An option in who's favour? The club's? May as well be a 1 year deal then.

Don’t disagree with anything you said but as it stands my response to you saying that’s guesswork is correct

Alarm bells didn't ring for you when Eustace walked? They didn't blare louder when you heard Gestede speak publicly?

Who does a 2 year deal harm, exactly? Let's say he's brilliant again next year, but the year after his legs completely go (unlikely). He'd still be a very useful bench player and personality to have around the squad (he seems incredibly professional). They were willing to keep McFadzean on as essentially a player / coach. Why not Batth? We apparently have 2 or 3 really promising young CBs on the books, they could learn a lot from him.

They sat him on the bench behind Calamity for most of the year, of course he wans out.

Be what Markanday will be getting next season.

Yep,looks very physically meek too.We'll soon find out what he is made of.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/25233718.brittain-sends-clear-blackburn-message-amid-contract-talks/ Elliot still trying to peddle that Brittain contract talks are "ongoing" with an absolute nothing story about him and his misses appearing on some netball show on Sky. Also a reminder that we haven't renewed any first team player contracts since 8th December 2023, just over 18 months ago.

More than he was worth.

I don't know for sure what's been offered to Batth but based on what we've seen operationally over the years, I would think it's a relatively poor deal. When Broughton was here and discussions were ongoing with Dolan about a new contract, I was told, by someone who would know, what the opening offer was. Notwithstanding the fact that is was an opening offer and negotiations move the goal posts for both parties, I was taken aback by, IMO, the relative paucity of the offer. There have been postings on here about Waggott allegedly adversely moving the goal posts on offers once made. A leopard doesn't change its spots and I have neither trust in nor respect for our regime. Rovers' recent history suggests to me neither Batth nor Weimann were made decent competitive offers irrespective of any 2nd year issues. If you can't tie down players already in the building then I think as a club we have huge problems.

Terrible bloke 😂😂

This next bit is speculation on my part (but I will show my workings 🧐) If Venkys were willing to pay the 100% guarantee I don’t think they’d have needed to go to court re the £4.85 million. I’m basing this on the fact they were given permission to send monies in March ‘24 without a judge ordering the authorities to allow this* With all this in mind, whilst the May case included a request for funds to be sent, I think their main motivation for the appeal was the removal of the guarantee. * I also have a slight recollection of a poster on here saying Pasha had confirmed a ‘deal had been done’. I’m presuming that deal was along the lines of ‘if you keep to the current court conditions well give you permission’ I wouldn’t want to rely on that source though (Pasha, not whoever that poster was 😁).

A very complicated typewriter !

Yes, he's cheap.

Ah I thought the purpose of last month's case was purely to be allowed to send over £4.85m. With a by product of the hearing being that the "bond" was reduced to 50% on the basis that there'd previously been argument that 100% was too onerous etc.

https://rovers.co.uk/news/2025/june/12/val--ddn-fits-the-profile-we-want-/

I hope not I think he could potentially embed himself in the squad. He's new to the championship still I think he can scare some defenders if he applies himself better

The other hearing currently pending (5th August) is a continuation of the original case - this is Venkys wanting to be able to send funds with no conditions whatsoever* Last month’s case was a separate (albeit clearly linked) appeal looking for the removal of the guarantee condition only. * other conditions are such things as the club’s auditors providing an end use certificate within three days of the remittance being received (ie confirming the monies will be used for the requested purpose only).

Whoosh. Sorry my feeble attempt at humour. Not a reference for the teenagers. (The Enigma machine)

Yea they use a banana

Bad understanding of the English dictionary. He's not going to hit the ground running is he.

Agreed. Aren't the further hearings that are scheduled if they ever get heard) to discuss whether the need for a guarantee can be removed altogether?

No, it’s definitely been implemented - the hearing you’re referring to was 20th May, the hearing when the reduction was applied was 26th May.

And there’s the guesswork - how do you know that hasn’t been offered? How do you know batth just point blank wants 2 guaranteed years of financial security before he retires? Not just possibility with options etc guessing…now I fully agree this ownership and club are a shambles but I’m certainly not overly mad at the fact they are holding tight on offering a soon to be 35 year old a two year contract now if it comes out that he accepts a derby deal one year rolling with options then yes il retract but it’s all guesswork at the moment all we know from any source is he wants two more years

Batth will be a colossal miss. Hyam is useless without someone extremely steady alongside him. Not too bothered about Weimann but of course if we lose him and Dolan then that's 14 goals missing from a forward line that was never exactly prolific in the first place. Grim times.