[ad_1]
SINGAPORE – Sport Singapore (SportSG) has vowed to clamp down on the “unscrupulous practice of some ActiveSG members” reselling their sports facility reserves for profit.
In a statement sent to The Straits Times on Friday (February 5), Sng Hock Lin, head of ActiveSG, said: “Such behavior is wrong and deprives other ActiveSG members that they really want to play sports at our facilities at affordable prices.” .
His comments came on the back of two ST reports that documented the practice that has affected recreational athletes in sports such as badminton, tennis, and soccer. Both stories gave voice to many members of the public who were disgusted and frustrated with the practice and the apparent lack of action on the part of the facility owners.
In his response, Sng added that SportSG has been monitoring the accounts of these resellers and has “blacklisted and suspended 255 accounts.”
He noted that SportSG “has already stepped up enforcement measures at the site,” where court tenants must be present or the reservation will be canceled. ST understands that this policy has been in effect since last year and that the renter must also be part of the gaming group. Noting that such measures can make true sports enthusiasts uncomfortable, he said countermeasures will be implemented “judiciously,” but cautioned that enforcement will intensify if these practices are not diminished.
It acknowledged that some of these roving ActiveSG members “have gone above and beyond to encourage others to ‘lend’ their accounts to them for such purposes” and that stricter penalties are being considered against such individuals.
“This could include increasing suspensions and prohibiting them and their accomplices from reserving all public facilities and working with other facility owners to do the same,” he added.
He reiterated that “selling is absolutely prohibited,” and urged the public not to purchase public sports facilities from these resellers. He warned that those who do so run the risk of being denied use of the facilities when they appear in court because SportSG will cancel reservations that carry “evidence of resale.”
He added that ActiveSG will continue to remind members not to use bots as “exploiting the system and making a profit are violations of Sport Singapore’s terms of use for ActiveSG facilities.”
Members are encouraged to contact SportSG to report such cases.
He also called for cooperation so that the reservation system for such facilities can remain “fair and affordable for all true sports enthusiasts.”
Recreational badminton player S. Levain, 27, welcomed SportSG’s stance.
He said: “It is good to know that the authorities are serious about wanting to change this situation … I hope the reservation process improves.”
However, Elynn Yang, a 35-year-old executive assistant who is also a recreational badminton player, remained somewhat skeptical.
She noted: “There are still some loopholes. Even if an account is banned, they can create new accounts.
“Making sure the court contractors have to be present may be a form (of enforcement), but will they actually verify the IC or will they just verify the reservation receipt? The receipt can be sent again as a screenshot.
“The person who reserved the court can be there to join the game for a while and do this for show. He can still let the rest of the players play and collect money as there is no one there who can stop them from doing so.” .
Noting the lucrative nature of the practice, with soccer fields, for example, being resold for a profit of $ 180, he added: “If you see an opportunity to continue making (easy) money by exploiting loopholes, why what wouldn’t they continue? ”
Another ad aficionado, Kenny Koh, 28, lamented: “The authority may suspend a user as a form of punishment and reduce massive bookings for a time. But that doesn’t educate the community on the core issue of not taking advantage of the system and being more inclusive. “
When asked to comment on the countermeasures needed to curb the practice of speculation, he added: “That would be a waste of resources, right? And it is solving the problem on a very superficial level.”
“This is supposed to be a leisure activity … imposing measures to this extent is defeating the purpose. We shouldn’t have to resort to that.”
[ad_2]
