RPRA changing things for membership.

[Guest]

 

There is nothing to say anybodys application has to be accepted unless there is good reason to reject it!

 

 

So nothing apart from the wording of the rule has changed then? expletive remove, whats the point?  :-/

As someone pointed out earlier, that means if the fees are returned then you can still be rejected??? I thought it was a step forward, obviously not! So the weak minded are still in control at that then!  

[pjc]

yep

[Guest spin cycle]

 

The only boundaries i'm against are the "polo mint" boundaries that are put around the lofts of good fanciers within the same village as the club, set purely to keep good fanciers out! My opinion is simply, if you are in the village / town, then as long as you aren't a proven undesirable or defaulter, then you should be allowed in to your local club.   Its the only fair way! You should not be kept out because you race a good bird!

 

'polo mint' boundaries are obviously wrong ...one other problem is how do you decide if someone is a'proven undesirable'....you can't. he will say it is because he's a good flyer..but the members think he'll make club life miserable

[The Game Keeper]

the ruling should be let every one joine other than defaulters if in club and start trouble warn once then ungentleman rule comes in then there out every one deserves a chance

[ChrisMaidment08]

the ruling should be let every one joine other than defaulters if in club and start trouble warn once then ungentleman rule comes in then there out every one deserves a chance

we had such thing in our club as chairman i told him open mouth once more you will get warning letter open it again youer out cured him but you dont know half fanciers till in youer club yes you hear things but most is jelousy

 

[Guest]

 

'polo mint' boundaries are obviously wrong ...one other problem is how do you decide if someone is a'proven undesirable'....you can't. he will say it is because he's a good flyer..but the members think he'll make club life miserable

 

Hi Spin,

Proven undesirable! This to me, means someone who has done wrong in the game, ie; stolen money from the pigeon organization, committed attrocities against fellow fanciers as in killing their pigeons / burning down their lofts etc. That is what i mean by proven, someone who has a record of ungentlemanly conduct WITHIN the sport. Not something for instance like he once as a youngster stole a car, and got a criminal record, etc, so as a middle aged man he can't be allowed in this pigeon club, that type of thing! As Chris Maidment quite rightly points out, there are too many top fanciers being kept out of clubs purely because they are good fliers, nothing else. Just because they are good pigeon men and would make the rest of the club unhappy becaue they aren't as good / competative as them doesn't in my opinion warrant them being kept out of the club, and this is happening all over the place. I thougt this new rule was going to put a stop to this but Phil, (PJC) has highlighted to me just how wrong I am, unfortunately!  :-/ The game should have a motto that each and every fancier should stand by, SPORT FOR ALL, not just the chosen few.

[mark croker]

I think that everyone should have a chance to join a club, people grow up, how many of use have stolen birds as a youngster, I know some of the top flyers in our fed have and at least in a club you can keep an eye on them and if anything does go wrong they have something to lose, with no club and no hope they would just keep stealing

 

If anyone stops anyone from joining a club they need to look at them self’s and ask why is our great sport dying

 

And for keeping good flyers out that’s just stupid, if you don’t compete against the best there is no point in competing at all. Just somthing to think about

 

Sorry for the rant

 

Mark

[pjc]

in all the clubs/societys i've been sec of, we've never refused anybody membership although on occasions there have been members join that i would rather have seen go elsewhere but all have been given a chance.

If they have caused agro antwhere before they have joined with a warning to behave or go but never refused.

 

If you can't compete with the winners either raise your game or put up with your performances don't run away and form another inferior club!

 

Phil

[Guest spin cycle]

 

Hi Spin,

Proven undesirable! This to me, means someone who has done wrong in the game, ie; stolen money from the pigeon organization, committed attrocities against fellow fanciers as in killing their pigeons / burning down their lofts etc. That is what i mean by proven, someone who has a record of ungentlemanly conduct WITHIN the sport. Not something for instance like he once as a youngster stole a car, and got a criminal record, etc, so as a middle aged man he can't be allowed in this pigeon club, that type of thing! As Chris Maidment quite rightly points out, there are too many top fanciers being kept out of clubs purely because they are good fliers, nothing else. Just because they are good pigeon men and would make the rest of the club unhappy becaue they aren't as good / competative as them doesn't in my opinion warrant them being kept out of the club, and this is happening all over the place. I thougt this new rule was going to put a stop to this but Phil, (PJC) has highlighted to me just how wrong I am, unfortunately!  :-/ The game should have a motto that each and every fancier should stand by, SPORT FOR ALL, not just the chosen few.

thats quite a clear cut interpretation..but burning lofts/killing pigeons isn't 'ungentlemanly'....it's unforgivable. i would say someone who spreads discord/ bullies / brags when he wins is more ungentlemanly...and therin is the problem its so subjective. it also puzzles me why these top fanciers want to fly with these pathetic clubs .why not just move on to bigger/better things. i've only ever been a member of one club and been in pigeons 3 years so forgive me if i seem naive

 

[Guest]

in all the clubs/societys i've been sec of, we've never refused anybody membership although on occasions there have been members join that i would rather have seen go elsewhere but all have been given a chance.

If they have caused agro antwhere before they have joined with a warning to behave or go but never refused.

 

If you can't compete with the winners either raise your game or put up with your performances don't run away and form another inferior club!

 

Phil

 

Well said Phil, I agree 100%! Our club is the same, no-one has ever been turned away, even the trouble makers. We let them in! But, I must agree, I would have rather seen them go elsewhere just for the bother they cause, and did cause! Your last sentence sums it up perfectly, but unfortunately, some people can't lift their game!  

 

[pjc]

If they can't lift there game Dave, they should just enjoy the sport for what it is and get pleasure from there birds, winning isn't everything!

 

Phil

[Guest]

thats quite a clear cut interpretation..but burning lofts/killing pigeons isn't 'ungentlemanly'....it's unforgivable. i would say someone who spreads discord/ bullies / brags when he wins is more ungentlemanly...and therin is the problem its so subjective. it also puzzles me why these top fanciers want to fly with these pathetic clubs .why not just move on to bigger/better things. i've only ever been a member of one club and been in pigeons 3 years so forgive me if i seem naive

 

Hi Spin,

agree with your sentiments rgarding the attrocities, it is unforgivable. I have endured both, and considerably more! Also agree with what you are saying as regards the trouble making mouthpieces, but we have fanciers that can't help cutting loose" once they have won a race, i just find it best not to sit with them, lol, and I do my best not to! I agree that the issue is subjective, but I feel that rules could be put in place to cover all eventuallities, and if enforced properly, would tidy up and cleanse the game quite some way.

One reason that some fanciers would want to compete in these pathetic clubs is that they will probably have no where else to go. Up here in the UNC for instance, to compete in the UNC you must first be a member of a club, who are members of the UNC. Each week is a club and Fed race, and from the racing season of about 28 races, we have about 9 races where the whole UNC competes together, and 1 race, the Queens Cup, where the entire north east competes together. If you only were allowed to basket your birds in a club, but not compete for club or Fed honours, then you would be left with only 9 races a year! Personally, if i had voted to force someone to have only that, or even no racing at all, I would not be able to look myself in the mirror. Unfortunately, some people can and do!