Balls banned on Bondi Beach

[reprise]

Warning : having fun is dangerous

Now you aren't even allowed to play beach volleyball there (how ironic is that?). The fine for breaching the no frisbees, no ball games by-law is $400.

Apparently, recreational activities conducted on the beach (like that exercise health authorities we all need more of) are interfering with the right of Botoxed Eastern suburbs matrons to inflict skin cancer on their collagened bodies.

I expect list and surfing will shortly join the list of banned activities so as to ensure that sun-worshippers are not subjected to stray saltwater splashes.

May the rays of the Sun reverse the effects of their expensive cosmetic surgery (and may the surfies have sudden attacks of clumsiness on their treks to and from the water).

 

[Drooper]

I have a friend who would not share your feelings.

She is (was) flight attendant with Qantas who lives in Bondi. One day, while at the beach, she was hit in the head by a football.

One serious neck injury later, she is no permanently grounded, he career at an end. Add to this a legacy of severe neck pain and restricted head movement.

 

[shemp]

No balls on the beach!? I think castration is too high a price to pay for a little sun. I'm going elsewhere!

 

[Skeptical Greg]

Warning : having fun is dangerous

Now you aren't even allowed to play beach volleyball there (how ironic is that?). The fine for breaching the no frisbees, no ball games by-law is $400.

..............................

Looks like Volley-Ballers have been breaking the law for some time now...

While ball sports and activities such as frisbee have been banned from Bondi and neighbouring beaches for some time, organised volleyball games have continued at the southern end of the beach without drama.

Perhaps they should seek legal recourse instead of crying in their sun screen..

 

[reprise]

Re: Re: Balls banned on Bondi Beach

Looks like Volley-Ballers have been breaking the law for some time now...

Perhaps they should seek legal recourse instead of crying in their sun screen..

Almost all of the weird and wonderful prohibitive by-laws relating to recreational activites which have been passed by councils in the past couple of years have been in response to increased personal injury litigation. If they ban any activity which might result in someone being injured, they minimise the risk of being sued for compensation. This keeps insurance premiums down (and the cost of public liability insurance has exploded in Australia in recent years) which keeps rates down, which pleases ratepayers.

The reason why this has become an issue now is because it's starting to get warm again and crowds are starting to flock to the beach again. We had a couple of warm days last week, and today it was 36°C here (96.8°F), and it's only the third week of Spring. From here on out, the beaches will be busy, and on weekends they will be packed.

Beaches have become something of a battleground in respect of public liability, and there's a very real fear that unless the public liability issue in this country is resolved very soon beaches as free recreational activity spaces will become a thing of the past. In a country where 83% of the population lives within 30 miles of the coast, this is a major issue.

For several years now the issue of patrolling beaches has simmered. Councils face a choice between meeting the cost of patrolling beaches (which is expensive) and hoping that by doing so limited injuries will occur, or closing them to the general public (thus limiting the number of people exposed to the general hazards which accompany beachgoing). Many councils employ only a few paid staff to patrol beaches, the majority of patrol work being done by voluntary surf life saving clubs. Following some extremely large compensation awards to people injured at beaches in recent years, many surf life saving clubs are understandably concerned about their legal liability in respect of such injuries - and those clubs certainly can't afford to insure themselves against that liability. Should the surf life saving clubs withdraw their services, councils will need to seriously consider restricting access to their beaches - a measure which is sure to provoke public outrage in Sydney at least.

 

[Samus]

I have a friend who would not share your feelings.

She is (was) flight attendant with Qantas who lives in Bondi. One day, while at the beach, she was hit in the head by a football.

One serious neck injury later, she is no permanently grounded, he career at an end. Add to this a legacy of severe neck pain and restricted head movement.

Is that one, isolated incident enough to stop everyone from playing with their balls at the beach? By your logic, baseball bats should be disallowed at parks because they might hurt someone.

While I sympathize with the situation your friend is now in, it's certainly not compelling evidence that beaches need to be ball-free.

 

[reprise]

Is that one, isolated incident enough to stop everyone from playing with their balls at the beach? By your logic, baseball bats should be disallowed at parks because they might hurt someone.

While I sympathize with the situation your friend is now in, it's certainly not compelling evidence that beaches need to be ball-free.

I certainly think that it's reasonable to limit games to a certain area of the beach. Yes, balls and frisbees will still stray outside of the designated area occasionally and injure people. But given that people are at THE BEACH already risking skin cancer, and risking spinal injury and drowning if they enter the water (Bondi is a surf beach with some pretty nasty rips), and risking treading on all sorts of foreign objects buried in the sand, I find a total ban ball and frisbee games ludicrous.

 

[Drooper]

Is that one, isolated incident enough to stop everyone from playing with their balls at the beach? By your logic, baseball bats should be disallowed at parks because they might hurt someone.

While I sympathize with the situation your friend is now in, it's certainly not compelling evidence that beaches need to be ball-free.

I think it is enough to suggest that some regulation is needed. Along with a little common sense, everyone should be able to enjoy one of the world's great urban beaches.

The point being that up until now there were no council by laws covering ball games. So that even if a group of yobs were annoying other beach users with a flying football, nothing could be done to stop them.

 

[Phil]

I certainly think that it's reasonable to limit games to a certain area of the beach. Yes, balls and frisbees will still stray outside of the designated area occasionally and injure people. But given that people are at THE BEACH already risking skin cancer, and risking spinal injury and drowning if they enter the water (Bondi is a surf beach with some pretty nasty rips), and risking treading on all sorts of foreign objects buried in the sand, I find a total ban ball and frisbee games ludicrous.

reprise, a little off topic, but wasn't there a big protest by surfers when the Olympic venue for beach volleyball was set up on Bondi in 2000? I always thought Bondi was a surfer's haven, and have dreamed of making a trip there some day.

Anyway, I agree with you about limiting areas for certain activities. Most of the best beaches in the States have areas where the volleyball courts are set up that are separate from everything else, or at least well defined as being specifically for volleyball. So that if you wander into the middle of a game and get hit, it's your own damn fault. But there will always be the idiots who are no good with the frisbee or a football running around and among the average beach goer who will cause injury. It's a shame all you guys have to suffer for it though.