Yea, Yea yea....yawn!

Mac

Guests - this sponsored link will vanish when you log-in. Click here to register for free.

I have always respected Barrie Rickards for his high principles and his intellect. Nothing has changed that. I feel it totally distasteful to suggest that Barrie's opinion and support could be bought by the gift of a few dead fish! For heavens sakes, the matter should be history by now.

It was on the way to being just that...until his posting.

Mac

Fair comment! Peter

Mr Eeelcatcher, young Sir,

Many thanks for your comments, Steve - very fair.

The discrepancy that you raise is not really that at all. What I meant as 'before' was that Barrie was involved and agreed with the committee before we went ahead with expelling Neville and the others. Although the committee were agreed it wanted to discuss the intended action with him before it took place. The discrepancy arises due to my clumsy way of saying things rather than anything else. Also, contrary to popular belief, the committee consulted with as many officers and members as it could to get their input. The committee did not act in the insular, draconian way that some would have people believe.

Onto Neville's apology at the SACG meeting - the one that Mark, Dave Lumb, Frank and I sat impassively through. What apology? If you remember the nearest he got to saying sorry was stating "I might regret a lot of this in a year or two." Do you think that Mark and the current committee wouldn't have pointed to this if it had been an apology - it would have helped their case for readmission no end. Not only that, why did Chris and Alan of SACG think it so important to get Neville and PAC round a table, issue a statement that was supposed to be an apology from Neville if he had already given one. No, that apology was another bit of Neville speak.

Cheers Steve,

Ray

Why can't all PAC members just pull together for the sake of the club? Leaving is not going to do the club any good in the long or the short term. The decision has been made to readmit Neville and like it or not, it is better for the club that he is in rather than out, because if he is out he could cause the club long term damage by his continuing rants in p+p etc.

I know many members don't like(to put it mildly!) Neville at the present time, but you can't argue about the immense work he has done for the pike and zander scene in the past 25+ years. The fact of the matter is the PAC need people like him and Barrie Rickards, Martin Gay, Mick Brown etc. The club will be in a much weaker position without them.

The new committee have made a decision, and they should be respected for it, just the same as Frank & co should be respected for the decision they made last year. I still think Neville should write a letter of apology to the committee, admitting his mistake which would at least go some way to helping us move on and put this whole Blithfield thing to bed for good.

Cheers

Could we get a few things clear. I know when people are trying to smear Barrie Rickards that they are desperate. Barrie's big deal with lucebaits consists of one large poly box full of smelt, mackerel, lampery and pollen. That is it! No £1000 consultancy cheque! For the benefit of Frank, Mac, Ray and John, who have not been around quite as long as some of us. Barrie and I ( Martin Gay as well ) have had some pretty robust debates over the years. You could hardly say we have ever been in each others pockets.

As John Cleese said to the Germans about World War II, "You started it" I'm doing my best to end it. I have apologisedto Ray, Frank and Alastair for my personal remarks ( no apology was ever forthcoming from them for the initial Blithfield press release. )
I certainly regret having to defend myself in the way I did. With people like Frank and Ray involved you tell me what other option I had? You've all resigned I regret that, but even though you've resigned you still want your own way? If you were as honourable as you all claim you'd shut up for the benefit of PAC. In the meantime I hope with a lot of effort from my part to win back some ofthe lost PAC members. As for Barrie Rickards, an apolgy is due, disgraceful behaviour on your parts.

This is an unprecedented posting on my part, I agree with NF wholeheartedly and unreservedly over the vast majority of his comments on this matter, especially re Barrie Rickards. The slight reservation is that NF states that he 'regrets having to defend himself' as he did. That small word 'having' beggers belief! If, Nev, you were to say 'I regret defending myself as I did,' rather than 'having to defend myself as I did' then I, for one, would consider the matter as amicably settled. At no time did you 'have' to defend yourself in the style that you did. It is noticeable that NONE of the other Blithfield gang chose to defend themselves as you have. Blithfield is long behind us, it's your 'defence' that has, largely, caused the problems.

Actually Mick Brown is 100% in agreement with how I dealt with the matter. He decided that he would not respond in detail to how the last committee behaved.

ET and Kev Shaw the same.

Just ask yourself in the light of how the old committee are behaving whether "going quietly" would have improved my situation?

What's this then, the pot calling the kettle black?

Had the original post re this thread not been posted, no one would have had any reason to say anything! If people really want this thing to go away as they say they do, don't start related threads that only ensure a response.

Think about it.

Mac