lraC

It’s always been my opinion, that the reason for not selling the club, is fear of something coming out that would cause some severe problems. Some people have suggested that their is no “conspiracy theory” and perhaps that’s correct, but I cannot see any other reason for holding on to us, despite all that’s gone on in the past and is currently going on. It simply beggars belief now.

Maybe the agent has forgotten who the owners were, as no doubt running the club himself and dishing out contracts negotiated by himself, especially one for his own son, can no doubt become a bit confusing.

Exactly what I have been saying too. This new narrative that funds can be sent, so long as the same amount is deposited in a bond has resulted in zero, being sent ever since. Suhail has confirmed, as you correctly state that the ruling in November 2023 did not create a “precedent” which was the word used by Waggott. There will be no funds sent in my opinion, until the court agree that funds can be sent and as we have now seen 4 times, this court hearing just keeps getting put back. The latest one prompted an article in a national paper, stating that the club is in danger of going bust. What have we seen since, a resignation in the recruitment department and a statement from another backroom boy, that we will loan and develop, other clubs players.

Maybe, but the consequences of this look somewhat dire.

If it is such a drop in the ocean, why are we are now being asked to believe that double that hurts, as they have put 0 in since there were forced to effectively pay £2 for every £1 given the bond. if as is being suggested the very existence of the club is at risk, perhaps putting £10m in and the same in a bond might help.

There is very little doubt in my mind, that the only reason they hold onto the club, is their fear of things coming out, from the original takeover, that could create huge problems for them. We have already heard about property being seized and the article in the National press, now eludes to money laundering being one of the reasons an Indian business gets investigated by the ED. For them to be clinging on like they are, despite this adverse publicity now that is in our national press, combined with the legal costs, they must be faced with, given the 4 adjournments, as usual does not make any sense. No doubt the no impediment line trotted out was their idea, to keep the fans at bay, thinking they choose not to fund us rather than they are prevented from funding us, but the suggestion now that we are not far from running out of money, would surely provoke a reaction, but still nothing.

No impediment then!!!! I assume WATR will drill down on the no impediment line trotted about by Waggott, in the next meeting?

That's an absolutely brilliant post, but given the post made by Tomphil are we talking a bank guaranteed here, or a bond with hard cash deposited? Also I assume this is at risk, but in what circumstances would the forfeit the bond, or have to pay the value of the bank guarantee, dependent on what applies?

It depends what he said at the interview. I can make you millions, with my contacts in Europe. The proof is the signing I made happen of Maguire, which was at 20 times his true value. That was all done and dusted, until the tea lady spilled the contents of the teapot, onto his contract and we missed the deadline.

No.

Has anyone sent this to Waggott with a link to the Oxford English Dictionary, explaining the meaning of the word impediment? https://www.oxfordlearnersdictionaries.com/definition/american_english/impediment

Send him some Chile Con Carne, that might do the trick.

That’s a bent ref too and very topical after today.

My memory playing tricks on me. Cheers for posting and what a farce

It was amazing how quickly that spread, as from having very few of my schoolmates, supporting Rovers, back then, most used the chant in the playground if one of us shot wide during our many mini playtime games of 8 or 9 a side.

That's another one, I have never forgotten. I watched it on Sky and to make it worse, some of the pundits tried to justify the "foul" being given. Can you ever imagine that being given, in reverse? Never ever and even less so, when Sir Alex was in charge. PS I think it was a Sherwood "foul" by the way, but Shearer scored from his headed pass.

People still wonder to this day what "Beamo" means, but the older ones amongst us know exactly what it signifies.

There are a few on his back, in some cases undeservedly.

A great and very unexpected win and very timely too. The first goal was pure poetry and the second not far behind. That’s how to play the beautiful game and beats a hopeful punt up the pitch hands down. A shout out for Ohashi, who I thought was brilliant today and deserved a goal for his work rate alone.

It’s been a game worth watching so far.

The match was a sell out, so it was beamed back to Ewood on the big screen. I couldn’t believe the decision when I saw it live, but when I saw it on match of the day later, I also came to the conclusion that it was a corrupt one. There is no way a qualified referee could not know it was a stone wall pen.

Bernard will be very proud of him, I swear.

I honestly don’t think anyone on here, would mistake a few bad results as a plight, compared to 10 years of what must be close to the worst owners ever in English football.

A straight swap for Robins, would do for me.

I don't know if this is tongue in cheek, but have you not noticed we have a few issues here and there and that is putting it mildly. Perhaps you are happy with the way the club is being run, but I think you will find you are in the minority, if that is the case.