A.G.M

Well said 100% behind you, we need more clubs and anglers like you to turn things around at AGM,s and stop going backwards. Firstly get rid of the people ruining it for hard working anglers, who put in a huge amount of time and money who want to compete at the highest level. We need to modernise the way we qualify to compete on the world stage with our best anglers going forwards.
ps [has any of that the commity seen or fished a comp in the past 10 years or ever]

ps [has any of that the commity seen or fished a comp in the past 10 years or ever]

Unless you are in the pub/coffee shop you wont see the majority of central council members at the masters.
The majority of them turn up for the peg draw, then disappear until its time for food or tea.
There are a COUPLE of exceptions, but only a couple.
The master angler fee will increase, so the clubs take a hit again.
Now considering they make about TEN THOUSAND from the master angler shore ( €120 per angler, around 100 anglers ), can increasing the fee to cover bait ( good or bad ) actually be justified.
This comes from boat anglers voting on shore angling decisions and just not giving a f%&*.
How about the council members who turn up to the master angler, only to leech off the anglers and clubs, get off their ar*es and get a tackle manufacturer to sponsor the competition and the national teams.
Or is this just too much effort for them.
I really hope some of these shaven monkeys read these posts and take on board what is being said, their lack of organization, laziness and common sense just pi**es everyone off, every year.
If someone can explain to me EXACTLY where the money from the master angler fee goes i would be eternally grateful.

I wonder do any of the people that voted this proposal in have a bait dealer in the family because someone s going to make a lot of money there isnt a bait collecter in the country that would nt like to get that order

well paul if they if they give that as bait i think its a great idea ,but you worked it out for 100 anglers the new rules with a 2nd angler after 10 not after 25 there will be a lot more then 100 anglers more near 200. personally i think 25 in this day and age i think 25 is a bit high maybe 20 for a 2nd angler.

I know Barry!! I did include the word conservative in my post meaning the amount of anglers as well as the bait. But I think a lot of anglers will not bother fishing the master angler with the bait supplied situation. So it might even it self out?????

you dont nead to worry about 200 anglers for master angler, because anyone i have been talking to have said that they will not go under those rules , and if the entry drops for the masters their will not be enough money to pay for the team

Mixed feelings about it to be honest, great not to have to go organising bait and it works extremely well from the boats, however I can understand peoples concerns. Give it a try sure and see what happens before we all lose the run of ourselves, it might be OK, who knows. Be more concerned with decent venue selection to be honest. The ruling about a representative at the masters for every ten in a club is a disaster. There was once a little prestige and kudos attached to qualifying and fishing at this event. Even with one representative per 25 anglers, the general standard is just not there. What on earth is it going to be like with one in ten? Is this also passed for the boats? If so, how on earth are they going to find venues with enough boats? Can Kilmore, Donegal Bay and Cork Harbour handle up to 200 anglers?

Guys, it is like this....
If you are in a club and felt strongly enough about things it was your responsibility to have delegates from your club present to vote on things, if no one was for going then the effort should have been made by yourself to go on the clubs behalf (the likes of Dave, Paul and myself to name a few.)
As far as bait provided personally think its a great step forward and would love to see it being spread further .... indeed being implemented in closed gold medals as well.
Its no problem getting bait for big numbers.... ammo, dragon baits etc can cater for it all.... its done every year for home internationals and world events when they are held here, so why should it be a problem for masters or fish offs?!!

Dont get me wrong, our club backed a lot of the proposals, but was also against a lot of them, some went in our favour, others didnt, thats democracy! and we have to get on with it.

We also must remember that our federation should be about more than just match angling..... and lets face it, thats where all the bitching is being done that is currently tearing our federation to shreds. We must cater somewhere for 'joe bloggs' as if there is nothing for them to get out of the federation, they wont be part of it...... if we lose our 'joe bloggs' anglers you can forget about the federation, at the end of the day it is anglers like these who are the backbone of the federation. It is always bigger than the 100 guys standing at a masters.... people should not lose sight of this...

the current system accomodates thisfor those who have their eyes set on fishing at the top level.... go for your masters/fish offs/ world championship route. all well and good if you can afford to do so nowadays. keep the home nations as a team where the average angler has at least a fighting chance and something which they can realistically aspire to making a team, wherever they end up fishing they will at least be used to the type of fishing and should do ok provided the right management and coaching structures are in place

Also bear in mind that on the other side of the coin we have lost a good lot of guys who were more than capable at international level because of the changes that have already taken place over the past few years, we need to be very careful not to lose anymore, in fact i know of quite a few good anglers who are threatening to pull out of the federation already following some of the things that were passed on Saturday.
there are obviously two camps of thought on how teams should be selected, and they arent going to agree, and there seems to be no room for meeting in the middle on things, so its going to go boom soon, one way or another people are goin to walk away... and numbers will diminish which is a damn pity! as with all of the proposals that went through, they really should be given the same 3 year grace that others have received so having plans to completely turn a decision around that has just been made in a years time without even giving it a chance to work isnt on in my eyes...

So people bear in mind, its the way people are here, we dont react well to change in a hurry, give things time, if they dont work after a period of time, then try something different.

Well whoever voted backing this nonsense (boat anglers or other) and if the masters + fish-offs are fished under this ridiculous rule they have hepled greatly in the further decline of match fishing in this country.

well put phil

Well said there Phil, nice to see a rational response covering a different view on an emotive topic.

We also must remember that our federation should be about more than just match angling..... and lets face it, thats where all the bitching is being done that is currently tearing our federation to shreds. We must cater somewhere for 'joe bloggs' as if there is nothing for them to get out of the federation, they wont be part of it...... if we lose our 'joe bloggs' anglers you can forget about the federation, at the end of the day it is anglers like these who are the backbone of the federation. It is always bigger than the 100 guys standing at a masters.... people should not lose sight of this...

Quite right, Phil.

Just out of interest, can anyone tell me how much time at the AGM was dedicated to comps/rules, and how much was dedicated to other affairs? What ratio of the proposals voted on was about comp/match angling?

To be honest, lads, this is an IFSA matter and the IFSA have their own website. I'm considering locking/removing this thread, as it may be inappropriate to discuss their internal affairs on SAI.

In the meantime, it'll remain open whilst I have a chat with the other mods and admin.

If so, how on earth are they going to find venues with enough boats?

Maybe your surfer friends might help us out with that pete

We also must remember that our federation should be about more than just match angling..... and lets face it, thats where all the bitching is being done that is currently tearing our federation to shreds. We must cater somewhere for 'joe bloggs' as if there is nothing for them to get out of the federation, they wont be part of it...... if we lose our 'joe bloggs' anglers you can forget about the federation, at the end of the day it is anglers like these who are the backbone of the federation. It is always bigger than the 100 guys standing at a masters.... people should not lose sight of this...

Quite right, Phil.

Just out of interest, can anyone tell me how much time at the AGM was dedicated to comps/rules, and how much was dedicated to other affairs? What ratio of the proposals voted on was about comp/match angling?

To be honest, lads, this is an IFSA matter and the IFSA have their own website. I'm considering locking/removing this thread, as it may be inappropriate to discuss their internal affairs on SAI.

In the meantime, it'll remain open whilst I have a chat with the other mods and admin.

i stand corrected on this, but id say a good 90% of the notices of motion were in relation to processes for qualification, rules, managersand what have you for home nations and the world shore and boat teams, although, these were all the notices of motion that were received, so its down to all clubs to put things forward themselves if they want changes made in the likes of specimen systems etc and all other matters within the federation.
perhaps its time that there were different sections within our federation covering each part.
not all members are match anglers, some are specimen hunters, species hunters, pleasure anglers, some just in it purely for club angling.

have to agree with dave 100%
what was going forward is now going back
looks like lotto time
imo the bait supply will not work wrong bait for venues ,
bait quality could not be good for that many anglers

well was not at agm myself as my club already had two people at it,but we had meeting the week before to see witch way the club was to vote.but i think it is a major step back if the right bait could be supplied it might be good but i dont see how they can get enough good crab for sy 100 anglers and if they did would everyone get good crabs or a few good and the reat stones ect... and if they had the right bait is it fair cos the cost will prob go up,its 50 for bait for the boats and its only mackerel and rag image the cost of crab maddies wraps ect and if i can do my own bait for free before but now have to pay for it the weekend is costly enough as it is.this day and age we should be thinking of dropping the prices of competitions even if it mean smaller prizes.
the lads are right that the ifsa is not just about the few at the top or the lads compete to get to the top (now there not a lot out there for lads not compete and maybe there should be differant types of competitons brought in to involve all ie species comps bigest comps ect..?) but when we are discussing the rules for the master angler we are not talking about the interests of the joe bloggs but that lads that want to compete.i really thnk some of the new rules are going to hurt the ifsa this year.i dont feel like going the whole way to mullighmore for a lottery.

maybe on an other note we should also for club level be looking at other ideas or events to add into the year that are not serious competitions????

Alot of mixed emotions on this matter. Was at the A.G.M saturday and left with a strong sense of frustration at what had i'd seen there. I agree in a large part with what phil has said but i cant help feel that what happened is to the detriment of the federation. While i can see where people are coming from with the arguement that the I.F.S.A is for all anglers i cant help but feel that a network should be put in place to give the best anglers the oppertunity to represent the country. At the end of the day you are competing to be the top angler in the british isles or the world,every effort should be made to ensure that the best anglers get this oppertunity. Presently this is not the case, an angler can get lucky, have one good day and qualify. I just fail to see how that can be a fair or constructive way of picking a team. currently if you look at the top anglers in the country, the ones that are consistantly doing well in the big opens, many arnt present on international team. This has to indicate something. While many might feel this is an elitist view, and to an certain extent it probably is but again your competing against the top anglers in the world, some of them professional. Doesnt it make sense that we have our best anglers competing against them..

well, fish offs were what was wanted, now there are more guys going to be in it.... fishing to the same sizes and bait regulations as the world team. surely a step forward where the best anglers will come through?
home nations system, jimmy smith, yes this is a one off, but it is a prestigious title here and deserves the recognition of getting a team place from it.... how many poor anglers have won it in recent years??? closed gold medals, if provincial councils are to run their closed gold medals over a 5 leg system or whatever it will eliminate any lucky angler.

lets face it, we have had good enough teams of guys making teams world and home nations over the years.... that cant be argued, its down to what we do with these anglers between when they make the team and the championships that matters.
using the present qualification processes, i think we have a strong enough home nations team so far, and a good angler to captain world team, and im sure the top 5 in masters would have been quality enough team, but sure we will have another 4 strong anglers coming through fish offs. just cant see how so many changes are required in some peoples eyes.

[onlyacod]

Phil, I don't understand how you see bait being supplied/restricting baits as a 'step forward'. As Dave said in his post probably 50% of the anglers will blank in next years masters (daylight comps) if not more. It becomes a lottery as many people have said. You also said the teams over the last few years have been 'good enough', they should be as good as we can possibly make them not 'good enough'!!!

Most of our 'top anglers' are against any bait bans, bait restrictions etc as they see it as a step backwards and 'luck' plays more of a part in the outcome of matches. Are they all wrong? I don't think so... These lads are winning comps week in week out and have done so for along time. Time we start listening to what they say instead of ignoring them.

Restricting the bait anglers can use = reduced number of fish CAUGHT by anglers... FACT... = backwards step

What was started off by a few small minded anglers in Leinster a couple of years ago wanting rag, maddies, whites and crab banned in Leinster League Comps has now led/resulted in this. Next years AGM can't come quick enough!

Last edited by onlyacod on Wed Nov 10, 2010 2:40 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Hi, can anyone confirm what baits will be supplied or will we find out two weeks before "THE DISASTER ANGLER"........ Thanks.

i have to side with the consensus here, the idea of a bait supplied master angler is a bit grim to be honest. surely its going to be a logistical nightmare. organisers have enough to worry about pegging, stewarting and running the competition never mind trying to source and ensure everyone has adequete bait, surely its a logistical nightmare. it just doesnt make sence. as a result someone is going to have to pick up the tab as well, so does that mean entry fees are going to go up thereby costing more to the clubs? ammo and dragon are expensive.

i totaly inderstand phil that IFSA is not soley about match anglers but the master angler is. its designed to be a serious competition were the federation in theory can showcase the talent of some of our gifted anglers on a world stage, but evidently this is going to put a stop to that. joe bloggs should not ever be allowed to simply fish one comp and all of a sudden make an international team unless he;s got the skill to win it on his angling merits, not by complete fluke. it should be hard earned by those who spent the time learning the craft. by all means let joe bloggs take part but make it so that its not a lottery.




the prospect of rocking up to mullaghmore in a years time with a pack of eels and some mack is disconcerting is it not?