Bob Roberts
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2002
- Messages
- 2,334
- Reaction score
- 8
Okay Chris, I accept your correction, you're a ****head with delusional tendencies.
That better?
That better?
T
Tony Rocca
Guest
Cant wait for your next one Bob
Matt Brown
Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2005
- Messages
- 8
- Reaction score
- 0
Indeed. It's detracting from the issue and damaging everyone involved.
C
Chub King
Guest
For someone claiming to be getting bored of this barbel lark Bob sure does have a lot to say about barbel....
I have to confess that the species really is a bit dull. Easy to catch and easier to kill?
I still ask, what about perch? More perch probably go the way of the dodo than barbel but I've never seen a post debating the merits of various types of perch tackle and how best to avoid deep-hooking them! Not a vogue species I guess...
Personally I'd prefer to catch a pound perch than a 5lb barbel. In fact, there are plenty of fish I'd rather catch than a barbel.
Anyone else dreaming about going tench fishing next May (oops, I meant to say June!).!
Salt and vinegar anyone?
I have to confess that the species really is a bit dull. Easy to catch and easier to kill?
I still ask, what about perch? More perch probably go the way of the dodo than barbel but I've never seen a post debating the merits of various types of perch tackle and how best to avoid deep-hooking them! Not a vogue species I guess...
Personally I'd prefer to catch a pound perch than a 5lb barbel. In fact, there are plenty of fish I'd rather catch than a barbel.
Anyone else dreaming about going tench fishing next May (oops, I meant to say June!).!
Salt and vinegar anyone?
J
john ledger
Guest
Chub King how right you are pal,give me a chub grayling good dace anyday,if a barbel has brains they are in its arse(shut up Fred else i will cowtail you)
J
john ledger
Guest
And thats with out me blackpudding
Bob Roberts
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2002
- Messages
- 2,334
- Reaction score
- 8
Aye Greg, but being bored with catching them (for a while) does not detract from my passion in wanting fair and proper treatment for the species from all anglers and it is only right and proper that the barbel angling community's leading body takes the moral high ground and sets a new workable standard for us all to follow.
If you wish to take the perch problem over to the Coarse Forum, or the Predator even, I'll willingly discuss the issue with you there, or even off-line, but for some reason this area of the site has been deemed barbel specific.
We've had quite enough off-topic blathering on this thread already from the three amigos such that the actual issues have all but been lost.
If you wish to take the perch problem over to the Coarse Forum, or the Predator even, I'll willingly discuss the issue with you there, or even off-line, but for some reason this area of the site has been deemed barbel specific.
We've had quite enough off-topic blathering on this thread already from the three amigos such that the actual issues have all but been lost.
J
john ledger
Guest
Seem to remember last time i went with Fred he caught a barbel and i didnt so i might have got it wrong and it could be my brains are in my arse
Qoute from this thread by Mr Roberts 22/11/05
'For the record my decision not to rejoin the Society was told in confidence to one official.It has bee blabbed widely and miscontrued since...'
Quote from Mr Angry Revisits Barbel Care posted 30/09/05
'Well Fred thats two societies I will not be a member of next season.'
One being the Barbel Society I presume.
'For the record my decision not to rejoin the Society was told in confidence to one official.It has bee blabbed widely and miscontrued since...'
Quote from Mr Angry Revisits Barbel Care posted 30/09/05
'Well Fred thats two societies I will not be a member of next season.'
One being the Barbel Society I presume.
N
Nigel Connor(ACA ,SAA)
Guest
Come on Guester - out of the closet with you.
F
Fred Bonney
Guest
Well I'm going to have a final say to Bob Roberts and I won't resort to name calling.
Bob,you started all this with your personal attacks on Paul Owens and your incorrect references to Hazelford.
You had my respect before you raised those matters, both of which were uncalled for and seem to be no more than petty jealousy.
Since that time, I just don't feel able to accept anything you put in print.
YOUR issues may have been lost,the real issues are being discussed elsewhere on this site.
Bob,you started all this with your personal attacks on Paul Owens and your incorrect references to Hazelford.
You had my respect before you raised those matters, both of which were uncalled for and seem to be no more than petty jealousy.
Since that time, I just don't feel able to accept anything you put in print.
YOUR issues may have been lost,the real issues are being discussed elsewhere on this site.
T
Tony Rocca
Guest
Bob,
"from the three amigos "
There are a lot more than 3 on here Bob, cant you count. True there are only 2 others I know though.
"from the three amigos "
There are a lot more than 3 on here Bob, cant you count. True there are only 2 others I know though.
Bob Roberts
Well-known member
- Joined
- Sep 5, 2002
- Messages
- 2,334
- Reaction score
- 8
Fred, Tony, Chris,
The lack of respect between us is mutual. We disagree mainly on the way you have secured what was previously an open to all water for the benefit of a chosen few. When questioned openly the truth was never forthcoming. Is it any wonder then that discrepancies creep in when straight forward questions are met with ignorance?
You've stitched up one of the prime stretches of the Trent, taking privileges that are denied the members of the owning club for a few shillings. Paul Owens is also a member...
In private emails Tony has said he would have no objections to giving up the water and allowing the Society to run it but the controlling club allegedly want nothing to do with the Society. Why?
Paul Owens was asked if the Society would be prepared to take on the water. He replied, we won't bid for any water that is in the hands of another club, in this case the HPS. So the Society effectively has Hazelford stitched up in disguise but reserved for the chosen few.
Now I happen to think that is wrong.
Let's reel back a couple of weeks now, pre the latest debacle. I was invited to post on the Society site and put a tentative toe in the water regarding membership beefits. Steve Pope immediately welcomed me on board and what followed? You lot from the HPS began your juvenile one-line cat-calling and spoiling tactics. Did that do you any credit? I think not.
And it was your actions that determined where the critique on the handling code was placed. It was/still is available to the Society as a discussion document. Indeed a copy was sent by me privately to Steve before the spoiling on here began.
Steve has actually asked me to post it on the BS site where he is prepared to discuss it in depth but he stated that he would not come on FM and do so.
Following a flurry of texts in which Paul openly agreed with parts of the latest article I rang him regarding the original offer from the NFA to discuss barbel care with the Society. His reaction was negative to say the least.
Paul is still hung up over the no sleeping by rods issue over which I took him to task. It eats away at him and now he seeks to gain some kind of petty revenge (see his latest thread regarding me on the BS board). Actions like these demean him, not me and I find that a real shame because he is one of the Society's greatest assets.
I disagree strongly with the Society's stance on sleeping by rods. It is not illegal. I am not alone in believing that barbel fishing with multiple rods carries far greater risks but I hear no calls from the Society to ban that.
To openly brag that, "We are barbel anglers, not carpers!" is unforgivably bad etiquet in a wider fishing world.
To state, "Barbel anglers do not use keepnets!" is neither true nor enforceable, it is after all within the law and breaks no code other than the BS's.
Recently the Society decided to go with their own code rather than one involving the NFA. It contains unworkable statements and a degree of superiority based posturing that leave it flawed, yet the Society is openly promoting it to all and sundry as a free download.
Now people can bury their heads in the sand if they wish. Alternatively they can shout "LA!, LA! LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!" but the plain fact remains. Angling needs a practical and workable barbel handling code that is acceptable to all disciplines. That will involve compromise. To reach compromise the issues have to be discussed and your actions are obstructing the process.
I put it to you that you either get on board and discuss the issue in a dignified manner or you simply f*ck off and go fishing. The fresh air will do you good.
The lack of respect between us is mutual. We disagree mainly on the way you have secured what was previously an open to all water for the benefit of a chosen few. When questioned openly the truth was never forthcoming. Is it any wonder then that discrepancies creep in when straight forward questions are met with ignorance?
You've stitched up one of the prime stretches of the Trent, taking privileges that are denied the members of the owning club for a few shillings. Paul Owens is also a member...
In private emails Tony has said he would have no objections to giving up the water and allowing the Society to run it but the controlling club allegedly want nothing to do with the Society. Why?
Paul Owens was asked if the Society would be prepared to take on the water. He replied, we won't bid for any water that is in the hands of another club, in this case the HPS. So the Society effectively has Hazelford stitched up in disguise but reserved for the chosen few.
Now I happen to think that is wrong.
Let's reel back a couple of weeks now, pre the latest debacle. I was invited to post on the Society site and put a tentative toe in the water regarding membership beefits. Steve Pope immediately welcomed me on board and what followed? You lot from the HPS began your juvenile one-line cat-calling and spoiling tactics. Did that do you any credit? I think not.
And it was your actions that determined where the critique on the handling code was placed. It was/still is available to the Society as a discussion document. Indeed a copy was sent by me privately to Steve before the spoiling on here began.
Steve has actually asked me to post it on the BS site where he is prepared to discuss it in depth but he stated that he would not come on FM and do so.
Following a flurry of texts in which Paul openly agreed with parts of the latest article I rang him regarding the original offer from the NFA to discuss barbel care with the Society. His reaction was negative to say the least.
Paul is still hung up over the no sleeping by rods issue over which I took him to task. It eats away at him and now he seeks to gain some kind of petty revenge (see his latest thread regarding me on the BS board). Actions like these demean him, not me and I find that a real shame because he is one of the Society's greatest assets.
I disagree strongly with the Society's stance on sleeping by rods. It is not illegal. I am not alone in believing that barbel fishing with multiple rods carries far greater risks but I hear no calls from the Society to ban that.
To openly brag that, "We are barbel anglers, not carpers!" is unforgivably bad etiquet in a wider fishing world.
To state, "Barbel anglers do not use keepnets!" is neither true nor enforceable, it is after all within the law and breaks no code other than the BS's.
Recently the Society decided to go with their own code rather than one involving the NFA. It contains unworkable statements and a degree of superiority based posturing that leave it flawed, yet the Society is openly promoting it to all and sundry as a free download.
Now people can bury their heads in the sand if they wish. Alternatively they can shout "LA!, LA! LA! I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!" but the plain fact remains. Angling needs a practical and workable barbel handling code that is acceptable to all disciplines. That will involve compromise. To reach compromise the issues have to be discussed and your actions are obstructing the process.
I put it to you that you either get on board and discuss the issue in a dignified manner or you simply f*ck off and go fishing. The fresh air will do you good.
T
Tony Rocca
Guest
Crikey Bob, you must be nipped.
I am always happy to talk about anything, all the things you mention, and do. Just not with you.
Only one of us is being eaten away here Bob and his name begins with B, twice, or R if your posh.
Dont fancy fishing today thanks, maybe a roach or two at the weekend though.
I am always happy to talk about anything, all the things you mention, and do. Just not with you.
Only one of us is being eaten away here Bob and his name begins with B, twice, or R if your posh.
Dont fancy fishing today thanks, maybe a roach or two at the weekend though.
Matt Brown
Member
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2005
- Messages
- 8
- Reaction score
- 0
C
Chris Pearson
Guest
Matt,
Strange that you don't get lumped in with us don't you think?
I'm putting your name forward when Kofi Annan retires,you're a star ;-)
Strange that you don't get lumped in with us don't you think?
I'm putting your name forward when Kofi Annan retires,you're a star ;-)
T
Tony Rocca
Guest
Bob has a soft spot for Matt, maybe.
N
Nigel Connor(ACA ,SAA)
Guest
Matt, I clicked on the BS link.Is this a first? A thread which spans two sites at once! How do you keep up?
B
Bully
Guest
So is that it then, end of thread?
I hope so. I think Bob is absolutely right to open the debate on handling and challenge the BS. Steve Pope, to his credit, has welcomed the input. However, quite rightly he wants to do this within the confines of BS, but he has said he will look at comments via FM.
So lets close this one and go back to the real debate about providing sound advice on barbel care.
I think having at least one person doing a really "in your face challenge" is great. If you dont like it, either come back with sound arguments, or ignore.
As I've already said, life is 99% opinion, 1% fact.......and short!
I hope so. I think Bob is absolutely right to open the debate on handling and challenge the BS. Steve Pope, to his credit, has welcomed the input. However, quite rightly he wants to do this within the confines of BS, but he has said he will look at comments via FM.
So lets close this one and go back to the real debate about providing sound advice on barbel care.
I think having at least one person doing a really "in your face challenge" is great. If you dont like it, either come back with sound arguments, or ignore.
As I've already said, life is 99% opinion, 1% fact.......and short!