Crimpshrine

I wonder how much coaching McFadz gets involved in. He certainly seems very influential in terms of motivation and team spirit. It looks like a sensible decision to keep him around this season despite him not getting on the pitch very much

Is it a coincidence that our Rovers' COO is currently in India on business ? I doubt it, wouldn't want to miss the party.

Looks like they have paid off the loan from the guy in Bolton. I wonder if they had to pay a bond in India to cover this ? https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/13452736/charges

Half season tickets on sale - a bargain at approximately 70% cost of a full season ticket. They are going to fly out!

OK mate, no point continuing. You won't answer any of the genuine questions I am putting to you and you just want a playground squabble. If you change your mind and want to have a serious conversation send me a message. Thanks

But you aren't able to tell me what happened or when. You just swallowed Waggott's 'no impediment' statements. I didn't and still don't. It's hard to know what believe because nobody - including you - can provide any evidence. I tried to get to the truth by asking Suhail but you don't believe what he told me about the July date. So it appears you know more than he does - fair enough, I'd love to hear your explanation.

What is odd ? My beliefs are based on the reports from the court hearings that did not allow for future funds to be sent. How do you know something happened before July ? Do you know more than the COO of Blackburn Rovers ? I am obviously more likely to believe him than you - don't you think ? So, putting all that to one side, please inform me what happened before July, how did you know about it and where can I find the evidence? Thanks

Isn't the whole point of administration to save jobs and keep a business alive ? If the club can't pay their bills in the near future due to cashflow problems but the general structure of the club is sound and the potential to recover is evident, then administration could well turn everything around. There are some very positive examples - Crystal Palace have been through it twice !

What I always said was that the court hearing that allowed them to send money in November 2023 did not create a ruling that they could send any further money. That was confirmed by Suhail. However, something happened in July which, according to Suhail, changed the situation. I don't know for certain what this 'something' was and have yet to see any evidence as to what it was. Prior to July, they could not send any money without going back to court. If you were saying they could before July then I don't think that was correct. If you were saying it only after July, please explain what happened.

I guess so. He wasn't specific about the date. I can't say I understand everything fully even now. The financial statements issued yesterday still seem to state they need court permission to send funds which doesn't really agree with what Suhail said to me. Maybe they simply repeated the 'going concern' as a continuation from the last financial statements as it is convenient for them ?

The financial statements in April said pretty much the same thing as in the ones issued yesterday – Venky’s need to obtain permission every time they want to send money. I was recently lucky enough (not sure if that is the right phrase!) to talk to Suhail about the situation with the court hearings and Venky's ability to send money from India. This was back in September: I asked why the official ( vague ) club statements contradict the financial statements issued by the club in April (on Companies House web site). The financial statements state that the owners need to apply to the courts each and every time they need to send money. Conversely, the club seem to maintain that there is 'no impediment' to the owners sending funds. I'll put the conversation in Q and A format. Q: Why do the Club maintain that funds can be sent without impediment while the financial statement from April states they can't? A: The financial statement was correct at the time. The November hearing allowed £11 million to be transferred as long as a bond of the same amount was deposited in India. The November court hearing did not allow any further funds to be sent without going back to court. This was true in April when the financial statement was made - we were totally dependent on petitions to the courts. The court hearing scheduled for January (now November) was a petition to be allowed to send more funds. Something changed in July and the club was informed by the owners that they could now send funds without waiting for the next court hearing to take place. However, the requirement to post a bond against each payment remains. It is still a difficult situation. Q: So what is the point of the next court hearing if it was originally scheduled to ask for permission to send funds? A: The court hearing now has less importance but it may allow for a petition to remove the need for the additional bond but I don't really know if that will happen Q: how long do you think the bond requirement will be in place? A: I am not sure but the investigation is ongoing and may take a while. Q: What are the implications if the court hearing is delayed again? A: Very little, It is not really too important now Q: So, in theory, the owners could send money tomorrow if they wanted to? A: Yes, but with the added bond it is an expensive situation for the owners and the club is in a stable financial situation just at the moment. Q: So the club are not asking for more funds imminently A: Correct That was about it. I twigged a bit later that the July date coincides somewhat with the sale of the Neville house and Venky's possibly made a profit, paid off any tax they were deemed to have dodged and then deposited the rest of the cash back in India. This may have generated enough good will to have the restrictions loosened a bit but the end result is the same - they can only send funds with an associated bond. This was in September but I don't think anything has changed since then.

And the Tevez handball, offside, not over the line goal

our /ˈou(ə)r,är/ determiner belonging to or associated with the speaker and one or more other people previously mentioned or easily identified. plight1 /plīt/ noun a dangerous, difficult, or otherwise unfortunate situation. Similar to Predicament, sorry condition, sad state, trouble, difficulty, mess, dire straits

It is getting that way. Rovers 150th next year. If Venky's are still here that will be 15 years - 10% of our history under enemy occupation.

Maybe it helps for tax purposes to show they are making losses? Perhaps it's just a measure of their stupidity

Not real debts though are they? They are the cost of running the club for the last 14 years which Venky's know they will never get back. Whether they sell the club or not they will have already written that money off - unless of course we get promoted which is an option they don't seem interested in.

And being in an excellent position with respect to FFP must make the club more attractive to potential buyers with money to invest.

big profit to be made there

How much did we pay for Cantwell ? I can't see him hanging around too long. I bet Waggott sees him as the next phase of operation 'wash our own face' if he can sell him on at a decent profit.

I agree about the standard of football so far this season - not just Rovers. The last 4 games vs Plymouth, Swansea, WBA and Watford provided very little quality, excitement or entertainment from any of the teams involved. I thought Coventry looked decent but look how their season has gone so far ! Maybe the idea of 'staying in the game for 60 minutes' and then making a few like for like subs doesn't encourage exciting football

The club may not be actively looking to sell but I wonder if potential buyers have spotted an opportunity? Venky's obviously don't want to continue investing under their current restrictions - they may be tempted to sell now more than at any other time. They may be persuaded to sell at a reasonable price. Given the very good FFP situation at the club due to recent self funding, a decent position in the league and owners with cash flow problems, Rovers may be popping up at the top potential buyers' lists. Fingers crossed.

Carter at right back has got to stop. I'd get him in the centre with JRC right back. Toss up between Hyam and Batth as to who drops out

This year we will be in a very favourable position with respect to FFP and could go for broke if we are anywhere near the playoffs. Unfortunately, the owners have a new found belief that if they sell players, rather than simply let contracts run down, the club can 'wash its own face'. So, they can now 'concentrate on their business in India'. They also have the ready made excuse that if they do send money, they have to effectively pay double due to the bond that needs to be paid in India - so why bother. To Venk'y, the club is just a spreadsheet that gets a quick glance once a year.

We can analyse the match to death but basically we were bloody awful. The last 3 away games have been close to relegation levels of performance against teams that will probably finish at the lower end of the table themselves. It's just a symptom of Venky's era Rovers. What else can we realistically expect when we sell or release our best players and don't reinvest any money in the playing side? The start of the season had been decent but I don't allow myself to become too hopeful as I know there is no real determination to succeed within the club itself.

Certainly deserves a place in the next Colemanballs book