance.

 

[federalexpress]

We were very lucky as golfers to be able to play as much golf as we could compared many other sports who just stopped for a significant period of time - many other leagues didn’t get going again for at least 6 months

There were bigger priorities at the time

There was no science and I mean zero, that could justify stopping golf. I asked repeatedly for evidence and was given none because it didn't exist. Eventually even the government's scientists said risk was minimal but the government didn't listen. What other priorities existed at the time, existed independent of this very basic reality. To put it mildly, there are many priorities in the world but they don't require or justify the cessation of non related activities.

And to bring it back to the point, and in the interest of following the actual science, despite the clear absence of risk, EG, the topic in this thread, were supine about defending our sport and I personally will never forgive them for that.

 

[2blue]

Whilst I'm not sure what exactly EG was guilty of not doing, in arguing for the continuation of golf, I think that after Cheltenham had been allowed to go ahead then any other sport viewed as 'elitist', like tennis & golf, just had to be seen to be curtailed. Was no a problem in Scotland as it, largely, has a different view of golf.

 

[federalexpress]

Whilst I'm not sure what exactly EG was guilty of not doing, in arguing for the continuation of golf, I think that after Cheltenham had been allowed to go ahead then any other sport viewed as 'elitist', like tennis & golf, just had to be seen to be curtailed. Was no a problem in Scotland as it, largely, has a different view of golf.

Well for a start it was guilty of not making the case that golf is not actually especially elitist, outside a relatively small number of expensive, exclusive clubs. It needed to lobby to alter that perception which, as I think you correctly say, the London elite held of the game. They made basically zero effort to create public pressure, harnessing the millions who play the game. It was quite obvious that the route though the formal channels was going to be ignored. They needed to lobby professionally. I appreciate the EG probably lack suck skills, and the then new CEO was probably out of his depth, but as I wrote to them, you can hire such people. Why did they not think of a petition to parliament themselves? Why, when an inventive Scot took the initiative, did they not promote it heavily through the clubs? Why did they not at least grab control of the debate that had been forced, instead of letting every other sport, with no mass petition backing, take over?

Useless and supine and presumably we will see Jeremy Tomlinson CBE in due course.

PS As with lockdown itself, one could probably defend the first lockdown and all the restrictions on the basis of the sheer panic that prevailed. I don't think you could make that defence for subsequent lockdowns and curtailment of golf given what we had learned by then. It was anti science and, as you imply, more to do with political prejudice than anything else.

 

[2blue]

Well for a start it was guilty of not making the case that golf is not actually especially elitist, outside a relatively small number of expensive, exclusive clubs. It needed to lobby to alter that perception which, as I think you correctly say, the London elite held of the game. They made basically zero effort to create public pressure, harnessing the millions who play the game. It was quite obvious that the route though the formal channels was going to be ignored. They needed to lobby professionally. I appreciate the EG probably lack suck skills, and the then new CEO was probably out of his depth, but as I wrote to them, you can hire such people. Why did they not think of a petition to parliament themselves? Why, when an inventive Scot took the initiative, did they not promote it heavily through the clubs? Why did they not at least grab control of the debate that had been forced, instead of letting every other sport, with no mass petition backing, take over?

Useless and supine and presumably we will see Jeremy Tomlinson CBE in due course.

PS As with lockdown itself, one could probably defend the first lockdown and all the restrictions on the basis of the sheer panic that prevailed. I don't think you could make that defence for subsequent lockdowns and curtailment of golf given what we had learned by then. It was anti science and, as you imply, more to do with political prejudice than anything else.

Mmmmm.... I guess it could well vary country-wide but most folk I talk to would have golf as, still, a fairly elitist sport with tennis a little less so, I guess, as there are places to play without cost.
I certainly don't think that lobbying by EG would have made an iota of difference to joe-public's perception & could even of worsened it as they'd be seen to wishing to be treated as a special case. Can't help but think that your grudge is rather ill-founded.

 

[clubchamp98]

Mmmmm.... I guess it could well vary country-wide but most folk I talk to would have golf as, still, a fairly elitist sport with tennis a little less so, I guess, as there are places to play without cost.
I certainly don't think that lobbying by EG would have made an iota of difference to joe-public's perception & could even of worsened it as they'd be seen to wishing to be treated as a special case. Can't help but think that your grudge is rather ill-founded.

Agree as Joe Public only see the pros on the telly and comments about its £500+ a round and all have caddies.

You don’t see the local muni on the telly much.

I can’t see why golf should be treated any differently to other sport.
Yes nobody touches your equipment but a blanket ban favours nobody.

 

[Arthur Wedge]

There was no science and I mean zero, that could justify stopping golf. I asked repeatedly for evidence and was given none because it didn't exist. Eventually even the government's scientists said risk was minimal but the government didn't listen. What other priorities existed at the time, existed independent of this very basic reality. To put it mildly, there are many priorities in the world but they don't require or justify the cessation of non related activities.

And to bring it back to the point, and in the interest of following the actual science, despite the clear absence of risk, EG, the topic in this thread, were supine about defending our sport and I personally will never forgive them for that.

Keeping people alive was a bigger priority that someone being able to go and hit a golf ball

There were some who selfishly only could think of themselves during a very uncertain time in the world

It was not critical for people to be able to play golf

 

[Arthur Wedge]

Whilst I'm not sure what exactly EG was guilty of not doing, in arguing for the continuation of golf, I think that after Cheltenham had been allowed to go ahead then any other sport viewed as 'elitist', like tennis & golf, just had to be seen to be curtailed. Was no a problem in Scotland as it, largely, has a different view of golf.

Cheltenham was before lockdown