• You need to be a registered member of Barbel Fishing World to post on these forums. Some of the forums are hidden from non-members. Please refer to the instructions on the ‘Register’ page for details of how to join the new incarnation of BFW...

National team funding

J

Jason Bean

Senior Member
10104


I
 
Agreed, If I thought I was funding others to fish in a way I object to it would be quite a struggle to weigh off the need of a rod licence against the objection to where the money raised was going.

David
 
I can think of plenty of outcomes and pressing issues that I would be more than happy to contribute more rod license fees to. Match fishing, or more specifically a national match fishing team isn’t one of them.

I’ve got nothing against match fishing, but surely there are more immediate priorities.
If these issues aren’t addressed, the saying “You can’t catch what isn’t there”, will apply to specimen hunters, pleasure anglers and match fisherman alike.
 
Hi men,

I have personally told Rob of my views on his "carp team" , and although I feel a match team could represent us , there are other ways of funding them . Match fishing is not my thing , but who am I to comment on people who like doing it .

Hatter
 
Match fishing, whether it be the more traditional or the modern specimen hunter type, is not my bag either but glad to have someone representing the country BUT if funding is needed then they should seek sponsorship to cover costs and not expect our money to pay for their jolly’s. The betting industry seems to be throwing money in all directions, go knocking on their door for starters. Our money should be spent, as Richard says, on fighting pollution, poaching and the like.
 
Drennan walked away from Team England with their estimated £30,000 yearly sponsorship last January. It seems that not much of the £30,000 got to the end user and the individual anglers often had to finance themselves. The insider letter sent to Drennan claiming £22,000 went missing opened all sorts of funds not accounted for issues.
 
Mark Swaby said:
Drennan walked away from Team England with their estimated £30,000 yearly sponsorship last January. It seems that not much of the £30,000 got to the end user and the individual anglers often had to finance themselves. The insider letter sent to Drennan claiming £22,000 went missing opened all sorts of funds not accounted for issues.
Click to expand...

It appears that Drennan pulled the plug on their sponsorship because the England team manager wasn’t picking enough Drennan sponsored anglers. Insinuations were then made about the AT based on a letter from an anonymous source regarding the sponsorship money not being accounted for at the AT. None of which were even remotely substantiated. A lot of this was fuelled by some inaccurate and sensationalist reporting by Nigel Botherway on TalkS@@@e, who subsequently was forced to make a grovelling apology on air to the AT.

It was a pretty unsavoury episode to be honest, and it’s fair to say not Peter Drennan’s finest hour.
 
Joe Winstanley said:
It appears that Drennan pulled the plug on their sponsorship because the England team manager wasn’t picking enough Drennan sponsored anglers. Insinuations were then made about the AT based on a letter from an anonymous source regarding the sponsorship money not being accounted for at the AT. None of which were even remotely substantiated. A lot of this was fuelled by some inaccurate and sensationalist reporting by Nigel Botherway on TalkS@@@e, who subsequently was forced to make a grovelling apology on air to the AT.

It was a pretty unsavoury episode to be honest, and it’s fair to say not Peter Drennan’s finest hour.
Click to expand...

do you support a new tax on anglers to support the national teams though Joe?
 
It is not something I am in favour of either but, maybe, there could be an option to make a voluntary contribution when one renews their licence? For instance, if you renew online as I do, there could be a box you could tick if you wanted to contribute say £2.
 
Jason Bean said:
do you support a new tax on anglers to support the national teams though Joe?
Click to expand...

Nothing against it in principal, it’s good to have national teams etc, but it’s not a priority at the moment.

I would support an extra pound or two on the licence fee if it was going to be hypothecated to water quality...namely a legal fund for taking polluters to court. I wouldn’t mind if that money was given straight to Fish Legal, they would do a better job than the EA.
 
I'm against the idea, why should I sponsor someone to fish their chosen route in angling.
I have to buy all my own gear, boat, trailer, outboard, permits for various waters etc and never get any prize money if I'm top angler on a particular day.
Maybe the Angling Trust who organise many matches or Sport England should be digging into their pockets when it comes to national or international events.
 
I agree that there are probably more pressing matters which require additional funding but would be happy to have the option of contributing when renewing online. I’m not a match angler and do have some reservations about match fishing, but I’m not anti it. Surely successful national fishing teams are good for recruitment into angling, which is something angling is really struggling with at the moment. Match anglers are still anglers at the end of the day and we really should be sticking together to defend ourselves against the antis. I personally got into fishing through match fishing and many clubs would cease to exist if match fishing were banned. Remember, there are many practices in specimen angling which some find repugnant, such as hogging swims for long periods, pre-baiting swims with large volumes of pellets/boilies, having fish out of the water for too long for photos ............
 
Nick Coulthurst said:
I agree that there are probably more pressing matters which require additional funding but would be happy to have the option of contributing when renewing online. I’m not a match angler and do have some reservations about match fishing, but I’m not anti it. Surely successful national fishing teams are good for recruitment into angling, which is something angling is really struggling with at the moment. Match anglers are still anglers at the end of the day and we really should be sticking together to defend ourselves against the antis. I personally got into fishing through match fishing and many clubs would cease to exist if match fishing were banned. Remember, there are many practices in specimen angling which some find repugnant, such as hogging swims for long periods, pre-baiting swims with large volumes of pellets/boilies, having fish out of the water for too long for photos ............
Click to expand...
There may be many aspects of specimen angling which others find repugnant Nick, but they aren't being faced with a proposed license increase to sponsor specimen hunting. I am totally against this idea, why should people be forced to contribute to something they don't want to? I thought that was purpose of income tax..
 
I echo the posts above entirely. if I was to
Agree with one thing in that article it’s the title. It is a no brainier to put more funds into this wonderful hobby we all love and share, and I’d happily contribute more through my yearly licence.

however international match fishing teams are certainly NOT where I’d be choosing to invest it.
Our beautiful rivers are suffering with 9 months out of the year of raw sewage, otters pulling specimen fish out, careless angling where inadequate equipment or no equipment is used to preserve catches. Poaching, poor maintenance................yet these wallys think it’s best invested in building a team of pro keepnet fillers!!!! Total madness.

I’d happily pay double for my rod license if I knew it was been put into resolving real angling concerns and we could see a real benefit from that investment happening.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top