Guest Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 I want to be a member of two Federations and this rule is stopping me from achieving this.Is it time this rule was removed to let the likes of myself have the choice.I appreciate this may well have been asked before on here but now, it is relevant to myself and i would like to see what the general consensus is on this issue.
Guest bigda Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 nope they should start to endorse rule33 this year, and giving every fancier the only choice one or the other, to end this bed hopping, its doing more harm than good, as when agm have to deliberate, the then said members run back to tell the other what is happening and then the problems begin i.e. where cheaper than you, we have the best transport, we have the most pools, we are only in the wee national better chance of winning, and selling birds, it all there and it has come to the fore if this rule was administered as it should have been done there would only be one national end of .
Guest Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 nope they should start to endorse rule33 this year, and giving every fancier the only choice one or the other, to end this bed hopping, its doing more harm than good, as when agm have to deliberate, the then said members run back to tell the other what is happening and then the problems begin i.e. where cheaper than you, we have the best transport, we have the most pools, we are only in the wee national better chance of winning, and selling birds, it all there and it has come to the fore if this rule was administered as it should have been done there would only be one national end of . Danny you talk some crap some times mate,you will be getting black belt status in talking crap soon. :P ;D ;D
Guest bigda Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 Danny you talk some crap some times mate,you will be getting black belt status in talking crap soon. :P ;D ;D whats wrong you don't like my answers, vincey you should have changed your thread, and said i think the rule 33 should be scraped all together ;) ;D in your opinion :X :X :X ;) ;) ;D ;D
Guest Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 whats wrong you don't like my answers, vincey you should have changed your thread, and said i think the rule 33 should be scraped all together ;) ;D in your opinion :X :X :X ;) ;) ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D
Guest bigda Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D when hal, comes on you will get his vote ;D ;D
Guest Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 when hal, comes on you will get his vote ;D ;D Who is hal??????????????and you are in the minority at the moment mate. :P :P ;D ;D
Guest bigda Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 Who is hal??????????????and you are in the minority at the moment mate. :P :P ;D ;D uphallhen ------------
Guest Gareth Rankin Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 Have no problem with any member who wants to fly with 2 federations on a weekly basis but think it is very ungentlemanly to fly with one fed all season then jump ship to the fed that has the big prize money races.
Delboy Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 Have no problem with any member who wants to fly with 2 federations on a weekly basis but think it is very ungentlemanly to fly with one fed all season then jump ship to the fed that has the big prize money races. Your in wrong feckin sport Gareth if your looking for gentlemen ;D ;D
frank-123 Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 i would not welcome this rule to be changed your in or your out simple
ALF Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 It might not just be affecting yourself Vincent as i know a few people are thinking about joining South Lanarkshire fed to race there y/b's this year...
Guest Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 It might not just be affecting yourself Vincent as i know a few people are thinking about joining South Lanarkshire fed to race there y/b's this year... There is a loophole that can be flaunted,but cannot be bothered with all that.
ALF Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 There is a loophole that can be flaunted,but cannot be bothered with all that. Yes the loophole is there...
Guest Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 Going with the results of the poll so far, it does seem that there are a few that are scared of change/progression which is sadly evident across the board within Scottish pigeon racing.Cmon guys why are yous all so scared of change.Time to live with the times i think.Competition is everything after all is it not. ;)
Guest Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 is that not illegal restrictive freedom of choice can understand some wanting it to stay but it might have been all right years ago but not now dangerious ground and the only winner will be the lawers could cost the fed most of there hard earned savings
Guest bigda Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 is that not illegal restrictive freedom of choice can understand some wanting it to stay but it might have been all right years ago but not now dangerious ground and the only winner will be the lawers could cost the fed most of there hard earned savings no, being a member of another fed, you could not defend that in court, as you could not prove who you show allegiance to, as like you can join the army be in the army but cant be in two regiments at any one time ??)
Guest stb Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 no, being a member of another fed, you could not defend that in court, as you could not prove who you show allegiance to, as like you can join the army be in the army but cant be in two regiments at any one time ??) bigda apart from very few feds you can be in as many as will let you fly in . i have been in 3 before and flew in them all.
Guest bigda Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 bigda apart from very few feds you can be in as many as will let you fly in . i have been in 3 before and flew in them all. the reply is only to franks, as to restriction in going to court to defend his grievance
Guest stb Posted July 10, 2009 Report Posted July 10, 2009 the reply is only to franks, as to restriction in going to court to defend his grievance na probs
Guest bigda Posted July 11, 2009 Report Posted July 11, 2009 this is a great thing yes for lawyers , freedom of choice, but they never tell you the whole truth about freedom, if you are a member of anything it asks you to follow the rules and obey, and such like, as you can give only 100% at any one time, being a member of two clubs of the same nature, pigeon racing, or dancing, you have given up the 100% committal to the one club, and there ain't a court in the land that can save you a-ss should any club ask for you total support, and commitment, you would then find out you would have to give up on all the clubs, to then challenge them in court, that they where restricting you to joining the one or the other or both full circle again the lawyer would ask you what club you would like to join, and what one you can give 100% committal to
Guest stb Posted July 11, 2009 Report Posted July 11, 2009 this is a great thing yes for lawyers , freedom of choice, but they never tell you the whole truth about freedom, if you are a member of anything it asks you to follow the rules and obey, and such like, as you can give only 100% at any one time, being a member of two clubs of the same nature, pigeon racing, or dancing, you have given up the 100% committal to the one club, and there ain't a court in the land that can save you a-ss should any club ask for you total support, and commitment, you would then find out you would have to give up on all the clubs, to then challenge them in court, that they where restricting you to joining the one or the other or both full circle again the lawyer would ask you what club you would like to join, and what one you can give 100% committal tobigda its not about commital , a know fanciers who pay there subs to there clubs and feds every year and never race or havnt the time to race birds so there commital to fed is zero but clubs and fed get there dosh every year for nothing. as long as they pay it dont make a difference whether they race or not.
Guest bigda Posted July 11, 2009 Report Posted July 11, 2009 bigda its not about committal , a know fanciers who pay there subs to there clubs and feds every year and never race or haven't the time to race birds so there committal to fed is zero but clubs and fed get there dish every year for nothing. as long as they pay it don't make a difference whether they race or not. never said anything about that mate i am saying people who have a grevince with a fed, cant move the goal post to suit there own interests, yes you might be able to join different feds, but should they change there mind as to having you, you cant defend it if your are a member of another fed. and the one thing they are entitled to ask is give them 100% committal to our fed.
Guest Posted July 11, 2009 Report Posted July 11, 2009 is that not illegal restrictive freedom of choice can understand some wanting it to stay but it might have been all right years ago but not now dangerious ground and the only winner will be the lawers could cost the fed most of there hard earned savings A BIT RICH COMING FROM YOU FRANK,WHEN YOUR OWN CLUB RESTRICTS THE USE OF ETS IN YOUR CLUB(RPRA)AFTER IT HAS BEEN PASSED FOR USE BY YOUR RULING BODY!
jock3 Posted July 11, 2009 Report Posted July 11, 2009 A BIT RICH COMING FROM YOU FRANK,WHEN YOUR OWN CLUB RESTRICTS THE USE OF ETS IN YOUR CLUB(RPRA)AFTER IT HAS BEEN PASSED FOR USE BY YOUR RULING BODY! OUCH ;D
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now