I'd say that a Burnley fan would have struggled to make more of a mess than the existing owners, so on balance I'm pretty confident in saying that with other owners we would have been better off. Maybe still a Championship club yes, but at least one that operates like a football club should.

No problem at all with them training with the first team. They 'get through' when they are good enough to force their way in - either by taking advantage of a gap appearing e.g. suspension or injury, or when the manager deems them good enough. I find it interesting that this is precisely what happened with JDT and Adam Wharton - he got his opportunity when it arose during the season after impressing in the cup, seized it and never looked back. It was a natural process - he was clearly good enough and his transition into the first team was handled well by the coaching staff. This obsession however with 'creating a pathway' - the purpose of Blackburn Rovers and the nature of the Championship beast is not to 'create pathways' for youngsters - it is to win games and try to be successful AS A CLUB, not for individuals and their transfer values or so Venky stooges can be congratulated on future sales.

Every year Venkys have to find somewhere between 10 and 20 million to keep their regime going here. Adam Wharton's sale meant that they saved that money. And yes, a large chunk (not all) of Rovers' losses are a direct result of Venkys and their continuing mismanagement and neglect, which is another reason it wouldn't cost £20 million a year to fund Rovers under proper owners.

So we should be proud and happy that a lad developed through our academy, a Rovers fan, is ushered out the back door in the dying days of January for a relatively small fee to what was a smaller club until this lot took over, and then none of that money is used to improve or advance Rovers in any way? I'm pleased for Adam and his family and delighted he's developed but totally ashamed of Rovers' conduct before and since his sale.

Yes you are quite right - we spend on the academy and have category 1 status - so that is the place for young players to play and develop, not the first XI, where the ONLY focus should be on winning games and trying to get promoted. Far too much talk these days of projects, pathways, development. It is a way of lots of people making lots of money. These owners and their goons in the shadows will NEVER allow us to benefit from such a model in any event. It needs stability, reinvestment, good management, all in short supply here. Selling Adam Wharton did not, as far as I can see, benefit Blackburn Rovers in any way. It didn't release important funds for facilities or new players, it didn't lead to a better future, it just meant the revolting owners saved themselves the need to transfer their own funds from India. Whoop de doo. Remember that we aren't a club that offers Championship level wages or even makes an effort to keep important players like our academy developed captain. So what's the point? Even when they make the grade and go on to become Championship standard players we will either sell them and see none of the cash or release them because we can't be bothered paying them the going rate.

Again, why is it preferable to 'develop' 'young players', and in doing so likely sacrifice results, over immediate results which we were getting last season under Eustace and which should have taken us into the play-offs? Who wins from the strategy you are so happy with? Rovers? No chance. We sacrifice immediate results under the pretence of a longer term plan. When did we last benefit - really benefit - from a player sale? The Wharton emergence and sale should have been our golden lottery ticket - once in a generation. And where did we get with that one? Plenty of tweets and back slapping among Rovers and the support base about 'one of our own' but naff all to actually show for it, unless you count remaining in business as being something worth boasting about. Gestede benefits because he can claim we are 1 window into a 4,5,6 window process which secures him 3-4 years of employment. Venkys benefit because it saves them yet more money. Pasha stooge benefits because if one or two of these players come good and we sell them, even if its for a small fee, it is all profit and he can get a pat on the back from the money men in India.

Age is irrelevant here. See Adam Forshaw's new deal. Eustace had us in the top 6 thanks to these sort of players and if we'd have backed him even remotely in January he'd have potentially led us to promotion. I don't think anyone anywhere would have been bothered about how old Danny Batth is/was. Those signings were working a treat for us - that's what sensible clubs do with a limited budget - back a manager working wonders on it and let him keep going - Derby have clearly identified he's a man who can secure results on a meagre budget. Nobody associated with Rovers can claim there is any sort of sustainable long term plan as much as people would like to convince themselves there is. We change executives and management more often than people change their season tickets, we deliberately let contracts run down making no effort to renew them and fail to invest or build anything remotely sustainable. It's a myth, please don't delude yourself that because we've been outdone by Derby on Batth and Weimann that we are following some grand long term sustainable strategy. We're firing into the dark with Gestede following Pasha's instructions because it's the cheapest way and because he might earn a few brownie points in India if a couple of them pay off. Rovers won't benefit from it either way.

'More financial upside' Totally pointless issue if a) we don't renew contracts, b) we get relegated or miss promotion because of it, c) well sell them but it all goes into covering Venky losses and not back into the club.

Again - at any other club there would be concern because the focus and priority on those running the club is to get better and improve every year. But - at Rovers those that count - the owners and their henchman - have zero interest or concern in improvement or results on the pitch and are solely concerned with reducing costs and saving money - so the summer so far has gone pretty well for them. I'm sure Gestede and Ismael would have liked to have been in a far better position right now but both are mere pawns and employees in Championship roles they probably wouldn't have secured anywhere else, so they'll have to put up with it or leave.

So effectively we are going to be the away side at the weekend with Everton comfortably outnumbering Rovers fans and us agreeing to wear our away strip to accommodate their desire to wear their home strip. It really does show where we are at doesn't it? Add to that now suspicions of claret on the away shirt and the total lack of any effort to commemorate our 150th anniversary in any of the 3 shirts (not even getting the halves right on the home strip). Dear me.

There's loads of owners of other clubs who have attracted all sorts of negative publicity and labels of 'worst' owners in England for differing reasons. Oystons, Mike Ashley, Chansiri, Ken Anderson, SISU, Duchatelet, Carson Yeung, the other Chinese bloke at Birmingham, the one at Reading until recently, Vincent Tan at one stage. Point is that as bad as they might have been they've all had plus points along the way, including some sporting success and took some interest in their clubs. More importantly than that the bad times were relatively brief. A few years or so then it burnt out because they either gave up, ran out of money or got forced out. No other example I'm aware of beyond Venkys of such a long term sustained spell of damage and destruction, with no end in sight, and so few positives. Basically the only ones people can dig up are that they've paid their bills. That's how low standards have sunk that the best they've got to their name is paying their bills and not allowing the club to go bust. All those other clubs could move on, reunite, rebuild and look forward. We can't do that.

No I don't - aside from Portsmouth following their financial collapse no comparable sized club in England has successfully gone into fan ownership. It doesn't work at this level or size of club. Note also that Portsmouth, despite 15,000+ a week turning up in Leagues One and Two, promptly ditched the idea and sold out to the Americans because they realised that to get back up to the top 2 divisions they needed external investment. It is relatively easy to find new owners yes - if you like I could name you dozens of examples across the top 3 leagues in England. No guarantees of success I accept, but there are plenty of options out there and I think we can probably agree that they'd struggle to beat Venkys in the 'unfit and improper' rankings even if they were awful.

Why is the future being fan owned? I don't think that is a sensible proposal. No other examples of this working. Why can't we just do what everyone else has done and get better owners, more importantly ones prepared to invest

Normally I would complain about losing important players on free transfers. Of course in normal circumstances a few million in now rather than nothing in a year would be an important factor, because it could affect our budgets and FFP compliance. But we are well past normal here. As above, we aren't interested in getting better, reinvesting, protecting our assets. We have made no effort to keep him - we want rid. Normal footballing considerations that just about every other club and fanbase focuses on are not in play here. We are in a crisis situation and different rules apply. The reason we want rid isn't because they want to improve the team or spend his money on new players. They want rid because the owners want to save themselves money and are liquidating our assets to do so. The sooner they can't do that the nearer we get to breaking point. The less money they are able to collect from player trading the more they have to cough up in Pune and the more has to go into the Indian bond. I don't want us to sell another player for as long as this Regime owns and runs us. I want this club to drain them of funds to the point they can't do it any more and have to give it up. I want the whole rotten setup to collapse as soon as possible. I am living in daily fear of Adam Wharton leaving Palace, because it probably means a windfall of £6-10 million for this lot which will be like winning the lottery. Unfortunately a lot of people still think this sort of cash is going to make a difference to us and our squad. It clearly isn't.

Why sell? We ain't spending the money. It isn't increasing our transfer kitty. We've already brought in his replacement and the jury is very much out on whether he's any good. Almost certainly he's inferior to Brittain. If we don't sell him then we get another year of a good Championship player in our ranks. If we do sell we are going to be weaker. More importantly than that £2-3 million for him just makes it cheaper and easier for Venkys and probably helps chief stooge with his annual bonus. You're trying to normalise this as just part and parcel of everyday life and that Rovers just need to move on and reinvest and try to get better. None of those things are the priority here. We aren't trying to get better or responding to events beyond our control. We have created this mess through a deliberate strategy of running down contracts and that is because the priority is to cut costs and help the owners. I'd rather not help them.

Most friendlies involving foreign teams or PL outfits either require a financial incentive or a degree of organisation/competence/forward planning to involve the travel/timing stuff. Everton takes care of itself as their fans will cover the cost of hosting the game. What this lot want is cheap and easy - a League Two side turning up on their coach from an hour up the road, but we are now getting to the stage where really we need a match on the weekend of the 2nd August and probably also one to fill the gap between getting back from Spain on 26th July having played on 25th against Elche and the following weekend - you'd normally have another one midweek there to keep building up.

All gearing up for a Brockhall behind closed doors clash or two with Tranmere/Morecambe/Fleetwood/Oldham/Carlisle

I'm well aware of all this. Attempts to compare the highly professional and Premier League standard coaching staff of Allardyce and Hughes to the current outfit is hilarious and ludicrous in equal measure. https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/24977075.blackburns-stance-ismaels-staff-addition/ It was clearly implied that addition(s) to the staff were potentially coming this summer, and since then Lowe has departed. So I don't think this is simply Ismael not wanting a 'big coaching staff'. Perhaps he has been informed that there isn't the budget to allow for further coaching staff which is why Lowe has been axed - to save cash? I bet if you compare that collection of names to any other coaching staff in the division it is small.

Why do we have to wait and hope that the question gets asked in a Forum meeting? If the media and Ismael have both confirmed it why can't the club?

Yes we are. This time last year we had 2 more than we do now. I don't really care what he was doing, and presumably we weren't paying him to sit around doing nothing, it is less than we had before. I thought Ismael mentioned wanting to add to his staff once the season was over?

Exactly. Nixon 'broke' the news weeks ago, Ismael had to answer the question after the game on Saturday and it's been reported in the Telegraph. Still no official announcement from the club, which is what I would kind of expect but hey since when do we operate by industry norms?

Still no talk of Ismael bolstering his coaching staff? Remember we were already 1 down after Downing and Gardiner left for Derby with only Whitehead coming in with Ismael. Lots of talk about Adam Murray coming but he's gone to Kidderminster instead. Now with Lowe out the door we are 2 coaching staff down on last season. No wonder they prefer this model. A lot cheaper.

So am I right in thinking that there is still no announcement from the Club on the future of David Lowe, who apparently has left according to Ismael but the Club hasn't had the decency to announce it yet. Also after the appalling statement confirming the departure of the previous CEO after 7.5 years the club is yet to announce a replacement, timescale, update or indeed who is running the club in Waggott's place at the current time? Communication eh?

A convenient by-product of the ever revolving exit door and turnover of staff at Rovers is that every time a new manager/CEO/Head of turns up they can just blame whoever came before them and ask for a fresh start and a clean slate. The problem of course is that the cause of everything - the owners and their henchmen - are still here, so it just keeps on happening. I've no doubt people like Ismael will be saying that once we've got shut of Travis, Tronstad and Brittain 'it won't happen again' and we will learn lessons. And I suspect he will be sincere in that. But he won't be here for long and then the Regime will replace him with someone else who will be in exactly the same position.

All unemployed and desperate to get back working in the Championship. Lambert needed a steady job after the Villa experience, Mowbray was unemployable in the Championship and had been turned down by Chesterfield after the state he left Coventry in. JDT wanted a route into England to enhance his reputation and foolishly believed this was a serious outfit and Eustace needed to build on his short Birmingham spell and had been overlooked by numerous other Championship clubs over the previous 6 months. Common denominator - all were unemployed and keen to work - and all realised after getting into the building the true nature of the Venky beast. Lambert, JDT and Eustace couldn't wait to get out of here. The first two preferred unemployment to staying here any longer, the latter preferred to gamble his career on an uphill battle to avoid League One at Derby County. Odd one out Mowbray but he managed to get his holiday to India at the start which got his feet under the table and the assurances he wanted, and even then he was undermined and disgracefully treated in his last 12-18 months. Ismael will go the same way as Lambert, JDT and Eustace. If he makes it to 12 months I will be amazed.