Fans Forum/Roverstore/Commercial Chat

[47er]

2 hours ago, roverblue said:

I've said it the last few meetings but someone needs to record these forum sessions and we can all cut through the bullshit.

Forum should be disbanding and insisting that an open elected system is required for a new body.

[MarkBRFC]

2 hours ago, TheKitGuy said:

Who's the player? i'm out the loop

My guess, is JRC.

[AllRoversGirl_]

Fans deserve the truth

Minutes of the Blackburn Rovers Fans’ Forum

Meeting Monday 20th October 2025 – 6.30pm

 

 

 

Present – Fans’ Forum

 

Mark Hitchen

John Wareing

Savio Mathias

Bharat Parmar

Annette Birkbeck

Steve Birtwell

Terry Crawford

Megan Longworth

Duncan Miller

Neil Duckworth

Katie Hull

Anne-Marie Riach

Jakob Ward

 

Present from BRFC

 

Suhail Shaikh Chief Operating Officer

Lynsey TalbotHead of Operations

Yasir SufiHead of Commercial & Partnerships

Adam OwenHead of Technical Development

Matt WrightChief Financial Officer

Rob GillHead of Media & Communications

Rudy GestedeHead of Football operations

Brett BakerHead of Football administration

 

1.Apologies for Absence  

Ray Williamson

Zubair Bassa

Tristan Stock

Peter Bolton

Zayd Rawoot

 

2.Matters Arising from the minutes of the previous meeting 14th July 2025

 

None.

 

 

3.Club Kits 2027-28

MH stated that he would pass the fan survey on kit design to the club’s kit supplier.

 

DM asked why the adidas deal had been turned down

YS asked where that information had come from

DM stated Gary Aspden had stated in an interview with Soccer Bible

YS stated we are still in a contract with Macron and cannot comment

DM stated that report/rumours were rife that Castore/Umbro would be selected as the Issa brothers are their biggest investor and it was part of a wider attempt to engage them.

Both YS and SS stated they didn’t believe it to be true that they were the largest investor. DM disagreed and asked if there was any truth to reports that Macron were seeking to take legal action against the club.

SS asked where this information had come from and it may represent a breach the other way.

YS stated that there are lots of rumours from fans and we must deal with facts – the facts are we are in a deal with Macron and the results of the tender process must be kept confidential.

DM stated he knew adidas had put a good deal forward. SS replied that he didn’t believe the deal was good enough. DM asked if this was a purely financial opinion based on upfront payments and felt it was potentially short sighted.

YS asked if he felt our supporters would be happy to pay 80 for a shirt. 

DM stated that he felt they would be happy to pay 80 for a quality product than 60 for an off the peg or substandard product.

YS stated that many factors had to be considered.

DM stated that it was disappointing in relation to Adidas Spezial given a Rovers Season ticket holder was the curator of that range.

SS stated that we were never promised a Spezial range and without it being put in writing it cannot be considered.

DM stated that given his relationship with the club and community Gary’s verbal assurances should count for something given Spezial is his brand.

SS stated it is adidas’s brand and YS stated that as a great supporter of the club he wouldn’t be disclosing financial information (DM assured he wasn’t).

SS stated that Gary was an employee of adidas and that a Spezial range wasn’t committed and offered to phone him to verify.

 

SS stated that there is a template pattern that can’t be deviated from, but any new supplier will give us bespoke kits.

 

 

4.Pitch Maintenance / Drainage

ND reported that he had investigated water levels on the River Darwen over the 13 years that public records are available. During that time the club had had four games postponed or abandoned and of the top 5 recorded river levels, Rovers had had home games on three of them.

 

ND asked whether the outflow from the ground into the river had been checked on the day of the Ipswich game. LT replied that it had been checked a number of times, the last around 4.30pm, when the outflow was still above the river level. Rainfall records had shown that 77.2mm of rain had fallen at Ewood, compared to 57.7mm at Burnley and 54.1mm at Manchester United.

 

LT stated that, after the postponement of the game at home to Portsmouth last season, the club had spoken to United Utilities and the Environment Agency. The club had proposed adding a sleeve to the drain and after some discussion it had been agreed that this could be done but that the club would need to fund the work. The work was actually plannedto be done that week.

 

5.Ipswich Game Abandonment Update

 

MH noted that the abandoned game against Ipswich had now been re-arranged for Tuesday 2nd December, with season ticket holders having free access and anyone who had purchased tickets for the original fixture able to buy tickets at half price. YS confirmed that the decision was in line with the Club’s Charter

6.Lancashire Telegraph Communications

       

MH asked what had led the club to ban reporters from the Lancashire Telegraph from attending the club. RobG replied that the relationship had been difficult for some time and the leaking of team news was the final straw for the club. He really would have preferred not to have to do this and he still hoped to get back to a normal relationship as soon as possible, although there was no immediate prospect of that.

 

JW stated that it appears a growing trend at the club regarding unclear communication siting Jon Dahl Tomasson and Valerian Ismael being silenced or censored on certain topics, the club threatening fans with bans, and rumours and social media fallout surrounding Rudy Gestede which is not a good look for the club.

 

7.Court Case Update

 

MW stated that the requirement by the Indian courts for the club’s owners to guarantee that a fund equal to any monies sent to the club be logged had now been removed. Responding to a question from JaW, this would not mean any increase in funds available, as they were already backing the club to agreed budgets. RudyG added that the club had brought in 10 new signings and there was a possibility of further signings in the January 2026 transfer window.

 

DM asked if this would potentially give RG more room for new recruits and improved contracts, particularly given we have some headroom under FFP rules for a finite time.

RG stated we had recruited 10 players this summer.

MW stated the owners had funded the club to the level requested and will continue to do so, and with regards to FFP we clearly have some headroom due to the good business the club had done with the likes of Sam Szmodics and Adam Wharton, but 

 

JaW expressed concern about the number of players who had left the club in the Summer and subsequent team performances and the real possibility of a relegation fight. RG disagreed – Dominic Hyam, Lewis Travis, Callum Brittain and Harry Leonard had all wanted to leave the club. SM asked if there was any intention to recruit more players experienced in the Championship. RudyG replied that experience costs a lot of money and it was difficult to hire players ready to immediately compete in the league.

 

DM stated that in the last meeting SS stated they were looking to get closer to a break even model where they wouldn’t be as reliant on owner funding.

SS asked if DM thought this was possible, which he responded not if we want to stay in this division.

MW stated that the budget from the owners had increased and was committed to around 20 million a season.which was the required amount in this division and all clubs faced the same problem.

DM stated that while the FFP headroom exists why can’t the owners commit more and push for promotion, particularly given we finished 7th last year, relatively minimal investment could make all the difference, instead we appear to have cut back.

DM stated that the disappointing thing from a fans point of view is that the legacy of the sale of a generational talent in Adam Wharton has been to keep us afloat while the owners battled a legal issue, whereas it should have meant reinvestment into new playing assets who could help take us to the next level.

MW agreed and says he would also like to have seen that, but the reality is even with these sales we rely on owner funding.

DM asked if 20 million was their ceiling, because we have been told for a long time that Venky’s CAN’T invest any more under P&S/FFP rules, whereas now it is clear they could invest more but they don’t want to. If so how long will they remain happy to lose 20 million year on year, and what is the end game for them as owners and us as supporters. There seems to be no point or end to it.

MH stated that we accept big sales are needed but an opportunity to reinvest into the team isn’t made.

DM stated that if they want to break the cycle of just losing 20 million each year something needs to change, and if they aren’t willing to do that the advice SS must give them as their trusted advisor is to sell the club.

SS stated that there is no potential buyer and he came in at the time of the acquisition of the club. Both SS and MW stated that every football club is for sale, and if any of them can find a buyer they are willing to have a conversation.

 

DM asked RG that while he had stated he thinks we will have a good season, what if we don’t? Since Steve Waggott left the structure at the club is unclear and if there is a decision to be made on the future of the head coach, who is responsible for that?

SS stated it would be the owners decision, but they would propose it.

DM asked specifically who would propose this as it is unclear where people’s remit starts and ends, and it was unclear who was assessing the performance of RG/SS or VI.

RG stated that AO was responsible for assessing all coaching staff at the club, which extended to ValerienIsmael.

 

KH asked if it is a concern that we may be relegated.

RG stated that it is a concern but they believe it will be addressed and the statistics show that we are creating sufficient chances to score enough goals.

 

 

 

 

 

8.Fan Engagement Plan – Forum Constitution

 

MH asked for any comments from fan groups about the current situation with the only communication route between fans and the club is through the Fans Forum. A constitution for the Forum was in the process of completion to sit alongside the club’s Fan Engagement Plan.

 

ML stated that for Her Game Too the main issues were the lack of communications about the women’s team such that fans don’t even know when the fixtures are.

 

SB and SM suggested that more open engagement was needed with the wider fan base. 

 

JaW said that We Are The Rovers was concerned about the reduction in the number of Forums and the fact the MOU signed by WATR has been ignored by the club since SW left. JaW felt that given the current mood the club should be welcoming more engagement rather than scaling back.

DM pointed out that the 2 fan engagement plans from last season and this season when read side by side show all previous opportunities to grow and develop fan engagement have been scaled back, which will be a potential issue with the incoming football regulator.

YS sited club interviews with VI, Rg and AO as examples of fan engagement. DM disputed this as engagement must be a 2 way process.

DM stated that we need assurances the club is committed to fan engagement as during WATR discussions with the football regulator they highlighted real concerns with the direction in which the club have gone.

 

 

AMR suggested that supporters want to feel a sense of inclusion.

 

There was a wide ranging discussion about how consultation could attract a wider range of fans whilst still remaining a practical body. SS was open to receiving questions in advance from the fan base. YS added that the club would be happy to consider recording Forum meetings. DM suggested that there should be an affiliation process by the club for supporter groups. DM suggested that the FF needs to develop in line with regulatory advice on forming a Fan Engagement/Shadow Board.

9.Club Academy

 

AO stated that the club had retained its Category 1 status in February with no issues. Renewal is one a 3 year schedule but with annual reviews in February.

 

DM stated that it had been disappointing that there had been no Academy player on the pitch in the Swansea game, breaking a long continuous record. AO replied that both Scott Wharton and Hayden Carter being unavailable had been the issue at that game.

 

AO stated that it was difficult to integrate young players into an unstable environment JaW stated he felt this was contradictory as Ismael was reportedly appointed on the back of his willingness to increase academy minutes, and questioned why the club had chosen to transition so heavily this summer. 

AO stated it became a transitional year because players wanted to leave.

 

(Add para with AO’s stats)

 

10.Women’s Team

 

ML asked why there was such a lack of information available about the women’s team for supporters following the radical changes over the Summer. MW replied that the changes regarding the women’s team were a result of the authorities trying to up the status of the two top divisions to fully professional contracts, aiming for 85% of occupancy at grounds. Costs would have to balloon with no prospect of any income form TV and media rights for at least a couple of years. Meeting this change would have resulted in a substantial increase in budgets which would have inevitably affected the funding of the men’s team and there was no evidence of support from fans for the women’s team in terms at attendances.

 

The team had had a difficult start to the season because of all the changes over the Summer but were now set up to be competitive in League 4. ML stated that there appeared to be a lack of support for the team but MW disputed that and stated that the staffing for the new team that was asked for had been put in place. RobG stated that there had been a designated press officer for the women’s team for the last 7 or 8 years but no longer. The reality was that the team was now an amateur operation.

 

11.150th Anniversary Update

 

DM asked why the planning meetings had stopped abruptly in the Summer. YS stated that the situation had moved on from planning to action and that more meetings were never planned. DM stated that this was not the premise these meetings were set up for and members of the committee had frequently been tasked with additional ongoing tasks, and YS should check the email correspondence regarding this which would confirm that supporter involvement was supposed to be ongoing. SS confirmed that 150 people had been nominated for honour caps and it was intended to issue all of them through the season. 85 of the nominees were dead and of the remaining, many were involved with the football business and therefore often busy elsewhere on match days. There were a significant number planned to attend the Derby game. These caps have been selected by the club and the fans on the committee had no input.

DM asked for an update on behalf of Paul Salmon regarding a letter he wrote which it was agreed would be sent to FIFA, the FA, EFL and The Royal Family. SS stated this letter had been sent. DM expressed disappointment that Paul hadn’t been notified of this. (At the end of the meeting SS clarified that the letter had been sent to Mike Jackman, and not to any of the intended recipients.)

 

12.Equality, Diversity & Inclusion

 

LT stated that the club had been awarded a Silver Code of Practice for EDI and were working towards a Gold award.

 

LT reported that there had been a few reports of abuse by fans regarding discrimination. JaW asked whether anything had happened with these reports – LT agreed to check.

 

13.Any Other Business

 

a) AMR asked about the poor TV service on screens in the Blues Bar. YS agreed to check the situation.

b) JaW asked about progress in appointing a new Chief Executive Officer. SS stated that he had no update to give.

DM asked if the fact Steve Waggott was still employed and on gardening leave was holding up a new appointment, and might this improve in the coming weeks.

SS stated SW’s period of gardening leave was 12 months and it had no impact on any new appointment. He also highlighted that between Derek Shaw leaving and Steve Waggott joining the club operated without a CEO for 2 years.

c) MH asked whether it would be appropriate to bring the February meeting forward to December or January. LT stated that it was very unlikely that December would be possible.

 

[glen9mullan]

2 hours ago, 47er said:

Forum should be disbanding and insisting that an open elected system is required for a new body.

100% , exactly the reason I wont attend 

A demoricatically elected voice or none at all.

The only people stopping the fans electing a voice is indeed the forum.

Balloting the supporter base should be welcomed not ignored 

[glen9mullan]

8 minutes ago, AllRoversGirl_ said:

Fans deserve the truth

 

Minutes of the Blackburn Rovers Fans’ Forum

Meeting Monday 20th October 2025 – 6.30pm

 

 

 

Present – Fans’ Forum

 

Mark Hitchen

John Wareing

Savio Mathias

Bharat Parmar

Annette Birkbeck

Steve Birtwell

Terry Crawford

Megan Longworth

Duncan Miller

Neil Duckworth

Katie Hull

Anne-Marie Riach

Jakob Ward

 

Present from BRFC

 

Suhail Shaikh Chief Operating Officer

Lynsey TalbotHead of Operations

Yasir SufiHead of Commercial & Partnerships

Adam OwenHead of Technical Development

Matt WrightChief Financial Officer

Rob GillHead of Media & Communications

Rudy GestedeHead of Football operations

Brett BakerHead of Football administration

 

1.Apologies for Absence  

 

Ray Williamson

Zubair Bassa

Tristan Stock

Peter Bolton

Zayd Rawoot

 

2.Matters Arising from the minutes of the previous meeting 14th July 2025

 

None.

 

 

3.Club Kits 2027-28

 

MH stated that he would pass the fan survey on kit design to the club’s kit supplier.

 

DM asked why the adidas deal had been turned down

YS asked where that information had come from

DM stated Gary Aspden had stated in an interview with Soccer Bible

YS stated we are still in a contract with Macron and cannot comment

DM stated that report/rumours were rife that Castore/Umbro would be selected as the Issa brothers are their biggest investor and it was part of a wider attempt to engage them.

Both YS and SS stated they didn’t believe it to be true that they were the largest investor. DM disagreed and asked if there was any truth to reports that Macron were seeking to take legal action against the club.

SS asked where this information had come from and it may represent a breach the other way.

YS stated that there are lots of rumours from fans and we must deal with facts – the facts are we are in a deal with Macron and the results of the tender process must be kept confidential.

DM stated he knew adidas had put a good deal forward. SS replied that he didn’t believe the deal was good enough. DM asked if this was a purely financial opinion based on upfront payments and felt it was potentially short sighted.

YS asked if he felt our supporters would be happy to pay 80 for a shirt. 

DM stated that he felt they would be happy to pay 80 for a quality product than 60 for an off the peg or substandard product.

YS stated that many factors had to be considered.

DM stated that it was disappointing in relation to Adidas Spezial given a Rovers Season ticket holder was the curator of that range.

SS stated that we were never promised a Spezial range and without it being put in writing it cannot be considered.

DM stated that given his relationship with the club and community Gary’s verbal assurances should count for something given Spezial is his brand.

SS stated it is adidas’s brand and YS stated that as a great supporter of the club he wouldn’t be disclosing financial information (DM assured he wasn’t).

SS stated that Gary was an employee of adidas and that a Spezial range wasn’t committed and offered to phone him to verify.

 

SS stated that there is a template pattern that can’t be deviated from, but any new supplier will give us bespoke kits.

 

 

4.Pitch Maintenance / Drainage

 

ND reported that he had investigated water levels on the River Darwen over the 13 years that public records are available. During that time the club had had four games postponed or abandoned and of the top 5 recorded river levels, Rovers had had home games on three of them.

 

ND asked whether the outflow from the ground into the river had been checked on the day of the Ipswich game. LT replied that it had been checked a number of times, the last around 4.30pm, when the outflow was still above the river level. Rainfall records had shown that 77.2mm of rain had fallen at Ewood, compared to 57.7mm at Burnley and 54.1mm at Manchester United.

 

LT stated that, after the postponement of the game at home to Portsmouth last season, the club had spoken to United Utilities and the Environment Agency. The club had proposed adding a sleeve to the drain and after some discussion it had been agreed that this could be done but that the club would need to fund the work. The work was actually plannedto be done that week.

 

 

5.Ipswich Game Abandonment Update

 

MH noted that the abandoned game against Ipswich had now been re-arranged for Tuesday 2nd December, with season ticket holders having free access and anyone who had purchased tickets for the original fixture able to buy tickets at half price. YS confirmed that the decision was in line with the Club’s Charter

 

6.Lancashire Telegraph Communications

       

MH asked what had led the club to ban reporters from the Lancashire Telegraph from attending the club. RobG replied that the relationship had been difficult for some time and the leaking of team news was the final straw for the club. He really would have preferred not to have to do this and he still hoped to get back to a normal relationship as soon as possible, although there was no immediate prospect of that.

 

JW stated that it appears a growing trend at the club regarding unclear communication siting Jon Dahl Tomasson and Valerian Ismael being silenced or censored on certain topics, the club threatening fans with bans, and rumours and social media fallout surrounding Rudy Gestede which is not a good look for the club.

 

7.Court Case Update

 

MW stated that the requirement by the Indian courts for the club’s owners to guarantee that a fund equal to any monies sent to the club be logged had now been removed. Responding to a question from JaW, this would not mean any increase in funds available, as they were already backing the club to agreed budgets. RudyG added that the club had brought in 10 new signings and there was a possibility of further signings in the January 2026 transfer window.

 

DM asked if this would potentially give RG more room for new recruits and improved contracts, particularly given we have some headroom under FFP rules for a finite time.

RG stated we had recruited 10 players this summer.

MW stated the owners had funded the club to the level requested and will continue to do so, and with regards to FFP we clearly have some headroom due to the good business the club had done with the likes of Sam Szmodics and Adam Wharton, but 

 

JaW expressed concern about the number of players who had left the club in the Summer and subsequent team performances and the real possibility of a relegation fight. RG disagreed – Dominic Hyam, Lewis Travis, Callum Brittain and Harry Leonard had all wanted to leave the club. SM asked if there was any intention to recruit more players experienced in the Championship. RudyG replied that experience costs a lot of money and it was difficult to hire players ready to immediately compete in the league.

 

DM stated that in the last meeting SS stated they were looking to get closer to a break even model where they wouldn’t be as reliant on owner funding.

SS asked if DM thought this was possible, which he responded not if we want to stay in this division.

MW stated that the budget from the owners had increased and was committed to around 20 million a season.which was the required amount in this division and all clubs faced the same problem.

DM stated that while the FFP headroom exists why can’t the owners commit more and push for promotion, particularly given we finished 7th last year, relatively minimal investment could make all the difference, instead we appear to have cut back.

DM stated that the disappointing thing from a fans point of view is that the legacy of the sale of a generational talent in Adam Wharton has been to keep us afloat while the owners battled a legal issue, whereas it should have meant reinvestment into new playing assets who could help take us to the next level.

MW agreed and says he would also like to have seen that, but the reality is even with these sales we rely on owner funding.

DM asked if 20 million was their ceiling, because we have been told for a long time that Venky’s CAN’T invest any more under P&S/FFP rules, whereas now it is clear they could invest more but they don’t want to. If so how long will they remain happy to lose 20 million year on year, and what is the end game for them as owners and us as supporters. There seems to be no point or end to it.

MH stated that we accept big sales are needed but an opportunity to reinvest into the team isn’t made.

DM stated that if they want to break the cycle of just losing 20 million each year something needs to change, and if they aren’t willing to do that the advice SS must give them as their trusted advisor is to sell the club.

SS stated that there is no potential buyer and he came in at the time of the acquisition of the club. Both SS and MW stated that every football club is for sale, and if any of them can find a buyer they are willing to have a conversation.

 

DM asked RG that while he had stated he thinks we will have a good season, what if we don’t? Since Steve Waggott left the structure at the club is unclear and if there is a decision to be made on the future of the head coach, who is responsible for that?

SS stated it would be the owners decision, but they would propose it.

DM asked specifically who would propose this as it is unclear where people’s remit starts and ends, and it was unclear who was assessing the performance of RG/SS or VI.

RG stated that AO was responsible for assessing all coaching staff at the club, which extended to ValerienIsmael.

 

KH asked if it is a concern that we may be relegated.

RG stated that it is a concern but they believe it will be addressed and the statistics show that we are creating sufficient chances to score enough goals.

 

 

 

 

 

8.Fan Engagement Plan – Forum Constitution

 

MH asked for any comments from fan groups about the current situation with the only communication route between fans and the club is through the Fans Forum. A constitution for the Forum was in the process of completion to sit alongside the club’s Fan Engagement Plan.

 

ML stated that for Her Game Too the main issues were the lack of communications about the women’s team such that fans don’t even know when the fixtures are.

 

SB and SM suggested that more open engagement was needed with the wider fan base. 

 

JaW said that We Are The Rovers was concerned about the reduction in the number of Forums and the fact the MOU signed by WATR has been ignored by the club since SW left. JaW felt that given the current mood the club should be welcoming more engagement rather than scaling back.

DM pointed out that the 2 fan engagement plans from last season and this season when read side by side show all previous opportunities to grow and develop fan engagement have been scaled back, which will be a potential issue with the incoming football regulator.

YS sited club interviews with VI, Rg and AO as examples of fan engagement. DM disputed this as engagement must be a 2 way process.

DM stated that we need assurances the club is committed to fan engagement as during WATR discussions with the football regulator they highlighted real concerns with the direction in which the club have gone.

 

 

AMR suggested that supporters want to feel a sense of inclusion.

 

There was a wide ranging discussion about how consultation could attract a wider range of fans whilst still remaining a practical body. SS was open to receiving questions in advance from the fan base. YS added that the club would be happy to consider recording Forum meetings. DM suggested that there should be an affiliation process by the club for supporter groups. DM suggested that the FF needs to develop in line with regulatory advice on forming a Fan Engagement/Shadow Board.

 

9.Club Academy

 

AO stated that the club had retained its Category 1 status in February with no issues. Renewal is one a 3 year schedule but with annual reviews in February.

 

DM stated that it had been disappointing that there had been no Academy player on the pitch in the Swansea game, breaking a long continuous record. AO replied that both Scott Wharton and Hayden Carter being unavailable had been the issue at that game.

 

AO stated that it was difficult to integrate young players into an unstable environment JaW stated he felt this was contradictory as Ismael was reportedly appointed on the back of his willingness to increase academy minutes, and questioned why the club had chosen to transition so heavily this summer. 

AO stated it became a transitional year because players wanted to leave.

 

(Add para with AO’s stats)

 

10.Women’s Team

 

ML asked why there was such a lack of information available about the women’s team for supporters following the radical changes over the Summer. MW replied that the changes regarding the women’s team were a result of the authorities trying to up the status of the two top divisions to fully professional contracts, aiming for 85% of occupancy at grounds. Costs would have to balloon with no prospect of any income form TV and media rights for at least a couple of years. Meeting this change would have resulted in a substantial increase in budgets which would have inevitably affected the funding of the men’s team and there was no evidence of support from fans for the women’s team in terms at attendances.

 

The team had had a difficult start to the season because of all the changes over the Summer but were now set up to be competitive in League 4. ML stated that there appeared to be a lack of support for the team but MW disputed that and stated that the staffing for the new team that was asked for had been put in place. RobG stated that there had been a designated press officer for the women’s team for the last 7 or 8 years but no longer. The reality was that the team was now an amateur operation.

 

11.150th Anniversary Update

 

DM asked why the planning meetings had stopped abruptly in the Summer. YS stated that the situation had moved on from planning to action and that more meetings were never planned. DM stated that this was not the premise these meetings were set up for and members of the committee had frequently been tasked with additional ongoing tasks, and YS should check the email correspondence regarding this which would confirm that supporter involvement was supposed to be ongoing. SS confirmed that 150 people had been nominated for honour caps and it was intended to issue all of them through the season. 85 of the nominees were dead and of the remaining, many were involved with the football business and therefore often busy elsewhere on match days. There were a significant number planned to attend the Derby game. These caps have been selected by the club and the fans on the committee had no input.

DM asked for an update on behalf of Paul Salmon regarding a letter he wrote which it was agreed would be sent to FIFA, the FA, EFL and The Royal Family. SS stated this letter had been sent. DM expressed disappointment that Paul hadn’t been notified of this. (At the end of the meeting SS clarified that the letter had been sent to Mike Jackman, and not to any of the intended recipients.)

 

12.Equality, Diversity & Inclusion

 

LT stated that the club had been awarded a Silver Code of Practice for EDI and were working towards a Gold award.

 

LT reported that there had been a few reports of abuse by fans regarding discrimination. JaW asked whether anything had happened with these reports – LT agreed to check.

 

13.Any Other Business

 

a) AMR asked about the poor TV service on screens in the Blues Bar. YS agreed to check the situation.

b) JaW asked about progress in appointing a new Chief Executive Officer. SS stated that he had no update to give.

DM asked if the fact Steve Waggott was still employed and on gardening leave was holding up a new appointment, and might this improve in the coming weeks.

SS stated SW’s period of gardening leave was 12 months and it had no impact on any new appointment. He also highlighted that between Derek Shaw leaving and Steve Waggott joining the club operated without a CEO for 2 years.

c) MH asked whether it would be appropriate to bring the February meeting forward to December or January. LT stated that it was very unlikely that December would be possible.

 

Wait till you see clubs version where they add things NOT discussed.

[AllRoversGirl_]

15 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

Wait till you see clubs version where they add things NOT discussed.

No accountability. 

[wilsdenrover]

The written word is obviously open to interpretation but RG, SS and YS always seem to be on the defensive. 

[Herbie6590]

14 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

The written word is obviously open to interpretation but RG, SS and YS always seem to be on the defensive. 

The minutes read as an adversarial process. What should be positive, energising, engaging & aimed at stoking up & motivating the fanbase reads like a litany of excuses offered up by a poorly performing sales rep explaining why they missed their target.

Have done with it…the members really need to resign en bloc & as said elsewhere subject themselves to a public ballot. 

[Miller11]

9 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

The written word is obviously open to interpretation but RG, SS and YS always seem to be on the defensive. 

You’ve definitely not misinterpreted.

I’ve attended a total of 3 fans forum meetings. The first one saw Steve Waggott, Christina Haines and Lynsey Talbot sat amongst the supporters. At Suhail’s instruction an additional table was dragged over so him, Gestede, Yasir and others could sit at the head of the table, very separate from us mere mortals. The disconnect between Suhail and Waggott was evident, but the meeting was conducted professionally despite some robust discussion.

The last 2 have seen the most senior member of Rovers staff lose his rag within the first few minutes and act in a bizarre and unprofessional manner. The issues with the minutes have been well debated on here, and I’m sure will be again. The entire tone has changed and blatant bare faced lies are being told by club officials.

Aside from the fans forum meetings I’ve attended dozens of meetings at the club over recent years. From my perspective the culture is absolutely horrendous at the moment. Plenty of previously warm, engaging and competent staff are like frightened children. Everything has become combative and disingenuous.

Worst of all there is a complete lack of accountability throughout. I get the feeling that any sign of contrition would be viewed as unacceptable weakness - which gives the impression of most people there being completely arrogant, which coupled with low levels of competence is a dangerous thing. It should be no surprise - it’s a top down thing. The owners are like that, and so are their staff.

[glen9mullan]

The thing for me is, ive attended in excess of 100 meetings with the club, always minuted the discussion and never once have the club asked for these minutes to be changed (they know the answer id give).

They've always been conducted professionally, real questions asked and answers reported.

Ive attended one FF. 90% of attendees didnt speak, didn't ask questions and bar listening added no real value.  The majority are also self elected and only represent themselves and cant be considered to be elected supporter officials.

2 meetings on the trot minutes challenged after a president  was set in the previous meeting. Both times the challenge has been ignored by the secretary and chair who have opted for the clubs minutes. With that doing an injustice to the whole supporter base and those who gave up their free time for free to ask the proper questions.

Its an absolute disgrace.

Even down to the cosy constitution 2 forum members are agreeing with the club without consultation of the other forum members which they have refused to share bar a paragraph which is to validate the fan engagement plan.

Therefore handicapping the work being put in with the independent regulator by WATR.

Imo the forum should be disbanded and replaced with a modern democratically elected panel where every single attendee must be elected by the supporter base. It should be open to all with a maximum term for each member.

2 meetings a season is all we've got as comms and the FF are explicit in this.

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, AllRoversGirl_ said:

Fans deserve the truth

 

Minutes of the Blackburn Rovers Fans’ Forum

Meeting Monday 20th October 2025 – 6.30pm

 

 

 

Present – Fans’ Forum

 

Mark Hitchen

John Wareing

Savio Mathias

Bharat Parmar

Annette Birkbeck

Steve Birtwell

Terry Crawford

Megan Longworth

Duncan Miller

Neil Duckworth

Katie Hull

Anne-Marie Riach

Jakob Ward

 

Present from BRFC

 

Suhail Shaikh Chief Operating Officer

Lynsey TalbotHead of Operations

Yasir SufiHead of Commercial & Partnerships

Adam OwenHead of Technical Development

Matt WrightChief Financial Officer

Rob GillHead of Media & Communications

Rudy GestedeHead of Football operations

Brett BakerHead of Football administration

 

1.Apologies for Absence  

 

Ray Williamson

Zubair Bassa

Tristan Stock

Peter Bolton

Zayd Rawoot

 

2.Matters Arising from the minutes of the previous meeting 14th July 2025

 

None.

 

 

3.Club Kits 2027-28

 

MH stated that he would pass the fan survey on kit design to the club’s kit supplier.

 

DM asked why the adidas deal had been turned down

YS asked where that information had come from

DM stated Gary Aspden had stated in an interview with Soccer Bible

YS stated we are still in a contract with Macron and cannot comment

DM stated that report/rumours were rife that Castore/Umbro would be selected as the Issa brothers are their biggest investor and it was part of a wider attempt to engage them.

Both YS and SS stated they didn’t believe it to be true that they were the largest investor. DM disagreed and asked if there was any truth to reports that Macron were seeking to take legal action against the club.

SS asked where this information had come from and it may represent a breach the other way.

YS stated that there are lots of rumours from fans and we must deal with facts – the facts are we are in a deal with Macron and the results of the tender process must be kept confidential.

DM stated he knew adidas had put a good deal forward. SS replied that he didn’t believe the deal was good enough. DM asked if this was a purely financial opinion based on upfront payments and felt it was potentially short sighted.

YS asked if he felt our supporters would be happy to pay 80 for a shirt. 

DM stated that he felt they would be happy to pay 80 for a quality product than 60 for an off the peg or substandard product.

YS stated that many factors had to be considered.

DM stated that it was disappointing in relation to Adidas Spezial given a Rovers Season ticket holder was the curator of that range.

SS stated that we were never promised a Spezial range and without it being put in writing it cannot be considered.

DM stated that given his relationship with the club and community Gary’s verbal assurances should count for something given Spezial is his brand.

SS stated it is adidas’s brand and YS stated that as a great supporter of the club he wouldn’t be disclosing financial information (DM assured he wasn’t).

SS stated that Gary was an employee of adidas and that a Spezial range wasn’t committed and offered to phone him to verify.

 

SS stated that there is a template pattern that can’t be deviated from, but any new supplier will give us bespoke kits.

 

 

4.Pitch Maintenance / Drainage

 

ND reported that he had investigated water levels on the River Darwen over the 13 years that public records are available. During that time the club had had four games postponed or abandoned and of the top 5 recorded river levels, Rovers had had home games on three of them.

 

ND asked whether the outflow from the ground into the river had been checked on the day of the Ipswich game. LT replied that it had been checked a number of times, the last around 4.30pm, when the outflow was still above the river level. Rainfall records had shown that 77.2mm of rain had fallen at Ewood, compared to 57.7mm at Burnley and 54.1mm at Manchester United.

 

LT stated that, after the postponement of the game at home to Portsmouth last season, the club had spoken to United Utilities and the Environment Agency. The club had proposed adding a sleeve to the drain and after some discussion it had been agreed that this could be done but that the club would need to fund the work. The work was actually plannedto be done that week.

 

 

5.Ipswich Game Abandonment Update

 

MH noted that the abandoned game against Ipswich had now been re-arranged for Tuesday 2nd December, with season ticket holders having free access and anyone who had purchased tickets for the original fixture able to buy tickets at half price. YS confirmed that the decision was in line with the Club’s Charter

 

6.Lancashire Telegraph Communications

       

MH asked what had led the club to ban reporters from the Lancashire Telegraph from attending the club. RobG replied that the relationship had been difficult for some time and the leaking of team news was the final straw for the club. He really would have preferred not to have to do this and he still hoped to get back to a normal relationship as soon as possible, although there was no immediate prospect of that.

 

JW stated that it appears a growing trend at the club regarding unclear communication siting Jon Dahl Tomasson and Valerian Ismael being silenced or censored on certain topics, the club threatening fans with bans, and rumours and social media fallout surrounding Rudy Gestede which is not a good look for the club.

 

7.Court Case Update

 

MW stated that the requirement by the Indian courts for the club’s owners to guarantee that a fund equal to any monies sent to the club be logged had now been removed. Responding to a question from JaW, this would not mean any increase in funds available, as they were already backing the club to agreed budgets. RudyG added that the club had brought in 10 new signings and there was a possibility of further signings in the January 2026 transfer window.

 

DM asked if this would potentially give RG more room for new recruits and improved contracts, particularly given we have some headroom under FFP rules for a finite time.

RG stated we had recruited 10 players this summer.

MW stated the owners had funded the club to the level requested and will continue to do so, and with regards to FFP we clearly have some headroom due to the good business the club had done with the likes of Sam Szmodics and Adam Wharton, but 

 

JaW expressed concern about the number of players who had left the club in the Summer and subsequent team performances and the real possibility of a relegation fight. RG disagreed – Dominic Hyam, Lewis Travis, Callum Brittain and Harry Leonard had all wanted to leave the club. SM asked if there was any intention to recruit more players experienced in the Championship. RudyG replied that experience costs a lot of money and it was difficult to hire players ready to immediately compete in the league.

 

DM stated that in the last meeting SS stated they were looking to get closer to a break even model where they wouldn’t be as reliant on owner funding.

SS asked if DM thought this was possible, which he responded not if we want to stay in this division.

MW stated that the budget from the owners had increased and was committed to around 20 million a season.which was the required amount in this division and all clubs faced the same problem.

DM stated that while the FFP headroom exists why can’t the owners commit more and push for promotion, particularly given we finished 7th last year, relatively minimal investment could make all the difference, instead we appear to have cut back.

DM stated that the disappointing thing from a fans point of view is that the legacy of the sale of a generational talent in Adam Wharton has been to keep us afloat while the owners battled a legal issue, whereas it should have meant reinvestment into new playing assets who could help take us to the next level.

MW agreed and says he would also like to have seen that, but the reality is even with these sales we rely on owner funding.

DM asked if 20 million was their ceiling, because we have been told for a long time that Venky’s CAN’T invest any more under P&S/FFP rules, whereas now it is clear they could invest more but they don’t want to. If so how long will they remain happy to lose 20 million year on year, and what is the end game for them as owners and us as supporters. There seems to be no point or end to it.

MH stated that we accept big sales are needed but an opportunity to reinvest into the team isn’t made.

DM stated that if they want to break the cycle of just losing 20 million each year something needs to change, and if they aren’t willing to do that the advice SS must give them as their trusted advisor is to sell the club.

SS stated that there is no potential buyer and he came in at the time of the acquisition of the club. Both SS and MW stated that every football club is for sale, and if any of them can find a buyer they are willing to have a conversation.

 

DM asked RG that while he had stated he thinks we will have a good season, what if we don’t? Since Steve Waggott left the structure at the club is unclear and if there is a decision to be made on the future of the head coach, who is responsible for that?

SS stated it would be the owners decision, but they would propose it.

DM asked specifically who would propose this as it is unclear where people’s remit starts and ends, and it was unclear who was assessing the performance of RG/SS or VI.

RG stated that AO was responsible for assessing all coaching staff at the club, which extended to ValerienIsmael.

 

KH asked if it is a concern that we may be relegated.

RG stated that it is a concern but they believe it will be addressed and the statistics show that we are creating sufficient chances to score enough goals.

 

 

 

 

 

8.Fan Engagement Plan – Forum Constitution

 

MH asked for any comments from fan groups about the current situation with the only communication route between fans and the club is through the Fans Forum. A constitution for the Forum was in the process of completion to sit alongside the club’s Fan Engagement Plan.

 

ML stated that for Her Game Too the main issues were the lack of communications about the women’s team such that fans don’t even know when the fixtures are.

 

SB and SM suggested that more open engagement was needed with the wider fan base. 

 

JaW said that We Are The Rovers was concerned about the reduction in the number of Forums and the fact the MOU signed by WATR has been ignored by the club since SW left. JaW felt that given the current mood the club should be welcoming more engagement rather than scaling back.

DM pointed out that the 2 fan engagement plans from last season and this season when read side by side show all previous opportunities to grow and develop fan engagement have been scaled back, which will be a potential issue with the incoming football regulator.

YS sited club interviews with VI, Rg and AO as examples of fan engagement. DM disputed this as engagement must be a 2 way process.

DM stated that we need assurances the club is committed to fan engagement as during WATR discussions with the football regulator they highlighted real concerns with the direction in which the club have gone.

 

 

AMR suggested that supporters want to feel a sense of inclusion.

 

There was a wide ranging discussion about how consultation could attract a wider range of fans whilst still remaining a practical body. SS was open to receiving questions in advance from the fan base. YS added that the club would be happy to consider recording Forum meetings. DM suggested that there should be an affiliation process by the club for supporter groups. DM suggested that the FF needs to develop in line with regulatory advice on forming a Fan Engagement/Shadow Board.

 

9.Club Academy

 

AO stated that the club had retained its Category 1 status in February with no issues. Renewal is one a 3 year schedule but with annual reviews in February.

 

DM stated that it had been disappointing that there had been no Academy player on the pitch in the Swansea game, breaking a long continuous record. AO replied that both Scott Wharton and Hayden Carter being unavailable had been the issue at that game.

 

AO stated that it was difficult to integrate young players into an unstable environment JaW stated he felt this was contradictory as Ismael was reportedly appointed on the back of his willingness to increase academy minutes, and questioned why the club had chosen to transition so heavily this summer. 

AO stated it became a transitional year because players wanted to leave.

 

(Add para with AO’s stats)

 

10.Women’s Team

 

ML asked why there was such a lack of information available about the women’s team for supporters following the radical changes over the Summer. MW replied that the changes regarding the women’s team were a result of the authorities trying to up the status of the two top divisions to fully professional contracts, aiming for 85% of occupancy at grounds. Costs would have to balloon with no prospect of any income form TV and media rights for at least a couple of years. Meeting this change would have resulted in a substantial increase in budgets which would have inevitably affected the funding of the men’s team and there was no evidence of support from fans for the women’s team in terms at attendances.

 

The team had had a difficult start to the season because of all the changes over the Summer but were now set up to be competitive in League 4. ML stated that there appeared to be a lack of support for the team but MW disputed that and stated that the staffing for the new team that was asked for had been put in place. RobG stated that there had been a designated press officer for the women’s team for the last 7 or 8 years but no longer. The reality was that the team was now an amateur operation.

 

11.150th Anniversary Update

 

DM asked why the planning meetings had stopped abruptly in the Summer. YS stated that the situation had moved on from planning to action and that more meetings were never planned. DM stated that this was not the premise these meetings were set up for and members of the committee had frequently been tasked with additional ongoing tasks, and YS should check the email correspondence regarding this which would confirm that supporter involvement was supposed to be ongoing. SS confirmed that 150 people had been nominated for honour caps and it was intended to issue all of them through the season. 85 of the nominees were dead and of the remaining, many were involved with the football business and therefore often busy elsewhere on match days. There were a significant number planned to attend the Derby game. These caps have been selected by the club and the fans on the committee had no input.

DM asked for an update on behalf of Paul Salmon regarding a letter he wrote which it was agreed would be sent to FIFA, the FA, EFL and The Royal Family. SS stated this letter had been sent. DM expressed disappointment that Paul hadn’t been notified of this. (At the end of the meeting SS clarified that the letter had been sent to Mike Jackman, and not to any of the intended recipients.)

 

12.Equality, Diversity & Inclusion

 

LT stated that the club had been awarded a Silver Code of Practice for EDI and were working towards a Gold award.

 

LT reported that there had been a few reports of abuse by fans regarding discrimination. JaW asked whether anything had happened with these reports – LT agreed to check.

 

13.Any Other Business

 

a) AMR asked about the poor TV service on screens in the Blues Bar. YS agreed to check the situation.

b) JaW asked about progress in appointing a new Chief Executive Officer. SS stated that he had no update to give.

DM asked if the fact Steve Waggott was still employed and on gardening leave was holding up a new appointment, and might this improve in the coming weeks.

SS stated SW’s period of gardening leave was 12 months and it had no impact on any new appointment. He also highlighted that between Derek Shaw leaving and Steve Waggott joining the club operated without a CEO for 2 years.

c) MH asked whether it would be appropriate to bring the February meeting forward to December or January. LT stated that it was very unlikely that December would be possible.

 

Thanks for these.

If these minutes are accurate, what an absolute disgrace those responses from the Club are and it just highlights what a farce the Forum has become.

My main take outs were:

1) They seem far more worried about who might have leaked any info about the kit situation rather than any substantive issues like "Is it the best deal for the Club/the development of the Club Shop and/ or the Supporters?"

£80 for a shirt? Holy Cow! 

2) Particularly puzzled by Lynsey Talbot's response that work on a drainage sleeve was "planned for that week"

What week? The week of the Portsmouth game? Ipswich game? The same week the Forum was held?

Was it ever completed? If so, we've heard nothing whatsoever about it. Is it the standard "we're looking into it" scenario?

3) RG treating people as absolute mugs by claiming we've signed "ten players" when in real terms we sold more than that. (Did no-one pull them up on why Hyam was sold in the last few hours of the window without a suitable replacement?)

Also desperately disappointing to see that the resolution of the Court case in the owners' favour won't impact the budget in any way. RG again insulting everyone's intelligence by making out we're working to an agreed "budget" which implies a positive net spend when in reality we were about negative £2m net spend in summer plus presumably substantial wage savings.

If the owners have allegedly upped their annual contribution to £20m p.a.  - and we've slashed wage costs on players -  and made a trading profit in the summer which won't be reinvested in the squad - and it's not being spent on the ground - and it's not being spent on the women's team - where's it all going?

4) They clearly seem to be planning on operating without a CEO going forward or at least leaving it as long as possible.

5) No contrition whatsoever about the fate of the women's side.

6) No acknowledgement whatsoever that the "150th celebrations" have turned into an absolute embarrassment.

[RevidgeBlue]

1 hour ago, Herbie6590 said:

The minutes read as an adversarial process. What should be positive, energising, engaging & aimed at stoking up & motivating the fanbase reads like a litany of excuses offered up by a poorly performing sales rep explaining why they missed their target.

Have done with it…the members really need to resign en bloc & as said elsewhere subject themselves to a public ballot. 

Absolutely spot on Ian.

It was  seemingly not that much different when Waggott was here either. "Can't" "Wont" "We weren't aware" "We'll look into it" etc.

Edited 1 hour ago by RevidgeBlue

[RevidgeBlue]

13 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

2 meetings on the trot minutes challenged after a president  was set in the previous meeting. Both times the challenge has been ignored by the secretary and chair who have opted for the clubs minutes. 

John/OTG, I keep offering you the opportunity to proffer some sort of plausible explanation as to why this happened if correct or to deny it if it didnt.

Any comment to make?

[AllRoversGirl_]

46 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

John/OTG, I keep offering you the opportunity to proffer some sort of plausible explanation as to why this happened if correct or to deny it if it didnt.

Any comment to make?

They won't make any comment

The FF is not fit for purpose. Surely, the FF is supposed to hold those with powers responsible for the decisions made. The FF has lost all credibility, and fans are losing hope. I personally believe the chair and secretary are not fit for purpose in this role if they continue to allow the club to get away with murder

[J*B]

I wrote a long post here about this process, but have just deleted it because it's a convoluted way of saying much simpler: This is insanity. The entire point of minutes is an agreement from everybody in the room about what was said. If the minutes don't reflect what was said, they should never be agreed to. 

[Boz]

Firstly, I acknowledge any volunteers for giving up their time free of charge or favour and for the perceived betterment of an organisation. Rovers is many folks’ passion and if you think you might make a positive impact and you are willing and have the inclination, then fair play to you.
However, in my opinion, when something such as the Fans’ Forum has so apparently become a busted flush, one might assess and reflect whether you are still making a meaningful contribution, or whether perhaps you might possibly be becoming part of the problem, enabling matters to continue unchecked. By which I mean the obvious inaccuracies with regards to what is discussed and what is reported in the minutes. Not to mention holding a mirror up to the Rover’s senior management team as to their actions in running our club and when they are failing to be compliant with the EFL’s regulations.
I have no idea under what constitution the FF was established (I’ve read what is on Rovers website, which appears to have holes within its narrative) and briefly noted that it was set up in 2002, with then minutes appearing from 2017. There would appear to be a core number of representatives, with a number there from the outset. I can see who the members represent in the July minutes yet not in Octobers. 
My question is to the Chair Mark Hitchen (laughatthedingles ?) and to the Secretary John Wareing (Only2garners ?), at what stage do you decide enough is enough? 

Edited 11 minutes ago by Boz
grammar

[SIMON GARNERS 194]

DM asked for an update on behalf of Paul Salmon regarding a letter he wrote which it was agreed would be sent to FIFA, the FA, EFL and The Royal Family. SS stated this letter had been sent. DM expressed disappointment that Paul hadn’t been notified of this. (At the end of the meeting SS clarified that the letter had been sent to Mike Jackman, and not to any of the intended recipients.)

Could someone expand on this comment please?