Fans Forum/Roverstore/Commercial Chat

[BobbyRover12]

4 hours ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

How are the club taking the fans for mugs ?

4 hours ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

How are the club taking the fans for mugs ?

Wow, have you really just asked that question? Have you been sleeping for the last 15 years?

[rigger]

1 minute ago, lraC said:

Thanks.

Sounds like they could have had them for a couple of weeks then.

Maybe they don't like the edited version, but I wonder why?

Should this not be put to the EFL for them to ask questions of the club. Maybe ask the Blackburn MP, to ask the EFL to look into it.

[glen9mullan]

To be clear, not one forum member to my knowledge has rejected the edited version,  nor has the Chair or Secretary dismissed the request either.

It was received in the sprit It was sent, and sent to the club.

The only people holding things up are the club.

The minutes are not ground breaking but demonstrate the questions asked and answers recieved , (should of been more questions) but would need more than one meeting for that.

 

[lraC]

1 minute ago, rigger said:

Should this not be put to the EFL for them to ask questions of the club. Maybe ask the Blackburn MP, to ask the EFL to look into it.

I certainly think a deadline should be given, as surely it cannot take a couple of weeks to read and agree a set of minutes.

[lraC]

6 minutes ago, SIMON GARNERS 194 said:

Too many nodding Dogs on the FF?

I think we may have a couple of dogs with a bit more fight in them now.

[K-Hod]

13 minutes ago, SIMON GARNERS 194 said:

Too many nodding Dogs on the FF?

Definitely not.

[JBiz]

On 03/08/2025 at 15:22, Hasta said:

They won’t engage properly. They don’t want to. Fans opinions are a hinderance to their aim of cutting costs and cutting ambition.

Mike Graham spent years telling us we needed to keep engaging, and look at his speech as the outgoing chairman at the last Rovers trust meeting.

I’ve never spoken to Mike, I’ve read his posts on here and I watched his address (and the full trust video) but I just couldn’t help but feel put off getting involved.

I appreciate that the work they’ve done hasn’t come off like we and they want, and I know it’s not the trust or anyone from the FF or WATR etc - it’s all down to the club, I get that but need to stress it again!…

I felt put off getting involved because of the sheer negativity, “the he said she said, we did this, they took credit etc”

If I’m having that response - someone who cares deeply for the club, then it’s obvious to me that it would disengage many other fans too. Surely we need them all onside to change the ownership? The “demanding Rudy, Steve and Pasha don’t come to the games”, another thing I just thought a stupid response and easy to turn back on the fan group.

I don’t know the answers, I don’t have solutions - but I thought a pertinent thing to add since that’s how I felt. Getting the majority of rovers fans to engage with these groups surely requires a different approach.

 

[Hasta]

12 minutes ago, JBiz said:

I’ve never spoken to Mike, I’ve read his posts on here and I watched his address (and the full trust video) but I just couldn’t help but feel put off getting involved.

I appreciate that the work they’ve done hasn’t come off like we and they want, and I know it’s not the trust or anyone from the FF or WATR etc - it’s all down to the club, I get that but need to stress it again!…

I felt put off getting involved because of the sheer negativity, “the he said she said, we did this, they took credit etc”

If I’m having that response - someone who cares deeply for the club, then it’s obvious to me that it would disengage many other fans too. Surely we need them all onside to change the ownership? The “demanding Rudy, Steve and Pasha don’t come to the games”, another thing I just thought a stupid response and easy to turn back on the fan group.

I don’t know the answers, I don’t have solutions - but I thought a pertinent thing to add since that’s how I felt. Getting the majority of rovers fans to engage with these groups surely requires a different approach.

 

I'd taken you line of "I also don’t think you get people to engage with you by taking that approach, but I’m not or never will be involved in any of this because of the sheer time it must take up." to mean get people (at the club) to engage.

However you mean people of different opinions across the fan group. In which case I agree with you to some degree.

 

[JBiz]

18 minutes ago, Hasta said:

I'd taken you line of "I also don’t think you get people to engage with you by taking that approach, but I’m not or never will be involved in any of this because of the sheer time it must take up." to mean get people (at the club) to engage.

However you mean people of different opinions across the fan group. In which case I agree with you to some degree.

 

The time and effort thing is also a huge barrier for me personally, I already chair a group that runs charity stuff, and that takes up most of my spare time. I just thought important to add the part about how I felt it came across.

Not that I don’t understand why, banging your head against a wall for over a decade can’t be a healthy pastime!

[StHelensRover]

 

53 minutes ago, JBiz said:

 

If I’m having that response - someone who cares deeply for the club, then it’s obvious to me that it would disengage many other fans too. Surely we need them all onside to change the ownership? The “demanding Rudy, Steve and Pasha don’t come to the games”, another thing I just thought a stupid response and easy to turn back on the fan group.

I think the request that Pasha, Waggott and Gestede not attend matches was a good move, in hindsight. It was an unusual and quite petty request that the fan groups surely understood would be ignored, but it was a different angle of attack to the blanket "venkys out, sell the club".

It caught people running the club off guard a bit and it got media attention in the way that the last ten years of "venkys out, sell the club" hasn't. 

I think since then they've continued to trip themselves up when speaking on the record and showed a level of incompetence many of us expected. Every time we're able to force the leadership out in the open they continue to expose the rubbish job they've done and continue to do.

Given Waggott's speedy departure and then now coming out and threatening to ban fans, I'd say it ruffled feathers more than anything else in the last half-decade 

Edited 8 hours ago by StHelensRover

[wilsdenrover]

2 hours ago, glen9mullan said:

I recieved the first set of club approved minutes on the 18th July from a forum member as I was accidentally left of the circulation .

I reviewed and requested if I could edit as i felt they were inaccuate. I sent edited version which was supported by other attendees on the 20th July to chair/secretary. When it went club I'm not sure, But it’s certainly been with them a while.

or was it deliberate 🧐🧐😁

[lraC]

35 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

or was it deliberate 🧐🧐😁

There you go again.

You bet your life it was.

[chaddyrovers]

10 hours ago, lraC said:

Plenty give up their time under the radar too and I know only too well that the latest minutes, were not considered to be accurate, by some who attended.

I believe this will come out, so that people can make up their own minds. 

For the fans forum? 

I didn't like you attacked O2G for the minutes and given he has been doing that job for a long time and very well. Maybe some respect is needed here. 

Edited 3 hours ago by chaddyrovers

[Upside Down]

So to summarise:

Minutes still not released by the club despite them having them for a bit now

People still losing their shit over it for no real reason 

Mashed brains is still a complete drongo

[glen9mullan]

Think we maybe waiting a while yet,  edited version diluted to read completely differently,  I've notified FF, as have others I reject the club edits as they are not in line in what was said (I note nothing was stipulated in the meeting as off the record), and the changes are in places a fabrication of the discussion 

[TheRoversGRL]

As a rep, I have also rejected the minutes. They are non factual and are a blantant attempt of the club trying to hide things again and again

[J*B]

Someone send me the minutes as we believe are accurate anonymously and I’ll circulate them. Bored of this now. 

[wilsdenrover]

14 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

Think we maybe waiting a while yet,  edited version diluted to read completely differently,  I've notified FF, as have others I reject the club edits as they are not in line in what was said (I note nothing was stipulated in the meeting as off the record), and the changes are in places a fabrication of the discussion 

At this stage I  think the FF should publish their ‘version’ and then respond (publicly) if and when the club challenges them. 

[Upside Down]

This is getting exciting. I'm actually intrigued by what was said now.

FREE FREE THE FANS FORUM MINUTES !!!!

[J*B]

7 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

At this stage I  think the FF should publish their ‘version’ and then respond (publicly) if and when the club challenges them. 

The problem we have now is that the truth has come out - the minutes released don’t accurately reflect what was discussed in the room. I’ve no idea how we’ve got here, but unfortunately the entire thing is now under question.

The moment the minutes are released, whether the club agrees to the amendments or not, the entire historical archive is under scrutiny. 

[glen9mullan]

16 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

At this stage I  think the FF should publish their ‘version’ and then respond (publicly) if and when the club challenges them. 

Imo the club under their own FEP must publish the minutes as per the meeting.

Being published elsewhere only let's them off hook, and the tampering go away 

[wilsdenrover]

7 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

Imo the club under their own FEP must publish the minutes as per the meeting.

Being published elsewhere only let's them off hook, and the tampering go away 

I may have missed it but I can’t see the need to minute the meetings mentioned in the regs.

I note the FEP says they will but do you know if they are obliged to?

Edited 1 hour ago by wilsdenrover

[wilsdenrover]

11 minutes ago, J*B said:

The problem we have now is that the truth has come out - the minutes released don’t accurately reflect what was discussed in the room. I’ve no idea how we’ve got here, but unfortunately the entire thing is now under question.

The moment the minutes are released, whether the club agrees to the amendments or not, the entire historical archive is under scrutiny. 

I’m sure the members of the FF are clever enough to work out how to ensure the club are (rightly) blamed for this.

[glen9mullan]

[RoversClitheroe]

Is there not a duty of care to the supporters? 

Surely they're breaking the EFL rules?