Vince

This is a long post however it is worthwhile you taking your time to read it carefully.

Where do I begin?

With all the talk recenty about about problems with the Northen Intersite and additional teams entering I believe the time has come to take a long hard look at the series as a whole and see what needs to be done to get things back to where they were.

Dave Webster of MD's was the original instigator of the Intersite Series when it began back in 2002 and below is a copy of a post he has recently posted on MD's.
It's a detailed account of exactly why the series began and how it was run in the early days.

Being the originator of the series way back in 2002 I feel I need to put my ten bob in

Firstly when the series was initially talked about it was said that we wouldn't get it off the ground and after talks with the other websites that was proven wrong as most people were up for it.
'It' being a good laugh meeting other members of other websites for a freindly series of matches where the winning team held the merit of being the winning team, nothing more

There was a lot of banter, some ringers (Zinky, eh?) but the emphasis was not on winning but on enjoying the day, and that was certainly the case in the first few years, with the first matches being held in 2003

Unfortunatley to me and to some others the series became too competitive with winning taking precedent to enjoying the day, added to that the increase in pools monies that we saw and before long the less experienced participants soon became pools fodder and the humour aspect went wayside.
This was corrected I believe last year.

In the early days I ran the matches with the help of regional organisers and between us we kept some control over the series but personally I feel that once too many people became involved, too many chefs in effect, everything started to go pear shaped and overall control of the series was lost

What the series really needs to do is to go back to basics, it needs to look in depth at what the end result is to be gained and that is for people to enjoy themselves, take the mickey out of the other participants and teams, help out fellow team members and for the more experienced matchmen to 'teach' the less experienced.
It should not be a win at all costs, it should not be for the glory of holding the covetted shield (not that we ever did lol) and further more it should not yield sufficient pools monies to make it attractive to those that want to participate purely for the pickings

The rules as such in the early days was that the Intersite Series was open to all websites but they needed to be able to field a team in each region.
This was to make the series litterally that - a series of matches, based on points, and the overall winning team was the one with most points at the end of the series.

Websites that wanted to take part in the series had to show their interest before the start of the year and then commit to it once the year began.
A team cannot be added part way through a year because it makes a nightmare of booking venues, and the organisers need to know the numbers with as much advanced notice as possible so to be able to book a reasonable and suitable venue.
Likewise a team should not be able to drop out part way through a series as that will leave the organisers in the lurch with pegs that may need to be paid for

Another rule that was implemented at the beginning is that any participating website had to be open to all.
In other words had to be publicly accessible and not a closed site such as a subscription website or private club.
This is not a pop at TFC, it is because the nature of the series was to get all members of all the participating websites to be able to mingle, even to the point of invading other site's intersite threads, all part of the fun and humour that the series intended
This cannot take place if a participating website is 'private'

On the subject of skills, participating teams should not be hand picked based upon skills or venue knowledge, after all again the emphasis was not on winning but taking part.
Team members should be picked irrelevant of the individual's ability or experience, they should be picked because they as an individual want to fish for their website and enjoy the comaradery that that brings. That is why the point scoring was arranged in such a way as to allow everyone the opportunity of being able to add to their team's score - 4 for a section win, down to 1 for last in section, or 0 for a DNW , four people to a section with four teams participating, five to a section with five teams (5 points then for a section win...), etc

The points system also had the advantage of no one really being able to predict the end result as it could all change on the day - take team MD's for example in the first series.
One minute we're riding high having held the lead in the first few matches - the next we were wiped off the podium in the final match.


I personally would hate to see the end of the series but some effort does need to be made to bring it back to the good old days, the organisers in each region should not feel that they are on the front line, nor should they be left out of pocket due to 'no shows'
Most venues do require a deposit on booking and personally I believe that that burden shouldn't fall upon the organisers, perhaps all participating sites should put forward a deposit at the beginning of the year to secure their involvement and also these deposits could be used against venue bookings ?

Pools monies should always be optional, but also should be low key, kept to a maximum of £5.00 and the pot to be split so that the winner would collect no more than say £30-40, enough to cover their bait, pools and peg monies?
Additional pools should be banned except for the obligatory '£Quids' between friends.

Drawing of pegs on the day should be done at random and anglers should not be placed on pegs which again would help to level the playing field somewhat - a good angler could end up on a duff peg, likewise a duff angler could end up on a good peg.
Placing anglers on pegs according to their ability isn't fair and could even be seen as manipulating the draw to gain points .

Perhaps what is needed is for a small committee to be drawn up at the end of the year prior to a new series and that committe to consist of 4 x regional organisers (one from each website) and a chairperson to oversee the running of the series for that year (possibly from a fifth site if participating, or from the winning site fo the year ended?).

Any website who wants to participate in the next series to make it known before the start of that year and to put a deposit to confirm their participation of say £50.00 (this could then be used as deposits for venue bookings)

Each website should submit their team list for a region a month before the start of the match in that region and again to insist that their team members send their peg fees to the region's organiser or to the team captain 3-4weeks prior to the match taking place. This would ensure that the organiser would at least be able to pay for the pegs that have been booked should people not show.

And finally, anyone without a sense of humour, or anyone who displays signs of taking it too seriously should be birched and made to sit between two of the ugliest mingers available - not saying who lol

Personally I would love to see the series get back to what it once was and therefore think that we should take on board Dave's suggestion of getting together a few representatives of the current sites along with a chairperson to look to the future.

Perhaps for this year the best thing would be to keep to the 4 teams that fished last year and any new teams be considered for entry next year.

Even before Dave's suggestion of an Individual to oversee the series Brian of Talk Angling offered to do just that much like WCA did until recently. I for one would be happy for him to do this, let's be honest there won't be many others coming forward to take it on.

So where do we go from here I guess each site needs to find someone prepared to represent them and make contact with Brian at Talk Angling about arranging what to do next. I have already offered to represent MD's and am awaiting approval from them.

Vince

justin case

I read this last night on MD but couldnt find my log in details to reply.

Dave has made a very good post there, he hits the nail on the head on so many points,

I have been commenting about a lot of this for a couple of weeks now as I could see the series becomming fragmented and too many "can we do this can we do that" type questions with no one to get the answer from.

One of the key points that needs to be sorted now, is this year, the suggestion of keeping things as is would be correct, doing anything else would set a president and new sites could use that as a lever in the future, and that lever is currently being tested going on some of the threads I have been reading across multyple boards, we need to sort the northern leg and sort out the western leg, thew Northern leg is currently on hold the western I heard its Viaduct in Aprill but Aprill is just around the corner and no more has been said. Im to the understanding Brian is sorting the midlands so that will be fine.

I would suggest picking up the peices and getting this years series out of the way including the individual, put in place the regional co ordinators and the chairperson, and then approiach all the sites again just like you guys did when you kicked the intersite off see what the numbers and interest are and then plan for next year,
Deadlines need to be made for entry along with a nominal entry fee which could cover any losses for no shows etc.

As for closed sites being allowed this could be managed in one or two ways and possibly open up the door to a couple more sites, firstly the intersite co ordinators and chairperson should get free access to those closed areas, or the intersite discussions within those closed sites remain in the public domain a simple flick of a few buttons and both could be set up, to enter the seires they must comply to that. (just an idea )

You co ordinators and the chairperson need to set the basic rules and guidelines for the series and make it known to all, this uncertanty we have had this year has caused some major greif, we lost Gaz who has put a lot of work into his area we got teams thinking they are fishing to find they cant, we have other teams tring to join but cant find a clear set of guidelines its all a bit messy right now especially looking in from the outside.

Realistically what are the chances of Gaz picking up the reigns again, I know there was discussions on site ( including here) about the rights and wrongs of an additional team fishing and he has had it thrown back in his face to a degree, but with the issues above regarding clarity over rules attended to, that shouldnt happen again.

All I can see is a good series slipping due to lack of co ordination and a little uncertanty sort them issues and its back on track.

Lets get it sorted.

JC

__________________

kleinboet

I am not a match angler, but have taken part in an intersite match and enjoyed it. I totally agree it should be a group of guys "hanging out" with each other only in this case not the pub but at the waterside. The banter is part and parcel of the intersite (even to our "boss" fishing for another site! )
I will be up for these events as the only pressure you have is the banter when you lose a fish or dry net! Please, Please can we have more of that than sitting grimly, with your main aim to outfish everybody else!!