2 hours ago, den said:

My questions would be about the fundamental need to do this.

Firstly, the only real reason I can see is to get everybody “under one roof”.

secondly, Venkys haven’t asked for this according to Waggott. “The club” has asked for it. Well, sorry but “the club” doesn’t have a voice, this has to have come from someone with a name. Seeing that Venkys haven’t asked for it - according to Waggott - then the only person who could have asked Venkys to sell off this land is the CEO himself. Why won’t he say that?

These answers don’t give us the truth in my opinion. Either Venkys HAVE asked for Waggott to sell off the land in order to simply cash in on the rewards of a 170 house development and Waggott is protecting them, - or this housing development is going ahead simply because it seems a good idea for “Tony”. I think the second one is highly unlikely. Does selling off such an amount of the academy for the current whim of a manager who certainly won’t be here much longer make any sense? Absolutely not.

 

I suggest Waggott isn’t telling the trust the whole story here and I am very sceptical of what this crew are up to. Someone as yet unknown is behind all this. I hate to think this lot down at Ewood are going to do irreversible damage then clear off.

 

I asked Waggott a direct question " Whose baby is this?"

He replied ...I think its an amalgamation...not India.they take their advice from us really..it started internally...its about player development.. 

7 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

 

I'm still confused about the covenant thing. According to the article from 2016 your initial research indicated this protection was in place. How can Waggott therefore claim that these expired after seven years in 2000?

One of you must be wrong and I have to say it would be very unusual to impose a restrictive covenant  protecting the use of land which lasted only seven years, there'd be little or no point. Covenants usually "run with the land" in perpetuity.

Our research done I think around 2017 may have been flawed/incomplete. You would have to assume with the sort of money involved that research the legals used by Rovers would be more likely to be correct. 

Basically there is only local opposition/ RVBC standing in the way of this from a legal aspect. 

19 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Why not?

There isn't one. Transcript from meeting released this evening . 

40 minutes ago, RevidgeBlue said:

 

If so, how does Waggott think he can possibly circumvent this? 

He doesn't need to...

7 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

Are the contents of this meeting confidential for the benefit of the Trust then?

No. I am writing up the meeting for release this weekend, and it most likely will be linked on here too. 

58 minutes ago, den said:

Mowbrays quotes above are from this new LT article.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/19126978.rovers-owners-venkys-must-plan-future---mowbray/

Meaningless, baseless waffle.

Exhibit A. 

 "At no stage this season have I looked over my shoulder, if we lose the next two or three, I might not be here to look over my shoulder, and if I am here, will I look over my shoulder?"

Absolute piffle. 

4 minutes ago, den said:

Hi Ozz. Simple question. Does the trust have Access to legal advice? 
 

No real reason for asking.

Yes Den. 👍.

Hope you and Baz doing well. 

Just a reminder that to even apply for planning permission for housing technically breaches the covenants placed by the Walker Trust. 

Which Rovers have not quite done yet.

The Senior Training Centre

2 hours ago, WIR Second Coming said:

Hello. What does this mean?

Please ignore this. 

Amendment pending

1 hour ago, Ulrich said:

The funnies have it. Do you want me to call you a cab? I'll borrow mum's dog n bone 📞👍😂😂😂

I thought Aussies had a sense of humour.

Not even bothering to comment on today's words from TM he should have gotten in the cab......

You seem alright really mate. Carry on. 

4 hours ago, arbitro said:

If you took what was clearly joke seriously then that's up to you.

Seems all this Mowbray shit has deadend my sense of humour

Mowbray out. But no taxis. 

1 hour ago, arbitro said:

Too right. 

I just can't understand why people take a post serious when it's clearly humorous and therefore harmless.

Too much moral high ground taking for me.

It wasnt Funny! Just embarrasing

1 hour ago, AllRoverAsia said:

'ashamed' - that's up there with the inappropriate

And all because someone has a sense of humour.

After years of Vs and now Mowbray it's welcome.

Yeah but it wasnt funny though. 

3 hours ago, Ulrich said:

 I have always liked the 'taxi' analogy, so perhaps we could order TM one? Each that is, either all at one time IE 100 taxis (paid for by us) turn up at Ewood for TM. Perhaps they could be spread out across a day? One every 15 or so mins? I think that would be quite humourus 😂👍

If you are anything older than 12 years old then you should be ashamed of that post. 

A 1-1 draw at home to Stoke pretty much symbolises Tony Mowbray 2021 at Rovers. 

1 hour ago, Gav said:

Can we get to the Tranmere game as soon as possible please, I'm worried sick we'll not go up 😪

I can't sleep properly, I'm not eating properly and the Mrs isn't speaking to me because apparently: 

"I think more about football than I do about our relationship"

 

Gav I was exactly the same at the time, and again in 2000 promotion year. The first and last thoughts every day where about Rovers getting promoted. 

Been said before but Rovers have outlasted 4 long term relationships/marriages, but luckily I'm with someone who feels the same! 

20 hours ago, Hoochie Bloochie Mama said:

What's the annual profit/loss for a club like Chorley in a normal season?

No idea but on an average gate of 1,000 at average price of £13 they'd get £299,000 a season on 23 games, so a third of that to come from a 3rd round defeat is good news

1 hour ago, Rogerb said:

Chorley v Derby on bt sport sat 9th January 12:15. Kerching for Chorley

£75,000 tv money, and another 20k if they lose, more if they win!

I thought he let a soft one in against Millwall last night really. 

But generally good, an improvement on Walton

3 hours ago, Herbie6590 said:

Boxing Day at Molineux

 

Went to that, a rare sight of Russell Beardsmore one of Fergies Fledglings. Pretty dour game IIRC.  Bizarre stadium at that point.

Nope, I knew you'd ask that! 

1984, he was getting on a bit. Used to do Central League games, told a few good stories about Garner! 

Very interesting @arbitro .

I did level 3 refs course at Runshaw with Griff, did you know him?