M Godliman

I had the other five Martin.

Those of you who couldn't make it missed out on a great day. Martin. [ 26. April 2003, 09:20 PM: Message edited by: M Godliman ]

I do think it's important to be discerning about the quality of the content,there must be cut off point beyond witch it would be counter productive,there are a few examples around on cable of how to do it badly. Also I'm not convinced however well and skillfully it was presented there could ever be an important number of non anglers interested enough to chase after to boost audience figures. Martin.

It must surely be ratings and money that cause programmes to be made or not,if there was enough money in it someone would be doing it. Have you seen the advert on cable Home&Leisure for any one to send in there bit of video of themselves doing it??Who's going to be the next Matt Hayes or Paul young? Martin.

I would like to see more as well,I favour the more understated type of presenter more than arm waving baffoon sort, I suppose the extra pushy kind get to the job through persistence and persuasion.I sometimes think the blustering enthusiast can be good too, these things are a matter of personal preference of course. One thing had always puzzled me though one reaction amongst some presenters to catching a good fish on screen is to laugh ??? I've seen a few people catch big fish....had one or two myself and excitment has never resulted in guffawing, snickering, tittering of any kind,talking like a fool yes! talking too much yes(me I'm affraid)and variuos other kinds of strange behaviuor.Maybe they believe it makes angling look good to the possible non angler viewers?? hard to believe. Any way more fishing on the telly bring it on!! Martin.

I have more or less stopped buying them partly becaus the journalism is so daft sometimes,things like "snappers"(pike)"stripeys"(perch)"whiskers" barbel,etc. Also in a discussion with Barrie Rickards once about a Nile perch catch we had both witnessed was completely wrong on just about every detail and this after a direct interview with the captor I wondered if it was deliberate.He said he and Ray Webb did a bit of research and discovered only about fifty persent accuracy in the reports. Martin.

I agree with Leon if the tiger muskie is genuinly sterile then each one would only replace a pike in any place they were introduced,what a spectacular looking creature I would love to catch one.This subject grew out of debate on another board on the subject of the probable spread of zander in the Thames,where they would almost certainly breed and alter the predator/prey balance and there were a lot of people looking forward to that day.I guess in fantasy land if every fourth or fifth five pound Thames pike were replaced by a zander it would be nice but not at the risk of the detriment of the pike and perch population,and what chance of controlling that!! I've watched nature programmes on the telly since David Attenborough was a fresh faced young man and just about every corner of the world has a species flora or fauna in it that's not native and causing trouble introduced by mankind by accident or design,just look how far trout have traveled since Victorian times. Martin.

Newt....transatlantic spelling differences ? look what happened when you started the north south thing.Does the American version of scrabble allow English spellings ? we are forced to accept some American spellings. Martin. [ 18 March 2002, 12:16 PM: Message edited by: M Godliman ]

Newt....transatlantic spelling differences ? look what happened when you started the north south thing.Does the American version of scrabble allow English spellings ? we are forced to accept some American spellings. Martin. [ 18 March 2002, 12:16 PM: Message edited by: M Godliman ]

See Newt your Brit baitings worked a treat. Martin.

See Newt your Brit baitings worked a treat. Martin.

See Newt your Brit baitings worked a treat. Martin.

See Newt your Brit baitings worked a treat. Martin.

Notice Newt how there are not too many southeners feel the need to "big up" their status as it is innate in us. My wife who works in market research did a poll for a national newspaper a few years ago found that only one in three of us Londoners is born here,they are either from another part of the UK or from another country.It's prabably only a coincidence but my wife is a northener (from Yorkshire)and a majority of my friends wives are northeners too,no wonder those northern blokes are a bit miffed. A southen softie. Martin.

Notice Newt how there are not too many southeners feel the need to "big up" their status as it is innate in us. My wife who works in market research did a poll for a national newspaper a few years ago found that only one in three of us Londoners is born here,they are either from another part of the UK or from another country.It's prabably only a coincidence but my wife is a northener (from Yorkshire)and a majority of my friends wives are northeners too,no wonder those northern blokes are a bit miffed. A southen softie. Martin.