Commonwealth. See it before its all gone.....

[Freddy K]

I am a regular lurker here, alas this time with a sad tale to tell.

Commonwealth, on Melbournes world famous Sandbelt (Doak , is about to go under the knife again, this time at the hands of one Tony Cashmore. Many here will know him from his work at Long Island, Kingswood and 13th Beach, amongst others. Some good, some woeful, much in between.

Commonwealth has 13 intact holes left after the dastardly deeds of Kevin Hartley & Co. in the early 1990's; works which were universally bemoaned and ruined the flow and fabric of much of the course. The loss of the 1st and 7th, replaced by two of the worst holes in Melbourne, are testimony to his fine talents. Its no suprised that he is no longer allowed through the gates.

Cashmore has unfortunately convinced the powers to be that the greens complexes laid down by Charles Lane some 70 years ago are no longer befitting of a course of the modern age, and two are to immediately be flattened out in the name of more pin postions (4 & 15). I assure you I am not making this up. Further redesign of greenside and fairway bunkering are also planned. some filled in, some enlarged, all in the name of progress, and nothing to do with any sort of restoration.

I understand from some members that these works were to be subject to membership consultation prior to implementation, however I hear today that they have started the works already (4th fairway). The members are rightly furious.

I highly recommend Commonwealth to you, but if you want to see the fine architecture that remains, you will need to be quick. The way things have transpired over the last year, much of whats left may be gone by years end. RIP.

[Chris Kane]

Freddy,

Where did you hear all this: Can you send me an email to kanes@tpg.com.au ?

Thanks.

[Rick Pohl]

I urge all CGC who can't physically tie themselves to the greens (if indeed that's possible) to get out to the course ASAP and start snapping shots of any greens earmarked for change.

If we can't stop it now, we at least need photographic evidence of what was destroyed when sense finally prevails and the greens restored - whenever that may be.

[Mike Clayton]

Shane ,Chris
How can this be happening?
Surely these people have figured it out by now.
It is so depressing to have watched what has happened to one of the best courses in the country.
Not even close any more -but there are still 13 terrific holes left.
Freddie is exactly right though. The flow is gone and the bad work is spread throughout the course so it is a constant reminder.

[Shane Gurnett]

It is a sad day indeed when you walk up the fairway of one of you favourite holes and discover some new work that as a complete surprise.

Stay tuned for further details.

[Chris Kane]

Shane,

When you have taken those pics, can you post them here?  If you can't work out how, email them to me and I'll put them up.

[Justin_Ryan]

This is just terrible news for all those members at CGC, and hopefully steps can be taken to halt any further destruction before it is too late.  One has to wonder about a consulting architect, who confronted by 13 great or very good golf holes and 5 abominable, gets to work on the 13 that don't need touching.  Didn't he notice the atrocious bunkering on the newer holes, including three fairway bunkers where shots are blocked by ti-tree, or is the brief to continue the destruction a la what happened at Huntingdale, in the name of continuity.  In another thread Chris Kane accused me of being on drugs when I suggested seeking heritage listing for the remaining original green complexes, but the only people on drugs are those that think these changes are a good idea.  I think it is time for the boys at CGC to move into overdrive, and install a committee committed to restoring the course back to its rightful place in the upper echelon of Australian golf before these guys manage to finish the place off completely.

[Chris Kane]

Justin,

Slightly harsh to describe those five holes as abominable - surely 6 and 10 aren't thatbad?  They're not up to the standard of the rest of the course, but I wouldn't describe them as awful, they're just very average holes for a sandbelt course.

[Shane Gurnett]

Justin, I agree with you, but as Chris said maybe you have been a little harsh on the 10th (I agree the 6 is crap except for the green).

What Cashmore was presented with here was a unique opportunity to further his own cause by telling the powers to be just what a mess they made last time (the 1st, 7th and 12 are the prime examples), and offering a solution to fix the problem. If only he had the balls to tell it like it is.

I hope he is reading this, because he needs to understand the depth of resentment at the Club to what is being proposed.

[Justin_Ryan]

Shane/Chris

6 is that bad.  You are right though on the 10th, it isn't that bad a hole, but suffers from some abominably bad bunkering, with the bunker short left of the green being about half an inch deep from memory.  

The committee is certainly showing a strange set of priorities in choosing this path.  I would have thought the first priority before making major changes, and one which would get the support of all the members, would be to improve the standard of the fairways.  They are regarded by many as the worst on the sandbelt, and by a wide margin.  Secondly, I cannot understand the motivation for ignoring the obvious garbage on the aforementioned holes, and ripping into the remaining good holes.  Shane is right, Cashmore could attain hero status by improving these holes (you would really have to be trying hard to make them worse) and leaving the rest alone.  Knowing he is capable of some very good work, and confronted with some absolutely dreadful bunkering on these holes, I can only conclude that his brief from CGC was to leave these as is and move onto the rest of the course.  Perhaps they are still suffering from the delusion that they need to make changes in the hope of obtaining a major event.  Or perhaps they just want to pump up the ACR to boost their egos.  Whatever the reason is, it is absolutely, certainly wrong.

I also fear that with new course development looking very much like it will dry up over the next few years, that the many underoccupied architects will be making their way around the country convincing clubs that they need to make pointless changes.  As a friend pointed out to me, what makes today's architect the guru and those of past years the dunces.  Unfortunately, the powers that be at CGC seem to have fallen for it, and as a result, the course appears set to resume its inexorably downward slide in the hearts and minds of Australian golf afficionados.

[Danny Goss]

I cant understand how Cashmore can be let loose without members agreeing to any alterations. Surely any Club is "owned" by the members and they have to have the final say.
One of the difficluties I have faced at Warragul is that although we have a Master Plan which has been adopted by teh membership, the Board has agreed that any "major" alterations will be put before members before being carried out.
I am sure our Board would be voted out of office if we went against that members directive.
How can members at Commonwealth just let a committee alter something as basic or as integral to the place as golf holes without seeking members support? Sounds to me like they fear they would not get that support.
"Better to ask for forgiveness than permission!" I can hear them saying.

[Chris Kane]

Justin,

I think that 6 would be ok if they cut down every tree that's in play (about 200,000 exotic trees).  Both 6 and 13 would be wonderful if the trees between the fairways were removed where the joint bunkering currently resides, leaving a communal fairway.

If Commonwealth wanted to host a major event, the best course of action would be to buy all the houses on the western boundary of the property - space for corporate tents etc. is the thing holding CGC back in terms of professional tournaments, not really the course itself.  Anyway, what professional tournaments in Australia are "up for grabs"?

[Shane Gurnett]

6 could be improved in about two hours, with a couple of chainsaws and a shovel. Inappropriate bunkering, in the treelines, hurts the hole. Its not a patch on what used to be there, but it could easily be improved.

If they cut down every non native tree tomorrow, the place would improve out of sight (but it wont happen of course)

Regardless of what is done, a major tournament is out of the question due to the restrictions of the site. Until the adjoining Pioneer land is filled, there just is not room.

[Paul Daley]

This whole thread is a shock to the system: in more ways than one. I have just finished writing a piece for my new book on the green complexes at Commonwealth, and now I find my labour of love is out of date before being returned from the printing press. Not happy Jan!

Six is a shocker, ten is remarkably unremarkable. Yes, best to fix the woeful 1st and 7th holes before dabbling with additional work.

The fifteenth may be in the top-half dozen exciting greens in our land: to flatten it is reprehensible.

[Mike Clayton]

The problem with members voting is that most don't understand the issues or the subject.
We are about to 'do' the first 4 on the North at Peninsula and I suspect if the members were voting they would be split .
I know the holes will be terrific but it is awfully hard to convince the majority who don't really care so long as the holes are in good condition and they 'feel' nice.
The quality of the architecture is almost irrelevant.
Architects should ,however, be asked to face the membership to explain themselves and there needs to be enough with the knowledge to call architects on any salesmanship crap they may come up with.

Danny
If there was a vote on the 5th at Warragul I would bet at least 30% would be saying it is a good hole because it is so 'challenging'.
After all it has produced all those great players.

[Mike_Duffy]

Now that is just what I need for a Monday morning, more bad news. I'm horrified. Tell me this is a bad dream.

The members MUST have a say in what occurs to THEIR course.

So years ago I challanged the committee at my club regarding alterations taking place at the time. I was told that the committee "has the absolute right to manage the club as they see fit without interference from the membership".

Well those days have gone.  I hope the members at CGC have the balls to get a petition calling for a Special Meeting to discuss the proposed changes.

There is simply far too much of this crap being carried out by some Melbourne golf clubs at the present time, under the guise of "Modernisation".

As I've said many times before, Restoration - not redesign - is all that is required for the priceless gems of Melbourne's Sandbelt.

[NicP]

Firstly ley me say that I am outraged that I am yet again posting on the downfall of one of our great golf courses.

Having been lucky enough to have grown up in the heart of the Sandbelt (member at Southern until I was 16 then at Victoria) and having a OK game, I have had the oppurtunity to play all of our great, and not so great, courses in some form or another. I would say most under some form of "tournament" condition. In that ten or so years I have been "on the Sandbelt" I have seen much change and development some good and some very bad.

The good. Anyone walking into Victoria 10 years ago would have walked away very dissapointed. As we have posted on this site, VGC has improved out of sight due to Mike and his teams dedication to "restoration". No one more than Mike will tell you that his inspiration for Vic was sourced from an aerial that used to hang in the old downstairs bar from the 1930's. Mike's skill has been to take the photo and put it in the ground. There is still much work to be done and I hope Mike can remain patient enough to work with the Board until the entire course is where it should be.

Kingston Heath. I was lucky enough to work on the ground staff their for 3 months a few summers back in between Uni semesters. In the Office at the shed's are some of the best photos and plans you could ever want to see. I could go on about KHGC and it's layout etc. but this post is about Comm.

Commenwealth has the foundations to be, in my opinion, equal with KHGC as No.2 next to RMGC, however the way it is going it will end up with Huntingdale well and truly behind places like Woodlands, Cranbourne and up and comers like Ranfurlie. The holes left from a previous generation are as good as golf gets. Full of stratergy, options and excitment and the greens!!

The latest destruction of CGC probably spells the end of the place as a true contender for being in the Top 5 in Melbourne. I for one will hopefully get out there before to much work is done to experience a couple of the greens for the last time.

But what to do about all this? It is OK for people to say "Let the members vote on it" but what outcome do you expect from a group of members who put the board in?? Also, from my experience the % of voters is small and a board can "manipulate" the result. Maybe a check of the constitution is required. Can a petition of 100 sig's force an EGM like we are seeing at Carlton Football Club? The objecting force need to organise themselves and fight a united and public case to get the current board to 1) Change their mind or 2) Force the board out. Whatever it's going to be the fight will be tough and ugly but the course will be the winner. Don't worry about be "kicked out" of the club, there is to much legislation around these days for clubs to act like cowboys in relation to it's membership.

The overall solution to problems of this nature is to re-structure the way golf clubs are administered. The Board or Committe should stick to running dinners and social functions - Captain included. The course should be left to the Super and Consultant to implement a well documented and public "Master Plan" which should be followed to the letter and not changed everytime a new board is voted in.

Board members of our best courses must realise that they owe the game and their clubs much more than they realise. A final point. How many of us try to fix the plumbing when something goes wrong at home? Some do with disasterous results. The smart ones call in the plumber and the problem is fixed with no more headaches. So why then do we as members let Lawyers, Doctors etc. with no Golf Architecture experience come in and make decisions that effect our classic courses??

A note to the Board members at CGC. Your actions are being watched and monitored and you will be made accountable, it may take time but your blatant destruction of the course will not be sweept under the carpet. I urge all GCA posters and lurkers to get behind the members at CGC to fight this very disturbing development.

[Shane Gurnett]

Cashmore can make a hero of himself here. I hope he does the right thing.

[Matt_Cohn]

I'm still new to Commonwealth - I've played there twice. I don't necessarily agree with the consensus opinions about each hole, but overall, I strongly agree with what's being written here:

-Removing trees should be the club's first priority.

-Flattening greens is a terrible idea.

-The calls for action in this post are justified.

What are the possibilities that Cashmore will do a good job? Is there a chance that he might make the changes that need to be made, and not mess things up? The list of changes so far sounds dubious but the idea that he'll do a good job is worth putting out there...right?

[Peter Goss]

I'll add my voice to the outrage. Is there a published plan of what is currently underway and how public is the document? Is there a possibility of a legal injunction to stop progressive destruction ("enhancement") if the members are not fully aware of what is being done? Are any journos going to reprot this fiasco?

[Shane Gurnett]

Matt, appreciate your point of view, however whether or not Cashmore does a good job is not the point. Not even close. You can see by the comments of others (and there are many) that the greens in question, particularly the 15th is world class and needs no work. Certainly doen't need to be flattened. The issue is all about leaving well enough alone and resisting the temptation to tamper with things that are fine. Other matters are more pressing (undoing the disasters of the past) which are more important. If a fee has to be justified, then do it that way.

Peter, there has been nothing tabled other than a list of holes and broad statements. A detailed plan of each change would at least have given the members the opportunity for comment.

Shane

[Justin_Ryan]

NicP
You are spot on in your comparison with KH.  CGC arguably has the better holes and green complexes, but until they cut down all the trees and shrubs, which would restore the vistas and improve the fairways, they won't be within coo-ee.  The difference in approaches taken by these two clubs couldn't be starker, along with the outcomes.  The comparison with Huntingdale is apt.

Matt
If it was a brand new course, I would say that the odds of Cashmore doing a good job would be high, of all the new courses built in Victoria over the past ten years or so, I've enjoyed his more than others (of course, I'm still waiting for Mike to invite me to Ranfurlie).  His record on existing courses though is poor, with the reviews of his work at Kingswood and Long Island not positive, and I believe there was an involvement at Yarra Yarra that didn't pan out as well.  Of course, it could have been worse, with Hartley or TWP called in, but it is puzzling that they didn't seek out a high profile designer with a solid track record working on classic courses.  Of course, there is arguably only one of these in Australia, so the search obviously should have been international.  

I wouldn't hold out much hope of tree removal either, with the website boasting that the "extensive tree planting programme continues".  And Shane is right, you're not going to improve on the 15th green, or the other 12, they should just leave the bloody things alone.  You read on the website about Charles Lane, stripped to the waist, digging the bunkers himself, and it just drives home the total lack of respect by those in charge for what they have.  Get that heritage listing boys.  And someone needs to be out there collecting signatures to call an EGM and get these clowns turfed before it is too late.  

[NicP]

Buttinsky,

              I am NOT a member of CGC, however I can't see how that has any bearing on my feelings towards the recent developments or my ability, or right, to voice those feelings publicaly.

As I indicated in my previous post, Boards and Committee's can no longer take the approach that whatever happens inside there cylone fences is soley their business. They have a responsability to the game and it's traditions. They are merely transitional custodians of the course. We as golfers, and lovers of the game and it's magnificant traditions, must act as auditors of the Boards, Committes and ruling bodies that are there not for their own cause but for the betterment of the game and the courses that we play on.

So I call on all golfers, memebrs of CGC or not, to stand up and make their feelings known, so that we are not the last generation to be intrigued and seduced by classical architecture at its best.

[NicP]

Buttinsky,

              As far as the anonymous posts are concerend although they are not ideal, most of the Melbourne guys know each other after our outing at Ranfurlie, your contribution to the discussion is valuable - so post under whatever you please.

I understand your point regrading interference and it does have some validity. However certain clubs and institutions in society have a much greater role to play than just servicing their own members and causes. The Board at CGC are happy to sprout loudly about there storied history, and so they should but they owe their club to the founding fathers who worked so hard to form and maintain the club in much more difficult times than we now face.

Clubs like Commenwealth are not ordinary clubs or courses. CGC is a vital member of probably the most unique group of clubs and courses in the world. The decisions made there go right to the fabric of what Sandbelt golf and I would say golf in general is all about. The Board owe the game and their course much more than they could ever imagine.

Regarding your "house" analogy. Why do certain homes become "Heritage Listed"? So they cannot be touched and why... because society has deemed that these houses are integral to the fabric of society. In my opinion CGC is a vital part of the sandbelt fabric and needs to be protected.  

[Matt_Cohn]

Shane,

I didn't mean to imply that Cashmore should be out there digging up #15!!! Here is what I meant by my post: is it possible that if these changes go ahead, we will look back one day and say "No, the changes didn't need to be made...but at least Cashmore did a decent job" as opposed to "Not only were they bad ideas, but Cashmore did a completely incompetent job of carrying them out."

Also, there are some changes that should be made to the course, the trees being the best example. Is it possible that Cashmore will competently carry out some of the changes that should be made? - even if they're in addition to changes that undoubtedly shouldn't.

I hope you see where I'm coming from here. I know that good job vs. bad job is not the point. But once they stick a shovel in your golf course, I think it becomes a very important point!