Hasta

I know he was number one target and all that stuff, but I’m nervous about pinning our hopes on a lad who’s spent most of his time in Serie C, Serie D and getting relegated in the Swiss league.

And no-one in the corridors of power will feel any embarrassment about this.

Now I know that you won’t explain why you made that strange comment (I presume you misunderstood what Ghost7 was saying, but as you don’t hold your hand up and admit that like almost everyone else would I can’t be sure) I will move on. I don’t think I was being unreasonable trying to get clarity.

Rovers didn’t say it. YOU said it.

We know. So why would beating Ipswich have made any difference?

This is a thread about the LT being banned. Ghost7 says “I feel like a new low has been hit over the weekend and there must be some very rotten and incompetent people in charge at Ewood. They've pretty much proved all the rumours right. 😔”. On this thread he’s clearly talking about a Jackson being banned. You reply with “And just go back a week and if we had beaten Ipswich, its would another different story ” So I’m asking why if we had beaten Ipswich, then the main story if the weekend which Ghost7 is referring to, the childish banning of the LT, would be a “different story”. Instead of asking you to explain, I could have just quoted you and replied Ehhhhh ????????????????

So if we had beaten Ipswich they wouldn’t have banned Jackson?

The EFL board is there to best run the EFL. Not having directors connected to league clubs incase the very infrequent issues like this arise would be silly if they are the best people to run the EFL. You could make a point that you don’t want all the directors to be from the same league, which is what they have done. What I do find odd is that Rick Parry, who fought to break away from the Football League and form the Premier League, is now EFL chair !

Forward planning. You can’t ’do away’ with the under 21’s if you keep using it.

Worst start to a season since 2016.

Do we have a boardroom who will act if we look in danger? Do we have a manager capable of organising and rallying the troops? Do we have a team of ‘leaders’? It looks a clean sweep of “no’s” to me.

We are lacking two things needed to avoid relegation at the moment - quality and luck.

Caught Ismael’s radio Lancs interview. All angry about the penalty decision and the ref winking at Cantwell. Took the interviewer to point out that, regardless of that, we were pretty shit all afternoon.

It’s massively different because Venkys / Suhail / Gestede chose to chop it up and change it greatly. So forgive me for thinking that “not being nailed on for relegation” is a good outcome to their actions.

“It’s been a mixed bad for sure but given we deliberately made our squad shitter, I think we’ve not been as shit as some expected”. Yeah. Great. Also we came 7th last year. Of course we shouldn’t be dead certs for relegation. We shouldn’t really be in danger of relegation.

Win percentage now less than Owen Coyle.

Every change we seem to get poorer. It's almost as though the squad has no depth.

Hands weren't outside his body. Not for me. (Although I screamed for it)

Who got outjumped at the back post there for the goal?

Fortunately, on twitter at least, the numpties like that are outnumbered 20 to1.

I suspect Rovers will back down over the next 7 days (they worded it as a 'suspension'). Jackson will then be under pressure to toe the line, and suspect the LT bosses will inform him to do so. I can't imagine Newsquest Media will have any appetite to allow 'journalistic freedom' if they believe it will cost subscriptions / sales. Hopefully it shines another light under the rock at Ewood. It shows more than ever that the much sought after "communication" is not necessarily the truth, just the version the club wants to put out. How people can look at the FF minutes issue and then this issue and then still believe the clubs narrative all the time is astonishing. Waggot was a PR genius compared to these clowns.

Front page

When it says “In these circumstances you would need to purchase a new ticket if the game was rearranged”, I just presume this means the original ticket would be void for the new game, and that a new ticket needs purchasing . Not that the 40% was knocked off the price of the new ticket. I can see how it could be read as you suggest , but that’s not how I read it. As I said, let’s see. As a season ticket holder I would expect it to be free anyway but nothing surprises me anymore.

But why would someone take 40% (6.3) if you can get it all back (6.4). Makes no sense. Either way it wouldn’t surprise me if the club actually just pretend the match was played and just offer “£15” tickets for the rearranged game, pocketing all the money for the first game. Let’s see.