FISHINGmagic would appreciate it if comments on this news item are treated with great caution until the full story emerges.

B....y hell ! Yup, must act with caution, after all it could be fingers in the till, drug abuse, sordid swinging parties......anything really!

Let's just wait for the facts guys.

Unfortunately,facts never interest the rumour mongers.

The only fact we have just yet is that they have been suspended from the ACA pending an investigation.

.....and if they don't say what the investigation is about the rumours would definitely start.

Was this the "bombshell" that Richard Lee was alluding to last week?

Given that there are no facts available, then to caution against conjecture or potentially damaging rumour has to be the sensible advice.

Lets hope that the issue is resolved one way or the other without damaging the Association.

(It's not a result of Cheekeys letter, I hope!)

it might not be sordid at all, it could be that they're not doing a good enough job or anything 'normal'.
Just because they are high profile, why does it have to be something illicit?
(it might be, but it might not)

If you were underpeforming at work, you could be suspended pending an internal review.

I have been involved in a few internal reviews regarding an individuals job performance during my work career Rik, (never about my own performance) but in good companies, these sort of things are kept confidential.

When an organisation makes a statement like the ACA have done, then something more is afoot.

But we must await the facts.

Well said Rik, I'd like to think it's something that simple and nothing sinister. The public persona of Bob James is that of an amiable gent, I've never heard or read any ill about him.

I would have thought that with it being an internal matter, then the ACA should have at least kept it that way.
By going public they leave themselves, and the James' open to all kinds of speculation.
Better to have had an internal inquiry BEFORE going to the press.
I'm afraid the ACA has gone down even further in my estimation.

Exactly John!

It would have come out eventually & then the ACA would have been excused of covering it up.

Interested to hear your issues with the ACA, John.

I think the issues they are investigating must be pretty serious or they would surely have kept it quiet. It doesn't make sense any other way.

That having betn said Graham I agree with John on this one (Yegods that must be something of a first!!)

The ACA should have kept this one under their hats until the investigation had been completed then gone public with the result assuming there was one.

I can only hope that for the sake of all concerned this matter whatever it might be can be resolved swiftly and fairly.

Alan, I take your point given that even if they are cleared there still will be a lingering suspicion over them.

I cant imagine that toungues would not have wagged however whilst the investigation was concluded & the ACA would have been forced to issue a statement clarifying the position.

Better in my view to get it out in the open initially rather than being forced to do so later.The Association's interests have to outweigh those of any individual.

The decision by the ACA to make a public statement may not have been an option if evidence had been presented by a third party.

Just what I was about to say Kevin. And as Nigel said, if this had blown before the ACA went public then they could have been accused of a cover up.

I was listening to Keith Arthur on Sunday when somebody phoned in complaining about Bob James' handling of a barbel in a picture on page 11 of last weeks AT. It couldn't be something like that could it?