sam vimes
Well-known member
OK, fair enough-its just an internet thing, I can rattle off ideas to someone 100's of miles away during a debate without much understanding of their situation which is easy and makes it look simple, sure I understand that but, I do understand those ideas might be impossible to implement or just impractical; I just fire them off and see if any hit the mark. Its not being deluded and nothing to do with political ideals, just ideas as they come and seeing if they are helpful or not as the case may be; there is not much more to it than that.
As an example its like my friend who is wheelchair/housebound with one leg, people are constantly trying to sell him jogging suits or telling him he should get out more and get a life on twitter; you understand what I am saying.
I understand not all clubs are the same and not all are struggling, some make more money than others and most not much but I just don't think there is a lot of initiative going on apart from day ticketing with a lot of hand wringing so I just try and think of something else.
With miles of rivers that have to be paid for that never get used, down my way for certain, it seems a waste and no good to me and more significantly no good to anyone it seems, club members included, lost to fishing whatever way you toss the coin. They end up no fishing or with another club, still makes no difference to me or anyone it would seem, I just know quite a lot of river like that my way. Why do clubs carry on paying out for these?
I'm sorry that you've taken "deluded" as an insult, it isn't, and wasn't intended as one. Ultimately, you are no more deluded than I am. You keep making similar points about clubs over a variety of different threads. I keep addressing many of your points and am deluding myself into thinking that you might take some of it on board. It's a crying shame that someone with so much apparent interest in your local clubs and how they operate can't translate that interest into getting involved. I'm sure they'd be delighted to have you. They'd probably be delighted to have anybody.
Although I'm still quite bemused as to how I actually ended up on a club committee, its been an education. I know that I'd have had many similar ideas of how dismally some clubs are run. I'd probably have proposed some similar solutions. However, I learned very rapidly why ideas that appear so obvious from the outside are simply not possible. There are many things I entirely disagree with. If it were a dictatorship, there are things I'd change in a heartbeat. However, one thing most clubs are is democratic, at least within the few that bother to turn up.
I started a thread some time ago suggesting that and I got it in the neck for it, deluded again. But at the time I could see in some situations clubs might work something out between them and gain from it and their anglers as well so, good; there was some meat in it after-all.
Let's not alter history here. I recall that you suggested that clubs should merge. Fair enough, not the daftest idea. However, I remember pointing out that your merging idea wasn't workable in many cases because of those pesky constitutions. These constitutions were invariably drafted a long time ago with the best of intentions. However, in some cases they end up being millstones round the neck of the club that can stop them merging, allowing outside members etc. Where clubs merging is feasible, it has often happened decades ago. There are plenty of "Amalgamations" out there in club land. When it comes to clubs co-operating, it's often not apparent, but many do already. My own club isn't likely to merge with another. That hasn't stopped us co-operating with another club over the use of a single stillwater.