Hmmm…in fairness, the Cantwell signing was a similar ilk. Let’s see.

This is exactly right. At the last WATR MoU meeting with the club in November 2024, the club committed to reinstating the fan consultation meetings and set target dates for February/March 2025. WATR were to help facilitate the meetings. Dates and venues were to be confirmed by the club in due course. From that point onwards, the club turned their back on WATR and their own Fan Engagement Plan entirely. Steve Waggott would answer emails but with delaying tactics and prevarication. Pasha and Lynsey Talbot stopped acknowledging emails altogether. The club have ignored all requests for further meetings . The latest FEP seems to confirm the intention to reduce fan engagement and control it via the FF - which as Matty correctly explains - is not the right vehicle. This is all down to Pasha doing things his way for his benefit. Luckily, he gets rattled easily - this is a battle we can win.

I have them now and then. I try not to make a habit of it though 😁

it is a good idea. Sounds like Glen and Duncan Miller are ready to do that anyway.

He wouldn’t have been in their half.

Whatever the team its the 1st day of the season and optimism will be there come this sunny Saturday Against better judgement bought to tickets in safe standing with the lad, 50th season of supporting since the diddy heights of 3rd division champions 1975 The Vine pub beforehand for a few beers and a decent chicken tikka off the barbecue Going down the Bolton road...

Has the forum considered giving the club a deadline after which they’ll publish the minutes (elsewhere) themselves?

I strongly suspect we'll be linked with a marquee type signing before the close of the window just to appease the fans and to appear like there's some kind of ambition at the club. Of course, we won't sign them and never will have intended to. If it does get anywhere near a done deal then the paperwork will be left in drafts again 'accidentally'.

Despite having one of the richest owners in the Championship.

Bravery comes in different forms out on the pitch. You wouldn’t see Berkovic flying in to a tackle but he’d always show for the ball no matter how closely he was being marked.

This just isn't going to happen, those days are long gone.

We won't be signing him for now. In other words, we've spent the Brittain money on Miller and Henriksson so we now need another sale before we can bring in Baradji or any further additions. I.e we're skint.

RamsNews, who is self described as "reliable", is doubling down on Trav to Derby, claims personal terms are agreed.

….for now. I think we’re keeping the Baradji deal warm to do if / when Trav goes. Mafoumbi is probably being hawked out to possible suitors to clear up that ESC spot. One thing that was interesting in the podcast was that Elliott suggested they might be building towards a marquee type signing in that forward / RW spot. He claimed it was his ideal scenario but I got the impression it may have been spoken about.

I'm hoping he does really well and nobody can get him out of the team.

I know that and I know that communications are poor. As someone who was in that meeting, I’m keen that the blame is aimed at the door of those communicating poorly, not those trying to hold the club to account.

Maybe. The good news is they don’t need a court case to be able to send money across. The bad news is they don’t want to meet the conditions which allow them to do so.

So no doubt the next one is after the window shuts in Feb !

If communications are poor, people will speculate and most times come to a negative conclusion. The problem is solved by good communication, even if it is not what people want to hear.

Agreed, so for balance, we will hopefully see both versions.

Or the new members simply had a different opinion on what should and shouldn’t have been minuted and what ‘tone’ should’ve been emphasised more. Without us seeing both versions of the minutes (which I’m sure we won’t) it will be very hard for us to come to any sort of conclusion.

The same seems to have been the case at Morecambe too and it appears that the complaints came a little too late. We can sit back and hope that the custodians have the very best intentions for BRFC or we can challenge things, that do not seem that way. I know what I am inclined to do.

That's exactly why we are where we are now. Read the post by GM above, as you will see that a version was sent to the club and according to Glen (who I have believe completely on the matter) an edited version was sent as "Some things missed, some things needed more detail, some things misrepresented or incorrect". Now that seems to me, that the first version could have been club friendly and although I don't yet know, how long the club have had the current version, they may not like them and are perhaps delaying releasing them. Given that there were some attendees, who went to the FF meeting for the first time, they were not around to question previous meetings, so the past minutes, would indeed need to involve collusion, between every member, so maybe there were fair and accurate and it is just a coincidence that the latest one has been challenged.

Apparently it uses a mixture of match betting odds and Opta's 'Power Rankings', both of which themselves are basically products of historical results. So yeah, it's basically predicting this season by using last season's form.

The process seems to have been broken for a long time, and nobody seems to have complained.