13 hours ago, philipl said:

Pulis simply said no just as Charlton said no on Bauer.

In the event both players spent most of the half season just gone injured.

I would look to a loan for Chapman.

That contradicts what Mowbray said at the supporters consultation meeting.

He said Boro were constantly on the phone asking if Rovers are still interested in Chapman.

Mowbray then went on to point out that Chapman currently wouldn't get in our team and his contract is up in the summer so why would he make any commitment at this point in time. This may not have made the radio edit.   

13 hours ago, old darwen blue said:

Whilst I respect the rights of people to have their own opinions on Tony I would just like you all to remember where we were before he arrived and the previous few years of catastrophic disaster on a seasonal basis. Let’s just give a manager at least three or four years before any judgement is cast. 

 

I thank you. 

Another 3 or 4 months of current form and I think most people will be casting judgement. This season could be catastrophic by then.

1 hour ago, USABlue said:

What was everyones thoughts on Rothwell.  I enjoyed his posivity and pace but he has some blunders in him, still, would like to see more of him.

I think he has potential. His pace while in possession of the ball is amazing but may sometimes affect his ability to pick a final ball.

He sometimes holds the ball too long but that will improve with experience. Overall he did well but diving when he had a clear chance to equalise really blotted his copybook. Got to cut that out.

The last 3 games I've attended were at Preston, Wigan and Sheffield Utd. I've seen us concede 10 goals in those 3 games and the reaction by the players to each goal has been the same - look down at your boots and shrug your shoulders.

Not once have I seen cross words between players, encouragement for each other, pointing fingers, no discussion about what went wrong, no communication of any sort. Just  no fight at all in this team. I think they have inherited Mowbray's 'this is where we are' attitude. The team is spineless and leaderless.

I think we showed in the first hour today that there is ability in the side - Palmer was good, Reed and Travis both busy. Rothwell seems to be more bluster than end product and that dive was a disgrace. I didn't see any real threat from Brereton at all I'm afraid.

But the overriding  worry I have is that this team is beginning to accept these heavy defeats as par for the course. The attitude in the last few weeks has been as bad as anything since we were relegated from the Premiership.  I don't see any confidence returning to this side without a big change in personnel or a change of manager.

I don't think we will go down but we can't plod along like this into next season. 

1 hour ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

That's the thing - we bring Bell in for Williams, he plays like a drain and next match it's lets bring back Williams, If you rolled them both together you wouldn't have a Billy Wilson or an Alan Wright. Same goes for the midfield, lets swap Evans for Rodwell, Rodwell doesn't play well and lets bring back Evans. Rothwell or Smallwood, Palmer or Conway, Bennett or Smallwood. The manager sees them in training, he must know who's the best.

we've been quite lucky with lack of injuries and suspensions so far this season - they often have a big affect around Christmas. However, I really don't want to watch us plod along with Evans, Smallwood, Williams etc for the rest of this season but I don't think Mowbray will shuffle the pack unless he's forced to.

No point keeping a settled team if we are not winning. I am hoping we are safe from any relegation scrap so why not experiment a bit?

8 minutes ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

Even if Graham was playing out of his skin why hasn't Brererton been coming on to play in his position when Graham goes off ?

And why start Palmer instead of Brereton at Preston ?

I don't really understand how the 'loan with a view to permanent transfer' works if it is outside the window for transfers.

If there is a clause that states that the loan MUST be converted to a permanent move on a certain date then it is clearly a permanent deal made outside the EFL transfer window which is against the rules. 

Does it mean clubs can make permanent signings during the loan window and just call it something else while the authorities turn a blind eye?

If it is just an 'agreement' then do we need to stick to it ?

18 minutes ago, Parsonblue said:

Once again it comes down to players making the right decisions at the right time.  Too many go into panic mode when we come under any sort of pressure.  No excuse for this result.  Two-one up after 90 minutes and then two goals given away in four minutes - shocking defending.  Personally, I don't blame the manager or the coaching staff - it comes down to the players on the pitch doing the job they are supposed to do.  A professional footballer shouldn't need telling how to see out a game for four minutes, particularly as they had withstood the pressure for most of the match.

Anyone thinking we are going to get rid of Mowbray is living in cloud cuckoo land.  Having signed a long term contract the owners are clearly backing him.  It's now up to him to keep us afloat this season and then look at a rebuilding job in the summer.  We need better than what we have and need to start by building a solid platform at the back.

The buck stops with the manager.

Currently he is not doing a good job. The thing that worries me most is his apparent lack of emotion after each defeat - He should be absolutely fuming but appears to accept our plight as somehow inevitable - 'its just where we are'. If that attitude is prevalent in the dressing room then we might as well give up now.

Too many excuses not enough action. Mowbray needs to change his attitude but it won't happen. He's under no pressure after that recent contract renewal - Not good news for Rovers immediate future in my opinion.

8 hours ago, JHRover said:

I remain of the view that the best prospects of long term success are by installing a qualified, capable technical director or director of football who can oversee and orchestrate the football operation with a head coach operating alongside/beneath him. The D of F or whatever you want to call it would liaise with the owners and report to them and be given a budget and he would take overall responsibility working in tandem with his choice of manager.

I look at Leeds and Norwich steaming clear in this league and both are doing so with good head coaches who have come into this sort of system working under a footballing director with recruitment a joint effort. Bielsa has come along and fitted smoothly into the structure at Leeds which was set up before his arrival.

The way we operate is extremely old school with the manager having too much responsibility across too many areas. In this day and age the manager should be able to focus on training and matchdays with academy/recruitment going on elsewhere. It is ludicrous that the manager has to fly to India to get his instructions/budget.

There are odd exceptions these days like Warnock at Cardiff or Dyche at Burnley which were more traditional ways of doing things but I think in our circumstances with absentee foreign clueless owners we need a structure in place that ensures continuity and so managers can come and go without being utterly reliant upon them for the entire football operation. It seems Mowbray played a part in our CEO arriving which is also bonkers and quite alarming. 

I'm not for one minute slating Mowbray or saying he should be removed from his role but we're now in a position where we are heavily reliant on him for virtually every aspect of the operation - speaking to the owners, this 'trust' thing we have in place, recruitment, training, scouting. If we unfortunately reach a stage where Mowbray reaches the end of the line at the club then it will all have to be started again from scratch, which will probably take several years to achieve. We need to be able to change manager if required without losing all direction and having to start again from scratch. That's how Leeds have managed to get where they are - not through spending daft money or even being particularly well run - but having a structure above the manager that continues and into which the manager can fit.

 

This is exactly right. I don't see how Venky's don't understand this. No business will ever succeed without the correct infrastructure. Rovers need a proper board of directors who understand football, understand the club and understand the fans.

I can't imagine Venky's allowing their other business interests to be run with the same model used at Rovers.

Maybe they see themselves as Mowbray's supervisors and think they don't need any help. It's either that or they are not particularly bothered about future progression.

Still totally baffled by their intentions and actions after all this time.  Without changes behind the scenes Rovers will stagnate and slowly continue on a downward spiral.

14 minutes ago, J*B said:

Come on now, don't be silly. Mowbray isn't the sort of man to accept that. Venkys are so secretive they only trust a few certain people. There's no way on earth players are being approved by Venkys and signed by Rovers without Mowbrays consent. Non story.

There is definitely something in this story.

I believe Mowbray was consulted but not particularly keen. The deal went through because Brereton seemed to fit the criteria currently being used for Rovers' signings.

1 hour ago, Mattyblue said:

Interesting to see meadows/Jim Wilkinson, who does have decent sources, I believe, say on Twitter that he’s heard BB and Davenport were not players Mowbray wanted...

I heard the same from a member of the scouting staff. Mentioned it on this thread weeks ago.

6 hours ago, Franky said:

Mowbray, give us a shrug

Mowbray Mowbray give us a shrug

This is exactly what I thought after his post match interview - "I guess that shows just about where we are" when talking about losing a two goal lead. He should have been absolutely fuming but he seemed very calm about it all.  Oh dear never mind!

At the supporters consultation he was saying we could compete with every other team in the division and was talking about getting significant backing from the owners if we are in with a shout of the playoff places in January. Now he seems reasonably content with mid table. 

He hasn't just had a long contract extension by any chance?

Just now, Ossydave said:

Its just a Surveymonkey link.

From the wording of the email they're initially targeting fans with history (previous season ticket holder for 25+ years) that STILL go to away games but not currently home games.  Not sure it's a good idea posting the link to the survey on here as it's swaying their results.  If you fit into that bracket you'll get the email anyway.

I fit the description exactly. I'll keep an eye on my email.

Thanks

I really want to do the survey but they haven't sent me one.

Is there an email address supplied to reply the survey to ? I might return one anyway

I have been grappling with this question for a day or two now. What does this Venky visit mean to us?

Apart from the 1875 protest against Wolves, I have not attended a home game since the act of sabotage that resulted in I have been stopped from posting this by moderators. Coyle being appointed manager. My preferred option would be that Venky’s leave tomorrow even if it means Rovers starting again in the Conference  - I’d be back at Ewood immediately.

While those responsible for appointing Coyle and committing many previous misdemeanors  are still in charge I don’t want to pay any money into the coffers .

My main gripe these days is the apparent aloofness and total lack of respect shown by Venky’s towards us fans. They have made no attempt to engage or explain their actions. Even the official ‘messages  from the owners’ issued after promotion and Mowbray’s new contract were obviously written by staff at Ewood. It seems to me that they run Rovers as a footnote at their AGMs and supply enough money to keep the club running without really caring too much because they can afford it. Any chance of making money via player sales they will take as a bonus.

Despite the upturn in good feeling recently, I think the club is stuck in limbo. Without a board of any substance ( Waggott and Cheston are money men not football men) and owners who take an interest every blue moon, I can’t see us progressing significantly. The board needs to consist of people who understand football, understand Blackburn Rovers and understand the fans and the local community. Without that soul, Rovers is becoming a faceless corporation with no real empathy with the local community (Mowbray aside).

There is more to our club than results on the pitch – History, pride, nostalgia, tradition etc. All these aspects will be lost if Venky’s remain in charge and the situation remains as it is. The club is a shadow of it’s former self.

So, what does the visit of Jagdish Rao signify? Do we dismiss him out of hand because he is related to the three stooges? It’s a tough call and, as usual, with no communication from the owners, we are completely in the dark as to whether it could be the start of a new era or a one-off jolly.

Assuming Venky’s will be here for the foreseeable future, what is the best to hope for? I can’t forget the past and I will be more than happy if Madam and the brothers never appear again ( maybe the protests and boycotts and snowballs have been useful after all). But is there any hope of some sort of uneasy truce that will allow Rovers to move forwards and get out of the current limbo?

How would people feel if Jagdish becomes a regular visitor, gets involved at a board level, starts a clean slate, engages with the supporters and proves by his actions that he understands the situation and is willing to be totally honest ? Would that be enough to start a peace process?  -As long as the others stay away - maybe.

 Some people may prefer no visits from Venky’s  and just leave everything to Waggott and Mowbray but I think we need more infrastructure to have any chance of progression.

Change will need to take place at some point or I think Rovers will stagnate. As much as we hate the fact, the only people in a position to make changes are the owners. They need to (preferably) leave or step up to the plate. We need people who care to run our club.

1 hour ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

I'd be surprised if he's still here in 2022. Just saying.

It is a hell of a long contract. 

I like Mowbray and am willing him to succeed so I a am pleased he has been given an extension.

However, the thought of his conservative style of football for the next 4 years doesn't really excite me too much. 

3 -1 flattered us last night.

Fragility at the back and lack of goal threat is not a good combination.

The much lauded fighting spirit was conspicuous by its absence. Dack is either not fit or not interested.

Body language and lack of talking among the players suggested low confidence all round.

Team selection totally bemusing.

There is always one team that plummets into a relegation battle in the second half of the season. I hope it's not going to be us! 

1 hour ago, tomphil said:

It was around 1.5k on Monday I think although don't reckon tonight was ever destined to be a huge turnout but you'd have expected 2.5k or so really.

Sorry if this has been asked before.

Does anyone know if we can pay on the day for the away end tonight ?

This statement is a direct quote from his talk at the fans consultation meeting on Thursday night  -word for word ( as recorded for Radio Lancs so probably taken from that).

Not a reaction to Saturday's match at all. 

2 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

If he has said that then he is heading down a path of his stubbornness potentially continuing to create animosity and disagreement with the supporters.

That argument doesnt hold much weight when his primary alternative is to play Bradley Dack and Kasey Palmer in his place when Graham is unavailable.

Your theory may be right in that he made his name at this level as a central striker. He also looks like a fish out of water playing as a wide man.

He was quite clear about his opinion on Brereton's abilities at the moment. Also said he was a great lad and well liked by everyone. But it sounds like he's not getting a game up front any time soon. 

Have a listen on radio Lancs on Wednesday night. Hopefully it won't be edited.

Well that was embarrassing. I work in Preston so not looking forward to Monday morning.

I came away from the fans consultation meeting on Thursday full of admiration for Mowbray and convinced he was the best man for the job - and then he comes up with that brain-fart of a team selection. Total blame is on him for complete nonsense idea that nobody else would have come up with. Unbelievable.

Even after the fillip of the goal at the start of the second half we continued to give a Coylesque performance. It was the team selection that had set the scene and reduced confidence.

On Thursday Mowbray said quite categorically, on and off the record, that Brereton is not ready to play down the middle due to his lack of upper body strength, inability to hold the ball up or turn defenders. I am convinced he was not Mowbray's choice when he was signed ( See Ben Brereton thread for full discussion). Venky's playing some sort of Moneyball game in my opinion.

Very, very disappointed with that performance- players to some extent but mainly by Mowbray.

5 minutes ago, Biz said:

It’s an attractive tie - local “derby”, 15 minute drive, easy transport links even after poor trains. Decent pubs, the team is in decent form. £24 quid, I think they would’ve sold them all at £34 quid.

Compare that to Millwall and Rotherham at home, and it becomes obvious why those 2500 are only interested in more “appealing” games.

Yes, I can see why PNE is an appealing match but it seems strange that so many people don't find ANY home matches appealing enough to attend.  

Interesting fact that was quoted by Steve Waggott last night about the 5,500 tickets sold for the PNE game this weekend:

Nearly 2500 of those fans have not bought a single ticket for a home match this season ( and are not ST holders).  

Is it that many folk just prefer the away-day experience or are big numbers still deliberately boycotting Ewood matches?

Didn't cause much discussion last night but I thought it was an amazing stat.

22 minutes ago, Paul said:

 

You are right there are many good points here. It is my belief that the issue runs much deeper than a £3 surcharge and it is an excuse for many. If I was a casual fan I don't think I'd pay match day prices at ANY ground. I stopped going away in the PL when the trip to Anfield cost in excess of £100. I simply cannot justify the expenditure - even when I worked though I could afford it. Perceived value and all that.

 

I think you have just made a good point against the surcharge which you seem to have been defending in your previous posts - nobody likes paying them. Everybody has a limit to the amount they are willing to pay and increased costs are a reason some people won't attend - not an excuse. Nobody needs an excuse not to attend - it's a free world.

Maybe £30 is a barrier too far for some people. You say yourself you wouldn't pay it. 

Buying any tickets on the internet seem to incur surcharges these days and EVERYBODY moans about them. People are not just picking on Rovers for doing it. 

It would be great PR if Rovers dropped the surcharge to encourage attendances - simple as that.

26 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

Just buy your ticket before the surcharge kicks in then. 

I still think if you are willing and able to fork out £27 for a ticket, you would only refuse to part with £3 extra out of principle. Which of course is fair enough and your own prerogative.  I also think that is cutting your nose off to spite your face at this point. 

OK, so I don't have a credit card and like to pay cash.

An advance trip to Ewood to buy a ticket would cost me more than £3.00 and take up valuable time. Why should I pay more than anyone else ?