Jump to content

BRFCS

BY THE FANS, FOR THE FANS
SINCE 1996
Proudly partnered with TheTerraceStore.com

[Archived] Has a date been agreed for supporters consultation meeting


Recommended Posts

6 hours ago, JHRover said:

With regards to the Coyle appointment, it is important that we find out how and why that came about for a number of reasons. I accept that some things can be merely consigned to the history books and ignored, but not the Coyle appointment. I very much want to know what happened there as it was a critical component in our relegation and also potentially blows the 'hard lessons learned' theory out of the water and sends us back to 2010 decision making. We were led to believe following the Singh/Kean departure and Bowyer years that expensive lessons had been learned and the club was operating sensibly.

It ultimately amounts to an either/or situation for Cheston.

If he put Coyle forward/recommended his appointment to the owners then he should be sacked or resign in embarrassment as he is partly responsible for relegation and the situation we are in. It also begs the question of how/why he was playing such a part in manager recruitment with no right to be doing so.

If (and I suspect from what I have heard that this is more likely) that Cheston made recommendations, went off on his holidays, then Coyle was catapulted into the hot seat by someone else, then not only does that make Cheston's contributions meaningless and lead to the question of why he was interviewing managers in the first place, but also leads to the more important question of who was directing the club and making crucial decisions that have since seen us relegated.

It's not good enough just to shrug shoulders and say 'look to the future not the past'. I say that because the Coyle fiasco was less than 18 months ago and the people involved are seemingly still running the club today - Cheston/Shadow Director.

It is important we know how this happened as only by learning from that will the club ensure it doesn't happen again. Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. Yet from where I sit no lessons have been learned as the structure remains the same, the decision makers remain the same only now we've a nicer man in the dugout.

 

Totally agree. Questions need answering regarding his appointment.

I suspect that a certain agency/agent has been involved from day one and is still here. 

I think too much sh#t hit the fan(s) too quickly in the first few Venky years, I think around the time Bowyer was in the hot seat, the involvement of suspected agency/agents was being limited, possibly to try and create the image “stability” (A player or 2 through the (back) door, no doubt)

Eventually, they were able to worm their way back in a bit more and got one of “their boys” in the hot seat once more.

As for the present day, I suspect they will still be involved in the club somehow as Venkys never learn. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 402
  • Created
  • Last Reply
35 minutes ago, davulsukur said:

Totally agree. Questions need answering regarding his appointment.

I suspect that a certain agency/agent has been involved from day one and is still here. 

I think too much sh#t hit the fan(s) too quickly in the first few Venky years, I think around the time Bowyer was in the hot seat, the involvement of suspected agency/agents was being limited, possibly to try and create the image “stability” (A player or 2 through the (back) door, no doubt)

Eventually, they were able to worm their way back in a bit more and got one of “their boys” in the hot seat once more.

As for the present day, I suspect they will still be involved in the club somehow as Venkys never learn. 

                            There's a snake still in the garden.

                             Its eggs are hidden in the soil,

                             So Cheston goes on holiday

                             And in comes...Owen Coyle!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, Hasta said:

 

 

I know you have. So do you agree that if the last paragraph in the letter is true, then it is in breach of FA regulations?

From reading the letter it was the Premier League that stop the transfer happening and suddenly a couple of things happened to allowed the transfer to get the go ahead

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/2012/01/15/revealed-the-letter-that-exposes-the-history-of-blackburn-rovers-crisis-150102/

here is a list of Nick Harris and Sports intelligence articles from that time

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/?s=Blackburn&x=0&y=0#038;x=0&y=0/page/2/

 

8 hours ago, JHRover said:

With regards to the Coyle appointment, it is important that we find out how and why that came about for a number of reasons. I accept that some things can be merely consigned to the history books and ignored, but not the Coyle appointment. I very much want to know what happened there as it was a critical component in our relegation and also potentially blows the 'hard lessons learned' theory out of the water and sends us back to 2010 decision making. We were led to believe following the Singh/Kean departure and Bowyer years that expensive lessons had been learned and the club was operating sensibly.

It ultimately amounts to an either/or situation for Cheston.

If he put Coyle forward/recommended his appointment to the owners then he should be sacked or resign in embarrassment as he is partly responsible for relegation and the situation we are in. It also begs the question of how/why he was playing such a part in manager recruitment with no right to be doing so.

If (and I suspect from what I have heard that this is more likely) that Cheston made recommendations, went off on his holidays, then Coyle was catapulted into the hot seat by someone else, then not only does that make Cheston's contributions meaningless and lead to the question of why he was interviewing managers in the first place, but also leads to the more important question of who was directing the club and making crucial decisions that have since seen us relegated.

It's not good enough just to shrug shoulders and say 'look to the future not the past'. I say that because the Coyle fiasco was less than 18 months ago and the people involved are seemingly still running the club today - Cheston/Shadow Director.

It is important we know how this happened as only by learning from that will the club ensure it doesn't happen again. Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it. Yet from where I sit no lessons have been learned as the structure remains the same, the decision makers remain the same only now we've a nicer man in the dugout.

 

didn't Cheston recommend that we should appoint Warnock before he went on Holiday? shouldn't Cheston put his holiday on hold until the Warnock appointment was done? 

Wasn't Coyle appointment sorted when Cheston was on Holiday and my question would be who interview Coyle? didn't Coyle once say at a Fan meeting that Balaji interview him and the meeting was arranged by Pasha who rung him up? I am right in believing this is what Coyle said? so who suggested Coyle name to Balaji then? was it Dave Sheron? was it Ian Slivester who suggest him(don't forgot when he was appointed and who was the manager at the time)? was it Huber, Grothe or Anderson? didn't Coyle agreed to job the job for a third of wages of Warnock or was that the players budget? I wonder if Coyle regrets taking the Rovers manager job? He was advise not to take the job by his Good Friend Alan Nixon, remember him saying this last year on BBC Radio Lancashire 

here are 3 companies house record of 3 sports agencies with the same people that involved with Kentaro

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04765076/officers

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09296851/officers

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09310404/officers

lots of questions but not a lot of answers out there. 

does anyone know if Glen Mullan will restart his blogs again about the 6 years before now?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point is Chaddy you said earlier there was no evidence.

An MD of a football club ending a letter with:-

Finally, our football secretary has, this morning, been instructed by SEM to issue a mandate to a third party without any reference or approval from the board. We are not familiar with the player concerned nor is he one that has been mentioned to us by the manager. Could you please, therefore, clarify the role of SEM in our transfer policy.’

surely indicates a breach of FA rules in regards to running a club. Why they never acted on it we can only speculate.

 

The Coyle appointment, and the sham way it may or may not have happened, is just baffling beyond words. The only constant with every bullshit story and rumour about Rovers is the crooked Indians.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, Hasta said:

The point is Chaddy you said earlier there was no evidence.

An MD of a football club ending a letter with:-

Finally, our football secretary has, this morning, been instructed by SEM to issue a mandate to a third party without any reference or approval from the board. We are not familiar with the player concerned nor is he one that has been mentioned to us by the manager. Could you please, therefore, clarify the role of SEM in our transfer policy.’

surely indicates a breach of FA rules in regards to running a club. Why they never acted on it we can only speculate.

 

The Coyle appointment, and the sham way it may or may not have happened, is just baffling beyond words. The only constant with every bullshit story and rumour about Rovers is the crooked Indians.

well it wasn't the FA that stop on the transfer but the Premier League that stop it the transfer but authorised the transfer a few days later after no 3rd party ownership were involved

we don't know how often in the past 8 years this has happen but the club has never been punished by the FA or PL. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

From reading the letter it was the Premier League that stop the transfer happening and suddenly a couple of things happened to allowed the transfer to get the go ahead

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/2012/01/15/revealed-the-letter-that-exposes-the-history-of-blackburn-rovers-crisis-150102/

here is a list of Nick Harris and Sports intelligence articles from that time

http://www.sportingintelligence.com/?s=Blackburn&x=0&y=0#038;x=0&y=0/page/2/

 

didn't Cheston recommend that we should appoint Warnock before he went on Holiday? shouldn't Cheston put his holiday on hold until the Warnock appointment was done? 

Wasn't Coyle appointment sorted when Cheston was on Holiday and my question would be who interview Coyle? didn't Coyle once say at a Fan meeting that Balaji interview him and the meeting was arranged by Pasha who rung him up? I am right in believing this is what Coyle said? so who suggested Coyle name to Balaji then? was it Dave Sheron? was it Ian Slivester who suggest him(don't forgot when he was appointed and who was the manager at the time)? was it Huber, Grothe or Anderson? didn't Coyle agreed to job the job for a third of wages of Warnock or was that the players budget? I wonder if Coyle regrets taking the Rovers manager job? He was advise not to take the job by his Good Friend Alan Nixon, remember him saying this last year on BBC Radio Lancashire 

here are 3 companies house record of 3 sports agencies with the same people that involved with Kentaro

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/04765076/officers

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09296851/officers

https://beta.companieshouse.gov.uk/company/09310404/officers

lots of questions but not a lot of answers out there. 

does anyone know if Glen Mullan will restart his blogs again about the 6 years before now?

 

What tosh you talk

you've contradicted yourself again in less than 24 hours 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

After not going to put myself through it I finally listened to a replay on Radio Lancs.

Cheston, whilst not there yet, has improved a little in Public speaking although, imo, he has a voice that betrays the fact that he knows that he is spouting cobblers. Information wise I gained nothing from him I didn't know or suspect already.

Tony's team talk was good and an easy listen. A modern day Mark Twain storyteller.

Hells Bells I began to feel sorry for the Pune crowd who can't attend such events or indeed Ewood at all as they would be shouted at and called bad names by nasty people.  Again learnt little new but it served its purpose in placating the masses.

If I said that after promotion this season we will then bounce straight through the Championship in one season I would expect to be called a Fantasist, or indeed much worse.

Am I cynical? You can put your shirt on it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, AllRoverAsia said:

After not going to put myself through it I finally listened to a replay on Radio Lancs.

Cheston, whilst not there yet, has improved a little in Public speaking although, imo, he has a voice that betrays the fact that he knows that he is spouting cobblers. Information wise I gained nothing from him I didn't know or suspect already.

Tony's team talk was good and an easy listen. A modern day Mark Twain storyteller.

Hells Bells I began to feel sorry for the Pune crowd who can't attend such events or indeed Ewood at all as they would be shouted at and called bad names by nasty people.  Again learnt little new but it served its purpose in placating the masses.

If I said that after promotion this season we will then bounce straight through the Championship in one season I would expect to be called a Fantasist, or indeed much worse.

Am I cynical? You can put your shirt on it.

There is a massive difference between fantasism and optimism.

Ill condescend for you;

1. "That lad can't get a game because his agent won't agree his wages, I don't have any facts or even any genuine hearsay, but I dreamt it up so it must be true"

2. "It would be my target to bounce through the championship like Sheff united are trying, like Norwich and Southampton."

Hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

well it wasn't the FA that stop on the transfer but the Premier League that stop it the transfer but authorised the transfer a few days later after no 3rd party ownership were involved

we don't know how often in the past 8 years this has happen but the club has never been punished by the FA or PL. 

I'm not talking about third party ownership of players. That's a completely different subject.  

I'm talking about the club being run by a third party rather than the board of directors.

The three questions it raised back then were:-

 

1) Why did Venkys allow this to happen?

2) Who exactly was making and authorising the decisions on transfers?

3) Were the decisions being made solely taken for the benefit of Blackburn Rovers football club?

 

People will say it's in the past. However the problem is almost the same three questions apply to the Owen Coyle appointment less than 15 months ago.

We have no transparency whatsoever on who makes what decisions at Ewood Park. Whilst the club decisions are  still 'taken in India', where there is no one who knows a thing about football is based there, it is deeply concerning.

 That is what worries fans and that is what should be what is clarified in these consultation meetings. Not what TM thinks about certain players.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When you look at the Coyle situation and then add in the Stokes & Wes Brown farces and his re signing of Feeney on a 2 year deal then chuck in his overwhelming desire to try and pay money for Giles Barnes you really have to ask the same old questions as a lot of these things follow the same old tracks.

It was almost like a very watered down version of the Kean saga and guess what it also ended in relegation and multiple pay offs like that did.

Bowyers time 'appeared' to put a lid on it for a while and now the same with Mowbray but you can bet your right leg should he depart there'll be another one with Coylesqe links through the door next at 33-1 who'll go down a similar avenue with coaches and players.

Alongside Venkys it's been a recurring theme from day one, the two go hand in hand.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

37 minutes ago, tomphil said:

When you look at the Coyle situation and then add in the Stokes & Wes Brown farces and his re signing of Feeney on a 2 year deal then chuck in his overwhelming desire to try and pay money for Giles Barnes you really have to ask the same old questions as a lot of these things follow the same old tracks.

 

Blimey, I actually misread your first line, as "Stokes & Wes Brown faeces."...It is all in my head, I know!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have page after page here, of debate about the value of these meetings. It goes without saying, that almost everyone isn't happy with the contents of this latest meeting and the failure to answer the important questions. I guess it wouldn't be too bad if we knew that the big mistakes made, that now see us in the third tier, would not be repeated. The chances are though, that they will, as we can only deduce that the person(s) who made these mistakes (or reckless decisions) are still here and more importantly are not going to be held to account. The big question is, who made the mistakes, is it the owners, their adviser, or someone lurking in the shadows, who has influence, without the supporters, or the authorities knowing, who they actually are?  Assuming there is still an outside influence, who can make the big decisions, like managerial appointments, then this club is doomed. These decisions have rarely been sensible and in my view are rarely for the good of the club.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, lraC said:

We have page after page here, of debate about the value of these meetings. It goes without saying, that almost everyone isn't happy with the contents of this latest meeting and the failure to answer the important questions. I guess it wouldn't be too bad if we knew that the big mistakes made, that now see us in the third tier, would not be repeated. The chances are though, that they will, as we can only deduce that the person(s) who made these mistakes (or reckless decisions) are still here and more importantly are not going to be held to account. The big question is, who made the mistakes, is it the owners, their adviser, or someone lurking in the shadows, who has influence, without the supporters, or the authorities knowing, who they actually are?  Assuming there is still an outside influence, who can make the big decisions, like managerial appointments, then this club is doomed. These decisions have rarely been sensible and in my view are rarely for the good of the club.

Our only hope is for the club to be sold.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, lraC said:

We have page after page here, of debate about the value of these meetings. It goes without saying, that almost everyone isn't happy with the contents of this latest meeting and the failure to answer the important questions. I guess it wouldn't be too bad if we knew that the big mistakes made, that now see us in the third tier, would not be repeated. The chances are though, that they will, as we can only deduce that the person(s) who made these mistakes (or reckless decisions) are still here and more importantly are not going to be held to account. The big question is, who made the mistakes, is it the owners, their adviser, or someone lurking in the shadows, who has influence, without the supporters, or the authorities knowing, who they actually are?  Assuming there is still an outside influence, who can make the big decisions, like managerial appointments, then this club is doomed. These decisions have rarely been sensible and in my view are rarely for the good of the club.

I've never known a relegation be papered over in the fashion we've seen at Rovers since May. In some ways that is a good thing - business as usual, continuity, retention of facilities, minimal redundancies etc. But on the other hand you could be forgiven for thinking nothing had happened.

No admission of guilt/culpability for our demise, no structural changes, no radical rethinking or realisation that things have gone too far and need to change. Blame shifting/deflection tactics in place. Owners remaining silent, their middle man/messenger remaining hidden, their patsy pretending as though nothing has happened and giving the impression he has had nothing to do with it despite being the only director at the club throughout.

Its utterly bizarre. Normally when a club of Blackburn Rovers' stature endures a horrific, predictable and avoidable relegation to the 3rd division heads would roll, major changes would be made, the guilty parties identified and axed, a new way of doing things brought in to turn the club around.

Not here though. Focus all your attention on Tony whilst ignoring the fundamental structural flaws that put us here and remain here today. Don't ask questions or seek answers on how/why we have ended up here, just concentrate on the future.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, JHRover said:

I've never known a relegation be papered over in the fashion we've seen at Rovers since May. In some ways that is a good thing - business as usual, continuity, retention of facilities, minimal redundancies etc. But on the other hand you could be forgiven for thinking nothing had happened.

No admission of guilt/culpability for our demise, no structural changes, no radical rethinking or realisation that things have gone too far and need to change. Blame shifting/deflection tactics in place. Owners remaining silent, their middle man/messenger remaining hidden, their patsy pretending as though nothing has happened and giving the impression he has had nothing to do with it despite being the only director at the club throughout.

Its utterly bizarre. Normally when a club of Blackburn Rovers' stature endures a horrific, predictable and avoidable relegation to the 3rd division heads would roll, major changes would be made, the guilty parties identified and axed, a new way of doing things brought in to turn the club around.

Not here though. Focus all your attention on Tony whilst ignoring the fundamental structural flaws that put us here and remain here today. Don't ask questions or seek answers on how/why we have ended up here, just concentrate on the future.

Firstly - the way you talk about the scenario comes across to me, as someone who is ignorant of the way the owners have chosen to run the club. I know from my own perspective, I want the owners to engage differently and employ a more valid structure but they choose to run it like this and thus besides protesting, boycotting or just giving up - I've not much say in the matter. I know, you know the scenario JHR, so don't feel obliged to create a "reasons why they run the club poorly" list please.

Secondly, when taking that into account - the culpability and/or blame falls directly at the feet off the owners. Their lackadaisical approach is the top and bottom of our problems. Ofcourse we could have discussions all day long about the difference Coyle made, or the knock on of having 7 managers in 5 years, the impact of 10+ million in pay offs, contract releases and the selling off key players to pay bills. The "guilty parties" are the Raos and their incessant need to run the club personally with "advice" and without the experience, are you seriously expecting them to sack themselves? Is that the Q we should be asking? Or, lets suggest they choose to axe all coaching staff and management.. do you expect their process to bring the right replacements in? It's not acceptance, or ignorance, it's called being realistic.

Thirdly and finally, nobody is choosing to ignore the flaws or the poor decisions made by the ownership. Simply choosing to engage with these meetings and weigh up the intentions of the staff involved, is not "ignoring fundamental structural flaws". I'd call it dealing with the reality that we find ourselves in. 

This is the scenario. I have respect for those who chose to disengage completely, and I can understand why. I have no respect for those who wish to criticise those who still wish to engage though. For all the past ridiculous decisions, mistakes and downright criminal mismanagement, the actual future, ergo the decisions made NOW, that impact that, are more important that who advised them to hire Coyle.

Ofcourse, I can understand the criticism on that basis that they've not learned from their mistakes, but surely, by now, we've come to realise they won't take advice from us? 

I'm 100% supportive of these meetings continuing despite many seeing it as a box ticking exercise.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, lraC said:

We have page after page here, of debate about the value of these meetings. It goes without saying, that almost everyone isn't happy with the contents of this latest meeting and the failure to answer the important questions. I guess it wouldn't be too bad if we knew that the big mistakes made, that now see us in the third tier, would not be repeated. The chances are though, that they will, as we can only deduce that the person(s) who made these mistakes (or reckless decisions) are still here and more importantly are not going to be held to account. The big question is, who made the mistakes, is it the owners, their adviser, or someone lurking in the shadows, who has influence, without the supporters, or the authorities knowing, who they actually are?  Assuming there is still an outside influence, who can make the big decisions, like managerial appointments, then this club is doomed. These decisions have rarely been sensible and in my view are rarely for the good of the club.

I do wonder if they really were mistakes. Then I have got to think who gained from decisions that a 7 year old could have predicted would lead to relegation-both times!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 08/10/2017 at 15:23, Biz said:

There is a massive difference between fantasism and optimism.

Ill condescend for you;

1. "That lad can't get a game because his agent won't agree his wages, I don't have any facts or even any genuine hearsay, but I dreamt it up so it must be true"

2. "It would be my target to bounce through the championship like Sheff united are trying, like Norwich and Southampton."

Hope this helps.

Saying 2 whilst knowing you manage a Club owned by Venkys is pure fantasy.

Imho.

Hope this helps.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

58 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

Saying 2 whilst knowing you manage a Club owned by Venkys is pure fantasy.

Imho.

Hope this helps.

Didn't help much, since it's still completely missing the point.

You've every reason to believe it to be unfounded optimism but there is a big difference between misplaced hope, and making things up. 

I know you know this, but I know you'd rather carry on churning out arguments (like many people here) because of a stubbornness or persona agenda with those responsible for the content. 

I think it says a lot about you, if you'd rather tolerate "I think he's been dropped because of his agent" without a semblance of evidence, as opposed to "our target is promotion"..

Unless I'm forcibly removed from the website, which might be the choice of a few people, I'll never stop pointing out this troublemaking nonsense. Like it or lump it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, Biz said:

Didn't help much, since it's still completely missing the point.

You've every reason to believe it to be unfounded optimism but there is a big difference between misplaced hope, and making things up. 

I know you know this, but I know you'd rather carry on churning out arguments (like many people here) because of a stubbornness or persona agenda with those responsible for the content. 

I think it says a lot about you, if you'd rather tolerate "I think he's been dropped because of his agent" without a semblance of evidence, as opposed to "our target is promotion"..

Unless I'm forcibly removed from the website, which might be the choice of a few people, I'll never stop pointing out this troublemaking nonsense. Like it or lump it. 

Blimey. I can almost taste the smell of burning martyr LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.