Dangerous cricketing still blocking Rye path

[Lee Scoresby]

Some weeks ago I drew attention on the EDF to the fact that during summer weekends the Kings-on-the-Rye (as it was) to Solomon's Passage pathway diagonally across the Rye is blockaded by not one but several cricket games.

Well, it still is - right at this moment, as I write. The good Councillor Hamvas's "enquiries" have evidently come to nothing at all.

And no, sporty-apologist fibbers, that certainly is NOT a soft tennis ball they're using.

I guess someone will have to be serious hurt, and then, THEN! we'll see municipal jobsworths scuttle-scuttle-scuttling to cover-up their inaction. Or, OR (how about this) Southwark officials could get off their chuffs NOW and stop this hazardous abuse of public space occurring. Most certainly arrange for these gentlemen to use the soon-to-open cricketing space - but if they refuse, the Met needs to get involved. Simple as. Safe movement in public spaces is a basic right.

Lee Scoresby

[jctg]

Is this a joke...?

[PeckhamRose]

No. Well if you get whacked I'll laugh, but no, it's not a joke. I agree with Lee.

[brapbrap]

People going out, being active and having a good time?

Heavens above. This needs stamping out immediately.

Compulsory afternoons in gastro pubs for all

[Local tramp]

Could we not keep the cricket going but just change the ball to a nice soft spongey one. That way people get to stay active and borons like lee don't have to be afraid of any physical sports going on that could cause them any harm

[PokerTime]

By cricket I'm guessing we are talking about adults occuping a large cricket sized space?

[titch juicy]

Could we keep the cricket going and make the ball a little harder so that m&?:ns like Lee that are too lazy to walk round, get hit and hurt due to their own stupidity and pigheadedness

[hpsaucey]

titch juicy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Could we keep the cricket going and make the ball

> a little harder so that m&?:ns like Lee that are

> too lazy to walk round, get hit and hurt due to

> their own stupidity and pigheadedness

Hang on - I've got a bit of sympathy here. The path across is well-established enough to be almost 'official'. Particularly useful for those with wheels - buggies,ETA: CYCLISTS, SCOOTERS, as well as those not watching the sky for cricket balls as they trawl along the path etc.

Maybe the cricketers should try and keep the play away from there - there's plenty of space after all. Does their play have to cross the path?

HP

[ianr]

From Southwark's Byelaws for pleasure grounds, public walks and open spaces, available at http://www.southwark.gov.uk/downloads/download/158/anti-social_behaviour:

Cricket

18. No person shall throw or strike a cricket ball with a bat except in a designated area for playing cricket.

They're presumably anxious to prevent public nuisance and injury to park users, and cautious of the risk of civil claims against them for damages that might arise from any accident. The people playing cricket might be similarly liable; the existence of the bye-law certainly wouldn't help their case. The fact that it's a public park doesn't in any case constitute a licence to do anything that risks harm to others. But of this case, I don't know any of the facts.

There's a long history of trying to find a balance between the sometimes opposing needs and rights of game players and bystanders and passers-by. See for example the attached, from Smith & Keenan's English Law: Text and Cases.

[Otta]

I have to agree with Lee on this, and think a couple of the responses are just shitty. Being hit my a cricket ball bloody hurts, and they simply shouldn't be playing on the path. There is nothing unreasonable about that, it's common bloody sense.

[Help-Ma-Boab]

Agree re cricket ball. The times I have seen them it's a tennis type ball they are using which doesn't really worry me. They may switch between balls or different groups use different balls.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I have to agree with Lee on this, and think a

> couple of the responses are just shitty. Being hit

> my a cricket ball bloody hurts, and they simply

> shouldn't be playing on the path. There is nothing

> unreasonable about that, it's common bloody sense.

[brapbrap]

They should be banned. The UN do quite rightly cite cricket as one of the top three causes of premature death in the West.

Given there are absolutely no other areas for anyone to walk in the whole of Dulwich means it's a matter of time before it turns into a bloodbath.

What this area needs is fewer people enjoying themselves and more buggie-pushing "yummy mummies".

[ianr]

brapbrap, your point is already well established in English law: see Rex v Haddock (Is it a free country?, reported in A P Herbert, Uncommon Law):

"The appellant made the general answer that this was a free country and a man can do what he likes if he does nobody any harm.... It cannot be too clearly understood that this is not a free country, and it will be an evil day for the legal profession when it is... and least of all may they do unusual actions "for fun". People must not do things for fun. There is no reference to fun in any Act of Parliament."

The full text does naughtily appear on the web from time to time.

[miga]

.

[Otta]

It really doesn't cost much to hire a cricket oval for a few hours, Belair park - ?70 for a half day, get a game together and you're looking at under ?4 each.

[brapbrap]

?4 is decent value if you're a high ranking board member at PWC, not so good if you book the place, two of your mates don't turn up and you're on jobseekers.

We need a slush fund to subsidise low earning cricket players with unreliable mates before everybody ends up dead.

If that doesn't work we could just build a couple of gastro pubs and a Jojo Maman Bebe there to stop them playing altogether. That's show them.

[Otta]

[brapbrap]

Great stuff. Thanks Otta.

If we're ever going to get to the bottom of this burning issue, though, what we need is some dull, pseudo-legal babble. Ianr, over to you.

[charlesfare]

Peak East Dulwich

[titch juicy]

I didn't realise it wasn't even the official path.

So it's pure laziness. There are perfectly good pavements either side of the park and a diagonal official path going from the crossroads to the gardens.

You want kids to stop playing cricket because you're too lazy to add an extra 3 or 4 minutes to your journey across the park?!

Laughable.

[Otta]

Oh, I askedmed it was the paved diagonal path. If not then I don't see so much of a problem.

Although I'd still say using a proper cricket ball is a bit too risky.

[Help-Ma-Boab]

There's loads room to get around them. I live opposite and watch from my window and I've only ever seen a tennis ball used, although didn't see what they were using yesterday but if it was a cricket ball then yes getting whacked by one them would hurt. I don't think they do use one though, or not when I have seen them. Will check next Sunday when they are back. I think it's great to see them using the common as a social sporting get together once a week.

Currently 22 lads playing football there with a large circle of coloured cones marking their pitch. Cross with caution!

[Help-Ma-Boab]

Just glanced out. Cricketers are there. Going to see what ball is in operation...

[Help-Ma-Boab]

They are NOT using a cricket ball. I was behind the wicket and the ball came to rest at my feet so I retrieved it for them. It's a fairly light white rubber ball, spongy really. These guys are well fielding and I can see in no way how folks cannot slightly adjust their route around them.

I'm all for these guys.

[StraferJack]

HMB - sterling work sir. I bow to your commitment