Absolutely 100% correct Top. I only wish he understood that himself. He would be one hell of an asset under those circumstances.

ONLY ROVERS RELATED ITEMS. Please.

An idea I've heard many times from many persons over the years; it would be nice if it ever got implemented. We'd have a reason to play in the otherwise stupid competition. Kudos to Eddie for bringing it up on this board.

Just wanted to mention that the eBay seller "americanslave9023" is now selling those Burnley discs to US addresses. But remember that unless you have a multi-format DVD player, the only place you will be able to play it is your computer.

Look back 1 page for my post.

Yes, PAL to NTSC. But computers with DVD players (all of them nowadays of course) can be set to handle either in about 20 seconds.

Normally I would think this is a gray area, but since this whole thread is links to League action being thrown on Youtube, what the hell? Click here Edit: Wanted to mention he's now selling to US addresses.

My favorite Souness moment. Anybody have that photo from the celebration?

Regulations of the UEFA Champions League Rule 17.07 Excluding the three rounds of the UEFA Intertoto Cup and the UEFA Super Cup, and subject to paragraph 17.18 below, a player may not play UEFA club competition matches for more than one competing club in the course of the same season. A substitute player who is not fielded is entitled to play for another club competing in the same season’s UEFA club competitions, provided that he is registered with the UEFA administration in accordance with the present Regulations. Rule 17.17 For all matches from the start of the first knockout round, a club may register a maximum of three new eligible players for the remaining matches in the current competition. Such registration must be completed by 1 February 2008 at the latest. This deadline cannot be extended. Rule 17.18 One player from the above quota of three who has played UEFA club competition matches for another competing club in the current season may exceptionally be registered, provided that the player has not been fielded: − in the same competition for another club − for another club that is currently in the same competition. In other words; nobody could play him in the CL until the round of 16 if he plays on Thursday.

This will all be over a week from tomorrow when he becomes cup-tied for European competitions.

The only time he scored more than 10 goals in a Premier League season was with us.

Look up 3, 4 or 5 posts (from this one) and read closely there Jamie.

He might have gone, but we'd have gotten our price. In this market; that's "a wadge north of £20 million" as philipl puts it. It's too bad tomorrow doesn't cup-tie him. We'll have to wait for 2nd Round Qualifying in the UEFA Cup for that.

No, they would not have.

Phew...where to start with you people...........Bellars arrived after an opportunistic meeting at a wedding. Benni's price that summer was more than double what we paid for him in the end, so we said no thanks. Had he been available at that price in August 2005 I believe we would have gone for him as well. As for 2006; if you believe Sparky wasn't looking to add to Bellars (Mido, Benni, whoever...), then you don't understand his ambitions at all. Unfortunately he also had to plan, of course, for the possible exercising of Bellar's clause. When that happened he did the best he could (Roberts, Nonda late on) to replenish while continuing with his main targets (Mido, Benni). But to say he would not have signed one of them if Bellars had stayed is stupid. And if I exercised the same reasoning now it would mean that we'll only go for Bellars if Benni leaves. Call me crazy or insult my intelligence if you will, but I don't think that's Sparky's plan. Or in other words: I stand by my statement. Pound sand 'drog. **After 1 hour I decided to edit out a mean-spirited statement. We're all on the same side in the end.

Are you trying to set a new personal record for stupidest comment?

That's bulls**t. It took us 10 years to find the next Shearer. We are not a "selling club", not this summer anyway. It'll take a combined £40m+ for the two players all the newspapers (+ some agents) want playing somewhere else to be actually playing somewhere else. Benni will be a Rover on Sept. 1.

West Ham Bids

I have to say I found Pearce's: "For me, representing your country is not about what suits you, it's about what suits your country, whether it be on the sporting field, whether it be in the armed forces. " comment a little distasteful. There's a big difference between trying to avoid getting shot or blown to bits in Iraq and trying to avoid tackles and score goals in a football match. Please do not associate the two with each other at all.

The name of his source: The Honorable Mr. Bull Turd

I disagree. I also think that Mort's happy here and that it will take one hell of a bid for Sparky to consider it. Player power doesn't mean that much when there are multiple years left on a contract, no release clauses, and the guy you're trying to extract the player from is Mark Hughes. I stand by my story. MGP & Benni will be in Blackburn Rovers Kits on September 1 or we will be £40m richer, one or the other.

Deciding to sponsor a lower division side and deciding to sponsor a PL club are 2 completely different things (even if it is Leeds, and don't forget their relationship with Celtic). Really, how could have it have not played a part in their decision making process? Let's just say that MGP being sold would be an inconvenience for them. So therefore, I believe they will say to Rovers (in a voice just a little louder than any of us are individually capable of): "Please don't sell Pedersen!" Which is, based on the numbers spent for other players in the last few years and the numbers being thrown around for others now, exactly what we should be getting for him if we decide to sell. But let's hope not. No. It's just that the owner who's been giving them all that free money might be becoming bored and/or frustrated by the lack of a European Cup. They're not in danger of doing a Leeds.

Oh good lord, I didn't say there was anything contractual (at least not between Rovers & Bet24 regarding MGP's contract status - There may be something contractual between MGP & Bet24, but whether or not it would have anything to do with where he plays or if such things are legal...........?). But anyone who doesn't seriously believe that MGP's presence on our roster had "a bit to do" with Bet24 deciding to come here in the first place or RoversTV going on the air in Scandinavia doesn't know how to put 2&2 together. Bet24 would be highly agitated by a sale. Whether their input would sway things in such a scenario I will leave for this board's conjecturing. Talk amongst yourselves.

Having seen the interview now I don't think it's anywhere near as bad as it was portrayed to be by the press; who picked out the parts that most sounded like what they wanted to hear. It seems to me that he's: A ) Planning for Intertoto B ) saying basically: "Of course I want to play in the CL you idiots" C ) & that "IF I CAN'T GET IT AT ROVERS, I would like the chance again somewhere else eventually". So for Jack's sake, everybody calm down. The Bellars game is just beginning & at the end of the day there's apparently no recording anywhere of Benni saying that he wants out. As for MGP; remember who his agent is, and don't forget about a little company named Bet24, who would have a great deal to say about any deals involving Gamst. It's the silly season folks, and for the first time in a long time I think we're going to come out winners.