G
Gary Knowles 2
Guest
and I still havent rec'd a letter from them...
J
James Townsend
Guest
I don?t know how relevant you all might think this, but I offer you this snippet as an indication of my now lost trust in the ?such a nice chap? that is Bob James.
A couple of years ago a long time fishing pal and I treated ourselves to a weekend with Bob James up on the Wye ? nice hotel, good food and two days guided by the man himself. He was genial enough but the weekend was a disappointment due to floods, bad conditions and my niggling doubt that he was not that interested.
One of the stories he told was of his time in the music business. I had just submitted my first article to an angling magazine and knowing the low financial return on the time invested in writing it, we were talking of how he made his living from fishing. He then told us the story that he said had set him up financially. Those of you well over 40 may remember the Bonzo Dog Do Da band, and our Mr. James told us of his time as their drummer, touring and fishing combining into the good life. Entertained by this tale I repeated it to my brother who thought it a lot of fun that I had spent time with a member of the Bonzos. The only problem was he didn?t remember his name and couldn?t place him.
I decided it would be fun to find some old photos of Mr. James and send them to my brother along with one of him now. Looking on the Neil Innes (He wrote a lot of their material I believe) web site I could find no reference to Bob James so I emailed and asked about him. The reply from Neil Innes was?"Bob James in the Bonzos? Hmmm....no. If he was in it before I joined, I don't know, I don't think so, but after, definitely not." Now maybe, as they say, ?if you can remember the 60?s you weren?t really there? and I got the wrong end of the stick, misunderstanding his tale; or maybe, just maybe, there is a little of the ?Walter Mitty? in our ex ACA Press and Publicity Officer.
A couple of years ago a long time fishing pal and I treated ourselves to a weekend with Bob James up on the Wye ? nice hotel, good food and two days guided by the man himself. He was genial enough but the weekend was a disappointment due to floods, bad conditions and my niggling doubt that he was not that interested.
One of the stories he told was of his time in the music business. I had just submitted my first article to an angling magazine and knowing the low financial return on the time invested in writing it, we were talking of how he made his living from fishing. He then told us the story that he said had set him up financially. Those of you well over 40 may remember the Bonzo Dog Do Da band, and our Mr. James told us of his time as their drummer, touring and fishing combining into the good life. Entertained by this tale I repeated it to my brother who thought it a lot of fun that I had spent time with a member of the Bonzos. The only problem was he didn?t remember his name and couldn?t place him.
I decided it would be fun to find some old photos of Mr. James and send them to my brother along with one of him now. Looking on the Neil Innes (He wrote a lot of their material I believe) web site I could find no reference to Bob James so I emailed and asked about him. The reply from Neil Innes was?"Bob James in the Bonzos? Hmmm....no. If he was in it before I joined, I don't know, I don't think so, but after, definitely not." Now maybe, as they say, ?if you can remember the 60?s you weren?t really there? and I got the wrong end of the stick, misunderstanding his tale; or maybe, just maybe, there is a little of the ?Walter Mitty? in our ex ACA Press and Publicity Officer.
N
Nigel Moors 2
Guest
Food for thought James. During this delay in getting to the truth, I've wondered if some of the emotional outpouring over this issue is solely down to Bob being one of those 'nice chaps' as you say and most of the angling public not able to face up to the fact he might just be in the wrong?
After all, even allowing for whatever financial settlement they may receive in return for keeping quiet, wouldn't he want to bring everything out into the open and clear his name?
After all, even allowing for whatever financial settlement they may receive in return for keeping quiet, wouldn't he want to bring everything out into the open and clear his name?
P
Peter Waller
Guest
I vaguelly remember that Bob was a photographer & did record jackets back in his younger days. Got a feeling that I picked that up on Passion for Angling, have to watch it again.
Now, I also vaguely remember reading, very recently, that Bob is only 45. Did think he was a tad older! But that being the case then he would have been born in 1959. In the DoDa band during the 60's?
Oh dear, how we wander through the realms of irrelevancy!
Now, I also vaguely remember reading, very recently, that Bob is only 45. Did think he was a tad older! But that being the case then he would have been born in 1959. In the DoDa band during the 60's?
Oh dear, how we wander through the realms of irrelevancy!
P
Peter Waller
Guest
Just checked. In the 'Independant' Bob is quoted as being 47. So that means if he joined the Do Da Band in '69 he would have been 12 years old! Nothing like gossiping and scandle making!!!!
Perhaps - - - - - !!!!
Perhaps - - - - - !!!!
S
Steve King
Guest
No, no, guys he was actually Arthur Brown and then went on to impersonate Keith Emerson in ELP for 7 years after Keith was drowned in the Devil's Triangle in a strange water skiing accident that involved a giant UFO and the Loch Ness Monster, (but the management wanted to keep it secret!).
Following this Bob then starred in "Spinal Tap The Movie" and ended up in a Bee Gees Tribute Band in Blackpool.
Anyone got any facts?????
Following this Bob then starred in "Spinal Tap The Movie" and ended up in a Bee Gees Tribute Band in Blackpool.
Anyone got any facts?????
E
ED (The ORIGINAL and REAL one)
Guest
Surely people join the ACA for the work they do for anglers --not as a Bob and Jane James fan club ---
J
James Townsend
Guest
I offered my tale only as an interesting curiosity that reminded me ?people can sometimes be not quite as they seem? I simply accepted what he told me as the truth and subsequently feel slightly foolish and a more than little disappointed. Whether we want it or not there is an element of the Bob James fan club about his work with the ACA because of his high profile in the angling world, he presented an image of himself and angling in ?A Passion For Angling? that I?m sure helped recruitment. Now this image is tarnished.
It is a fact that he told me this story.
It is a fact that he was under investigation.
It is a fact that he ?quit the ACA?.
Facts alone will never tell the whole story, what we need is the truth.
It is a fact that he told me this story.
It is a fact that he was under investigation.
It is a fact that he ?quit the ACA?.
Facts alone will never tell the whole story, what we need is the truth.
P
Peter Waller
Guest
Apparently, in Anglers Mail today, the ACA Chairman is to write to the membership and explain what has been going on. A writer on another forum commented, and I think wisely, that if the James were suspended and eventually left the ACA because of their wrong doing then no severence should be paid. If, however, they were innocent then the committee is at fault. It's a bad old do however you look at it!
P
Peter Waller
Guest
Just a thought, if we all resign from the ACA because of this regretable incident, who wins? Angling doesn't, that's for sure. The winners will be the polluters.
Hopefully we can all put this regretable mess behind us.
Hopefully we can all put this regretable mess behind us.
W
Wolfman Woody
Guest
Delving into the depths of minutiae, I think you'll find that Bob was born in 1948.
He confesses as much on the APFA video when talking to Bernard Venables. Bernard says that Crabtree was published in 1948 and bob says it was a good year, same as he was born in.
That would make him 56.
On the serious bit - I don't have top renew my membership until next May so I guess I'll hang on and see what transpires. However, I stand by what I said before, Bob and Jane should try to clear their names if they are innocent and if that means bringing all the dirty washing out then so be it. There can be nothing worse than having the stigma of being a cheat, a thief, or whatever hanging over you.
Who would trust you ever again and scandal will spread even if the facts are unproven. Were I a former sponsor of such a person I would distance myself immediately without question. You may not have a penny to your name, but if you have your pride intact that is everything.
I just hope that the settlement sum doesn't affect any of the present cases being fought.
He confesses as much on the APFA video when talking to Bernard Venables. Bernard says that Crabtree was published in 1948 and bob says it was a good year, same as he was born in.
That would make him 56.
On the serious bit - I don't have top renew my membership until next May so I guess I'll hang on and see what transpires. However, I stand by what I said before, Bob and Jane should try to clear their names if they are innocent and if that means bringing all the dirty washing out then so be it. There can be nothing worse than having the stigma of being a cheat, a thief, or whatever hanging over you.
Who would trust you ever again and scandal will spread even if the facts are unproven. Were I a former sponsor of such a person I would distance myself immediately without question. You may not have a penny to your name, but if you have your pride intact that is everything.
I just hope that the settlement sum doesn't affect any of the present cases being fought.
Peter Knight
New member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
Nigel Conner wrote -
''I am a member of the ACA but really do not see how my meagre contribution of ?15.00 a year or whatever the current fees are & a few raffle tickets gives me the right to demand meetings & this that & the other.To me the angling community owes a debt to the ACA & not the other way round.Perhaps some of the indignation shown by some on here might better be turned towards the pitifully low levels of membership''
Nigel it's that sort of view that will allow the ACA to change it's direction and perhaps become a charity and then there will be no members to challenge the board in their decisions.....
''I am a member of the ACA but really do not see how my meagre contribution of ?15.00 a year or whatever the current fees are & a few raffle tickets gives me the right to demand meetings & this that & the other.To me the angling community owes a debt to the ACA & not the other way round.Perhaps some of the indignation shown by some on here might better be turned towards the pitifully low levels of membership''
Nigel it's that sort of view that will allow the ACA to change it's direction and perhaps become a charity and then there will be no members to challenge the board in their decisions.....
GrahamM
Managing Editor
- Joined
- Feb 23, 1999
- Messages
- 9,773
- Reaction score
- 1
This is a direct quote from today's Angling Times. It sums up exactly how I feel about this mess. But I urge you to buy the paper and read the AT Opinion on page 3 in full. The following is just an extract:
<HR>
"If the allegations against Bob and Jane were upheld, then the pair should have been disciplined accordingly and, if necessary, fired.
"But, alternatively, if the allegations were unfounded and the pair exonerated then they should have been cleared and invited back to work. Quite honestly, there didn't seem any room for middle ground and the ambiguous, vague and muddled statement issued this week.
"The events of the last eight weeks have tarnished the image of all parties involved. Not permanantly, but certainly enough to cast a shadow that will linger as long as the element of mystery remains in the air.
"Angling wants answers. The ACA membership demands them."
<HR>
In a nutshell it's simple really:
If the Jameses are innocent of the allegations, or consider them too trivial to be contested, then they have nothing to fear from the results of the subsequent investigation being published.
On the other hand, if the ACA is confident it acted properly then it too has nothing to fear from the results of the subsequent investigation being published.
So, why do we have a confidentiality agreement?
Not to lessen the damage to the Association, that's for sure, for the secrecy is doing far more damage than the truth would.
Without the truth; without all the facts being published, how can we draw a line under this scandal and move on?
<HR>
"If the allegations against Bob and Jane were upheld, then the pair should have been disciplined accordingly and, if necessary, fired.
"But, alternatively, if the allegations were unfounded and the pair exonerated then they should have been cleared and invited back to work. Quite honestly, there didn't seem any room for middle ground and the ambiguous, vague and muddled statement issued this week.
"The events of the last eight weeks have tarnished the image of all parties involved. Not permanantly, but certainly enough to cast a shadow that will linger as long as the element of mystery remains in the air.
"Angling wants answers. The ACA membership demands them."
<HR>
In a nutshell it's simple really:
If the Jameses are innocent of the allegations, or consider them too trivial to be contested, then they have nothing to fear from the results of the subsequent investigation being published.
On the other hand, if the ACA is confident it acted properly then it too has nothing to fear from the results of the subsequent investigation being published.
So, why do we have a confidentiality agreement?
Not to lessen the damage to the Association, that's for sure, for the secrecy is doing far more damage than the truth would.
Without the truth; without all the facts being published, how can we draw a line under this scandal and move on?
P
Peter Waller
Guest
56, yes he looks that! As for being 47, well, can you ever believe what you read in the papers?
J
John Hepworth
Guest
Exactly Peter K. Re my comments earlier on the other thread about other 'underlying reasons'.
Again as I have said before, never be surprised at what people are capable of saying, or doing.
This is not directed at either Bob or Jane James.
Already I can hear the sounds of jubilation within the ACA, or what is left of it!
Again as I have said before, never be surprised at what people are capable of saying, or doing.
This is not directed at either Bob or Jane James.
Already I can hear the sounds of jubilation within the ACA, or what is left of it!
Peter Knight
New member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
John Hepworth wrote -
''This is not directed at either Bob or Jane James.''
You might well be right about that John but it sickens me the lenghts people will go to and the damage they are prepard to do to good people in order to get their way!
I spotted a post on another site that is worth a read - hang on I'll get it!
''This is not directed at either Bob or Jane James.''
You might well be right about that John but it sickens me the lenghts people will go to and the damage they are prepard to do to good people in order to get their way!
I spotted a post on another site that is worth a read - hang on I'll get it!
Peter Knight
New member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
Here it is -
I found this on course-fisherman.co.uk
''As I have stated on the forum the interest in this case by NZ anglers is substantial but the lack of real information is conspicuous by total absence.
One interesting rumour to see the light of day which is certainly worth more than a passing thought is that allegations of a serious nature have been laid by a member or members of such as PETA in order to cause serious damage to the sport of angling.
We find this not so far fetched as Peta has been effective in it's attempt to destroy the sheep farming and trade of Australia and New Zealand to such an extent that Federated Farmers are taking Peta to court in the USA for unfair trade practises.
It is therefore not unreasonable to think that the avowed stated intent to have the sport of angling banned made by PETA on their web site is under way by trying to discredit the most important single organisation and its exsecutive in the UK and, dare I say the western world, the ACA. The potential for such an attack to undermine our stance as responsible sports people would be immence.
Think well on the ramifications if this should be correct and successful. ''
I found this on course-fisherman.co.uk
''As I have stated on the forum the interest in this case by NZ anglers is substantial but the lack of real information is conspicuous by total absence.
One interesting rumour to see the light of day which is certainly worth more than a passing thought is that allegations of a serious nature have been laid by a member or members of such as PETA in order to cause serious damage to the sport of angling.
We find this not so far fetched as Peta has been effective in it's attempt to destroy the sheep farming and trade of Australia and New Zealand to such an extent that Federated Farmers are taking Peta to court in the USA for unfair trade practises.
It is therefore not unreasonable to think that the avowed stated intent to have the sport of angling banned made by PETA on their web site is under way by trying to discredit the most important single organisation and its exsecutive in the UK and, dare I say the western world, the ACA. The potential for such an attack to undermine our stance as responsible sports people would be immence.
Think well on the ramifications if this should be correct and successful. ''
Andy Stafford
New member
- Joined
- Oct 20, 2004
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
To balance comments here by people who are thinking of not renewing their ACA membership as a result of this episode, I'm personally aware of at least two people who resigned a decade ago in response to Bob's original appointment! I expect they'll both renew now that he is no longer employed by the organisation. Suffice to say that not everyone has always regarded him as a great bloke! And no, I wouldn't put it down to envy, just their personal views about his moral rectitude.
W
Wolfman Woody
Guest
I would second Graham's statement!
Secrecy becomes a hotbed for scandal and malicious gossip. It's far better for everyone that the truth came out. Only then can the line be drawn.
Secrecy becomes a hotbed for scandal and malicious gossip. It's far better for everyone that the truth came out. Only then can the line be drawn.
Peter Knight
New member
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 0
- Reaction score
- 0
Well I'm wondering who will be taking Bobs place as press officer for the ACA!
My bet is that they will promote some in-house crony rather than try to get a credible member of the fishing world.
My bet is that they will promote some in-house crony rather than try to get a credible member of the fishing world.