How can we take them seriously?

[Bruce]

I refer those of you with the December edition of Australian Golf Digest. p.75 has an ad for www.golfaccess.org.au

They have awarded their Division 3 Winner to a player who has signed an incorrect card.

No credibility.

[miro]

Bruce,

Whilst I cannot quite work out the incorrect score card bit I whole heartedly agree with you. For the AGU or any club to support this program is suicidal. It does nothing to promote club membership and it runs the risk of diluting the "morals" (wrong word but couldn't think of the right one) of the game by allowing palyers who are not fully aware of the rules or who don;t care to compete.

[markTHEblake]

It does nothing to promote club membership

Thats the common and misinformed perception of what the Golf Access program is about. If you read all of the info surrounding the launch of this program you will see its all about saving club membership in the long term.

Golf membership in australia is changing and declining. Social golf clubs are on the increase. This program is to encourage golfers who will *never* join a club to get involved in comps and get a handicap. Therefore after they get a taste of comeptitive golf they may be more likely to join a golf club.

Also remember that a golfer cannot join Golf Access if he has been a member of a Golf Club in the last 12 months.

[Bruce]

The error is circled for your convenience.

I was seriously looking at Golf Access as a means to get a hcp etc. without the very large outlay required for membership of even a minor club in Melbourne.

[miro]

It does nothing to promote club membership

Thats the common and misinformed perception of what the Golf Access program is about.  If you read all of the info surrounding the launch of this program you will see its all about saving club membership in the long term.

Blakey,

I understand the concept I just don't believe it is effective in any practical sense.

[Fishman Dan]

Golf Access is about getting non-members into golf. Punishing a social golfer with these so-called "rules" is against the spirit of the concept (but not the game!).

Yeah, sounds ridiculous to me too.

Then again, my favourite Rule (not!) 33-7 states that in exceptional circumstances the committee can overrule a DQ ;) :roll: