All Activity

It wasnt problem until the last 12 months was it?

The thing is, that £40k investment will appease some, similar to when we failed to do a total overhaul of the pitch but they came out and bigged up that they had stitched the goal areas and again people defended the owners. But the owners were supposed to and eventually blocked the aforementioned overhaul which was needed after 30+ plus years, a few years ago. It would have cost I think £2m and included the pipes underneath. And yet some with the inability to realise that its just a PR attempted spin piece will watch and read similar rubbish to today and swallow it. Its not the clubs fault!

Why was this never a problem pre-2011 then?

As someone said previously it would Environment agency problem and its would take years to find a solution and money to pay for it

I call BS on the club's latest statement regarding the cancellation; a lot of excuses but no solutions. Same thing will happen again in the following season(s) if no investment is made. 1. River was a problem in the match vs Portsmouth last year - then why don't they contact city council and express that it's an issue that needs resolving a.s.a.p.? What have the club done/ invested into in the meantime to mitigate the risk themselves regarding an overflowing river? 2. The pitch is 36 years old ad so the drainage system couldn't manage to handle the heavy rainfall (75 ml) against Ipswich - tell the owners to put money in to upgrade it then? I'm no expert on this but were pitch covers used at halftime for example to stop some of it and to lessen the pressure on the drainage? Again, no other club in the area had their game called off on that day (Bolton, B*rnley, Man Utd etc.). B*rnley supposedly handled 55 ml with a new pitch/drainage system but we can't handle 75 ml? Is it really that much of a difference? Are we really that far behind in terms of 'drainage system technologies' as ridiculous as it sounds? New instalment takes anywhere between 6-8 weeks according to web sources and are preferably being done during off season/ summer when conditions are usually dry, so the time aspect shouldn't be a factor here. 3. The groundsman happily shows off his latest 40K equipment as if that shows intent and willingness from the owners when we've had games cancelled due to waterlogged pitch for the past 4-5 seasons and we nearly had to call off the game vs Stoke as well. But I guess he'll work for another few years without any complaints until his retirement while traveling supporters are getting robbed from seeing their beloved team.

It is. He even acknowledged the age of the pitch on the video and the drainage underneath. The owners refused to do the full pitch overhaul needed the other year. Only the gullible and naive would think it was totally out of the clubs control.

He did that old pitch isn't to blame for the Ipswich game being called off but the pitch couldn't deal with the amount of rain we got.. The river level wasn't a factor and he was loud in saying. Also said we cant touch or changing in regard to the river. Its not something Rovers can do anything about

Mowbray and Waggott both said publicly that Mowbray didnt get Waggott the CEO job

It's alright, they'll plant three trees to carbon offset it all. Though of course, that doesn't apply to us proles. Sell your car and catch the bus, you selfish peasant.

The LT article clears it up for me nicely, the facts are there for all to see. However, I can't reach the same conclusion as the club. It's not to do with the amount of rain we got because Chorley, B***ley and others in the local area all played at the same time, both less than 10 miles in either direction. It seems to be to that small matter of having a pitch that's nearly 4 decades old. I wonder whether that makes it the oldest or certainly one of the oldest pitches in the division, that wouldn't surprise me. Sounds like an expensive job, but not for billionaire owners who love the club like their baby.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/25539231.blackburn-rovers-address-ipswich-abandonment-ewood-park-concerns/?ref=rss&utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky

Either side of Waggott these owners haven't had a CEO - that's from 2010 to December 2017 and since May 2025. They don't want a CEO. Never have never will. They agreed to bring in Waggott at Mowbray's request and together they went out to India and talked the owners into 'backing them'. Now we are just back to normal - no CEO and no need for one because they won't be empowered to do the job of a CEO in any event. The CEO here is just to tick boxes, meet regulations and talk a good game to the fans. Now they've cut off the Telegraph there's even less for them to do. It won't have gone unnoticed that they're saving hundreds of thousands of pounds a year by not having one.

It's just typical of the lethargy at the club, to be honest. I think the FF minutes stated that this will be dealt with in India, but my guess is that we will plod along for as long as we can with Rudy and Pasha.

https://www.facebook.com/share/17UpE273ax/

Theyve put up a video of the groundsman defending the club on the official youtube now. Mentioned the old pitch, all the other stuff is immaterial. Thats the issue, the owners wouldnt go through with the promised full pitch revamp a few years ago.

Until he left, you was pretty insistent that he was correct to carry on playing as we was at the time. He was wrong but it seemed to be out of stubborness rather than naivety. He had plans and he had the carpet totally pulled from underneath him, hence why he wanted to resign. His main lesson is to choose his next club based on the owners and board. Dont make the mistake he made here where Venkys totally messed up all of his plans.

Undav said publicly he turned down to stay and fight for Place at Brighton. We already a deal in place with Brighton. JDT and GB couldn't convince him to join us. Gregg Broughton's comments on the public record " I think it's on the public record we had an agreement in place with Brighton for Deniz Undav, and at that stage just before it was done, the player decided to stay in-house. " https://x.com/Rovers/status/1621486156721553410?ref_src=twsrc^tfw|twcamp^tweetembed|twterm^1621486156721553410|twgr^87f7e0e8d7a397d4e5e781152c1257c1b972938b|twcon^s1_c10&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Ffootballleagueworld.co.uk%2Fkey-blackburn-rovers-figure-reveals-premier-league-striker-turned-down-january-transfer-move%2F

A pattern emerges of not getting business done when needed. I very much doubt that's because we 'couldn't convince' a player to join us and is more likely because the owners and their henchman refused to sanction the outlay. In doing so it probably cost them millions and millions. JDT will have learned one thing from his time at Rovers. Never, ever trust a Venky.

Norwich drew with them, earlier in the season.

U21s are away at Preston tomorrow afternoon Haven't seen anything about this from Rovers, but the below is on the Preston site https://www.pnefc.net/news/2025/october/13/central-league-cup-continues-tuesday/

He needs to be club management but willing to be more adaptable in tactical

Not everything is about Rovers. He is young English coach and he has took his first move in management so I hope he does well there and develop into a good one

I know l, atleast we know we can draw against them. Positive if anything even though not at full strength

Given Waggott left around 5 months but according to companies house he is CEO here. I would have expected announcement by now

Never played for Rovers either or has any affiliation. odd one.