Leaderboard

The amount of bickering and indignated self righteousness on this thread says a lot more about the canalworld forums than it does about the TV. I thoroughly enjoyed it. -The show does not claim to be about boats, if anything the idea is light entertainement using the boat as a prop to approach different topics of the industrial revolution. -the show does not aim to be geographically accurate, or it would make for very boring television -Guy Martin speaks the way he does, get over it. Canalworld reminds me of a retirement home sometimes, all bickering and pointless indignation. My main criticism of the show would have been about the patronising voiceover. But I could live with it.

You know this really annoys me! The cc'er guidelines are quite clear that you should be on a progressive journey around the system! Because of you lot down south clogging up the canals as a a way of getting cheap housing, you are ruining my way of life! I am now faced with stupid mooring rules and hostile BW staff. It was great before i was free to roam where I liked without being harassed. Stop arguing with BW and move your bloody boats! If you can't move every 14 days and in a progressive way get a mooring! If you can't afford a mooring sell your boat and get something you can afford without causing trouble for other people.

People must get to grips to whom this program is aimed at --- mass prime time TV audience! We all, on this forum, know that it contains numerous, geographic and timing faults. But if we were to follow them on their journey in real time, as some on here would like, we would barely make it off the Bridgewater by the end of the series. Please take it as it was aimed, to introduce the general public to the Inland Waterways, and to Britain's great Industrial Heritage. If you don't like it don't watch it, I'm sure plenty will, and will enjoy it. Chris

No I think you'll find they are trying to clear the canals for the olympics. They don't have a problem with cc'ers or livaboards who follow the guidelines, they have a problem with bridge hoppers who don't move very far or continious moorers. This is why we live in a nanny state, the guidelines are what BW thinks is a fair way to behave on the canals. what is happening down there is unfair to the majority of boaters on the system and now because you won't follow the guidelines you are forcing BW to introduce draconian rules which is to the detriment of all canal users. It takes away my freedom and frankly arguing of the finer points of what is law or not is shameful.

Easy to critisise for all budding TV program makers. Yes imo there are editorial and production errors, but we don't know the schedule and budget they were working on. Lets not dwell on the negative. Found it an interesting and enjoyable program. The most important thing is that the canals, boats, landscape and heritage was on primetime TV. You can't get much better than that.

It was entertaining and makes a change from the 'come dine/masterchef/celebrity i can't cook/dancing on ice/come dancing/60 second slap paint about' rubbish that we usually get. If it makes a tenth of the UK viewing public think more about the canals and perhaps encourages them to go and walk a towpath or get involved then it can't be a bad thing. We are going to need all the support and understanding we can get over the next few years for the 'big society' of waterways or whatever they end up calling it.

keep on topic , whats the unstable bar got to do with guy,s boat.

Entirely agree. It's a prime time BBC1 show to capture an audience who've just watched The One Show and intended to entertain them and tell them a bit of interesting stuff too. I can't believe he amount of nit-picking. The sneering comments because a bloke who clearly knows his engines (he's a mechanic and a bike racer) makes a slip of the tongue about 'overhead cam'. And all the grumbling about continuity. Do you think the team that did 'Coast' walked every mile with the film crew in tow? This is t.v. - shots are set-up, edited, mixed etc to create a visual impression. I thought he was a cheerful, telegenic presenter who enjoyed the subject, I thought there was some good canal filming and the attempt to smelt(?) iron was genuinely interesting. I'll be watching next week too and having an extra chuckle about all the CWF grumps chuntering in their beards.

fancy being my deputy

Your argument supposes that the licence fee includes payment for mooring, and that any additional charge would be "paying twice for the same thing". I contend that the licence is just that; a licence fee, which does not include any payment for services. As such, BW are free to charge for any "USE" of the system at their discretion (or to choose not to charge). It is worth noting that whilst mooring charges and restrictions rely upon s43 TA 1962, Licence Fees are levied under other legislative provisions, so a licence fee cannot be a charge under s43.

It was mentioned that casting iron meant various canal structures could be made , also was the trent and mersey used to transport pottery. Like said above its light entertainment for a wide audience ,some of that wide audience will be asking me over the following days about the canals because they know i have a boat and i will be glad to tell them what it is all about , probably end up taking several out on the boat , we are going to be depending on the general publics charity i believe in the not to distant future to keep the canals and if it lifts the waterways profile ,be grateful.

Where it would be found to be true. The 1962 Act uses the word "service", but it goes on to define "service" to give it a very broad meaning. Whilst a court can interpret an Act where it needs to, it cannot interpret something in a manner that runs contrary to what the Act says, and as such, allowing a boater to moor to a bank IS a service. Oh, and if Sally Ash needs any assistance, I'm available for the right money.

I've just been out and had a look: At 11-00 at Sawley flood lock the level was 4" below the red and falling. With no serious rain I think you'll be OK later in the week.

It was well up when I crossed Sawley Bridge this morning. I was on my bike so paying plenty of attention to the traffic and I didn't notice of the flood gates at Sawley Cut were shut. "Swan Island" , just upstream of the bridge was under water though. This is usually taken as the river being in flood. If you like I'll try to nip back tomorrow or Wed for a closer look.