50% of those games came in the space of 7-days, during a very turbulent transitional period due to the departure of Eustace, and subsequent, mid-season appointment of Ismael.... We also lost at home to Portsmouth and Boro in that run of 5 defeats on the spin. You can't tell me we'd have picked up 0 points in those 5 games had Eustace stayed in charge.

Semantics…but I think Venky’s strategy is “The losses* must not exceed X” & if the by product of that is relegation, then they aren’t unduly concerned. Rudy & Suhail are more likely to be targeted on financials than league position. Their task being to minimise losses recognising that if relegation occurs, the cost base needs to be cut even more dramatically. This explains short term contracts, no wage increases, no sizeable fees entertained, season ticket prices held (revenue is up yet sales have fallen don’t forget…). *the amount you want from us every season

I do have a bit of a theory on this, which may be way off the mark. It could be driven by betting companies, as an early kick off accumulator can be attractive to punters and then when that loses, they lump on the normal kick off games and try to recoup their losses. Betting is big business and live TV games do attract more punters.

Come on Eustace, bid 5m. You know you want to.

If Brittain goes through, Baradji in on a cut price deal, then only Tronstad and Travis to offload and you have the perfect window from Pasha's point of view. Start panicking mid October when we're rooted to the bottom with Wednesday.

A 'package' of 3.5 mill 🤔 So it's about 2 million in instalments and a bunch of may or may not trigger add ons then. Still it'll easily cover this summers real outlay. Onto the loan market we go.....

I see Rovers have drawn Morecambe in the first game of Group A of the National League Cup. Or maybe not...

Try and avoid relegation, embarrassing season coming up

Certainly a top 5 in the league right back gone to a direct rival its poor but it’s to be expected and would certainly explain the lack of progress on any other targets recently

And none of the £3.5M will be used for transfers. The (sensible model) of buying cheap and selling at top price only works if reinvested into playing squad. We never do. As fans, we shouldn't be happy if any of our first team go, regardless of price...

Every cloud 🤣🤣

Don't make me tap the "his replacement is already at the club" sign

Under Eustace he massively improved defensively and certainly doesnt go missing. Cant see a better right back in the league.

There it is!

I think O'Rourke has been off the mark for a while although did report the McLoughlin deal.

3 seasons Brittain has been here - misses 15 games a season through injury, goes missing when we are up against it defensively and we are getting 3.5 million with a year left on his contract. Normal circumstances good business, but these aren’t normal circumstances. Cheap or no replacement and weaker come the West Brom game.

If Brittain goes as expected, then obviously a giant blow. On Weimann, I said at the time that I personally wouldnt have offered a new deal considering his injury and he did start to slow down before picking it up, but he can be someone you wouldnt have renewed AND a big loss at the same time. He has to be replaced, would sum us up that we offered him a deal yet didnt see fit to bring in another player when he didnt sign it. Holding a grudge over him having treatment for a couple of months is unfair. You cant expect him to sign a new deal just because he received medical treatment under contract. Also, no thanks to loaning young Saudi players. Signing him long term to develop as well as signing some more ready made attacking players, then maybe.

But but..... Chaddy said he was staying. 1st X1 further weakened. Only ray of hope is it's O Rourke and he's been way off the mark for a long time concerning Rovers.

I agree with your final paragraph

Ok. We're going round in circles. The fact that the Club want to loan him out suggests they dont feel he's good enough for their first team. In those circumstances I'd say "the majority of the time" the parent Club would prefer a deal where there's a good chance of selling for a realistic fee at the end of the deal than an out and out loan. In fact maybe the story does ring true. We're probably wanting to loan him with a view to buying him for a half eaten Mars Bar and an empty Coke can at the end of the loan in our usual style.

Covered this summers transfer business and then some in one fell swoop that Brittain deal. Pasha and Gestede will be laughing there heads off.

Im pretty sure that Mercer said Derby.

He's going to go so get it done ASAP imo. If its left to later in the window then the club will claim they tried to get a replacement in but couldn't get it done in time. Then they hope, once again, it becomes yesterday's news and fans don't shout about the money not being re-invested. We're still waiting for the Wharton and Szmodics money to be re-invested! We saw a top-ish level striker as a priority in Jan and were linked with some good names, yet come the summer we're not even targeting a new striker. How does that work?!

I would also hazard a guess that if we could use up to date figures (following the 2 years of cost cutting after the court case & bond etc became an issue), and then take out Rotherham, Plymouth, Huddersfield etc, and replace them with Wrexham, Charlton etc, we may slip another spot or two at least

Think sports Pete is awful although I think there could be some substance to this given the massive Hackney windfall pending