JHRover

When was the last time we wore that green shirt? Feels like ages since. Just so unnecessary to have three kits let alone four. 

If we had any sense we would just have had a special home shirt maybe with the maltese cross and worn it all season and then an away shirt, maybe gold or with the coat of arms. Make them both really good and watch them fly out. But a home shirt that doesn't even get the halves right, a random green effort 'inspired' by the town coat of arms (but not using the town coat of arms) and this fiasco with the all white kit appearing randomly on New Years' Day almost 2 months after the anniversary fixture just slapdash as ever.

They're in good form and have a better squad than us. Amazing what investment can do.

Fresh off the back of two very impressive wins against an upwardly mobile Sheffield United, coming from 3-1 down to win 5-3, and against hard to beat Preston, I can't see any more than 1 point at best for Rovers. The squad is in a shocking state and that's not down to a freak injury list but corner and cost cutting coming back to haunt us. 

It shows a few things

One - that the absence of any serious discussion or pressure on the manager - not even an 'Ismael sort it out' to be heard - shows that pretty much everyone knows that it is all pointless - pointless moaning about the manager, pointless trying to apply pressure or demand better or a change, pointless even going down the route of talking about change. Partly because even the Venky apologists know all too well that there isn't a functioning football club here where trivial matters like performances and results, league position, or any other metric by which the rest of the football world operates gets applied. 

Everyone knows this, deep down, which is why there is a stupefied fatigued silence on such things at games. No point expending energy thinking or wanting a change, even when results and performances are poor. That's a core component of following a football club gone - people have learned to just tolerate a poor product because it is pointless asking for better. 

Two - that those out there who think he is doing a good job in the 'circumstances' are actually in their position silently acknowledging there that the owners have ruined us with their approach - because to say he's doing a good job with a 31% win record having inherited a side in the top 6 less than a year ago and now have it staring at relegation would be frankly laughable at any other club.

Here there is a genuine argument for it, not because clubs normally drop by 15-20 places in the space of six months, but because the conditions the owners have imposed us on - those that many apologists have defended - are what has ultimately caused this situation. The same people would never directly complain or criticise the owners, preferring to convince themselves that they are necessary, yet if we aren't blaming Ismael and his win record, who are we blaming?

11 wins in 35 games (31% win record) and hovering precariously outside the drop zone yet not even a hint or sniff of pressure or contemplation of a change.

Just like the 'woe be us' sob stories about injuries and a lack of depth, well a transfer window opens in 48 hours so a golden opportunity to immediately go out and address these issues.

But we won't, we will just plod along as we are hoping it all turns out alright in the end.

Such a negligent and dangerous attitude and approach to running a multi-million pound organisation considering the extreme financial consequences, including redundancies, of relegation, yet nobody seems to give a stuff.

The regime will have been salivating for 6 months at the prospect of packing Gueye off to the Gulf and getting a decent fee for him after the interest that emerged late in the summer. This is just the culmination of that.

I agree he's poor, like most of the squad, but in the state we are in we can't be leaving him out of the squad for supposedly 'not running' enough in training. 

I doubt Ismael has much say in this matter, they've cuts to make and money to raise, what the 'head coach' wants won't be featuring in this.

Not really the 150th anniversary shirt is it?

• Released months after the 150th anniversary
• Not going to be worn in any competitive games
• People buying will be lucky to get their hands on it the same year as the anniversary

As predicted something that should have been simple, straightforward, easy - release a special kit for the anniversary season - has become a fiasco requiring a convoluted bidding process and long list of steps and rules.

Why the hell couldn't they have just released this in proper volume in the summer at a normal price and just let people buy it in the lead up to the occasion in November.

5 minutes ago, ... said:

And everyone is brassic now having spent alot over the festive period. Couldn't make it up

Maybe that's why they refused to sell Sheff Wednesday tickets....save people money so those disappointed fans could instead enter a ballot to try and win an £80 shirt that probably won't ever be worn by the team....method in the madness.

Everything back to front as per. 

Releasing the anniversary shirt 8 weeks after the anniversary and 4 days after Christmas strange behaviour to say the least.

Applying a facade of 'exclusivity' to what should be a celebration everyone can participate in not just the 'winners'

Obviously this is just because they wouldn't order a good supply of stock in so have to come up with an elaborate scheme to sell them.

I got dizzy half way through reading that trying to understand the process of selling some shirts 

Is there any mention on whether this will even be worn by the team in a game?

I don't think there's any more to it than them just cutting corners, as per.

As this game straddles the Christmas period and shop/ticket office closures someone down there, who probably has never bought an away ticket in their life, will have come to a decision that it was a whole lot easier for them to just stop selling on 23rd when they were shutting down for Xmas and then they could forget about it and come back in the New Year with the Wrexham game to occupy them.

They won't have stopped for a second to think about inconvenience to fans, or that there would be a lot of people unable to commit over a week in advance, especially during the Christmas period, or that the Middlesbrough game/performance/result might affect decisions, or that plans change at the 11th hour. 

They just treat fans as an inconvenience and appear amazed when their decision making gets called out. In familiar fashion we get a hastily cobbled together 'statement' with no name to it making a number of excuses and offering no assurances but trying to point the finger of blame away from Ewood.

They are good at that part of things.

Just stuff that never happens anywhere else. But that's because all other clubs are invested in helping their supporters and ensuring as many as possible get to games. Clearly that isn't the remit at Ewood these days, and it shows.

1 hour ago, chaddyrovers said:

Its all depends what type of new owners you would get and people would be very wary and uncertain which would be natural until you know their background, their plans for . Like I would be against someone like Mike Ashley owning us. I took interest in who Sheffield Wednesday preferred bid would be and the groups interested in the club. 

Yes you could lower ST prices and match day tickets but your money from them would be roughly the same, yes a better atmosphere in the ground and given that Sodexo runs the concourse outlet, you wouldn't get additional revenue from them or the foot outlets outside the BBE either. So bring in more sponsorship to the club is the biggest way

Interesting. So you would oppose Mike Ashley owning us - a man who had Newcastle as one of the most profitable and financially stable clubs in the country, and due to his financial management attracted the Saudis to buy them, and would rather continue with the current disgrace where we - somehow - continue to lose an 8 figure sum every year as we circle the plughole to oblivion and the club decays.

There is a big inconvenience to the 'who would buy us?' brigade - there's zero evidence to support those claims (except that people don't - and won't - ever publicise interest in buying something that isn't for sale - yet there is plenty of evidence that shows that Championship loss making football clubs ALWAYS attract new owners. Some good, some bad, some rich, some not as rich - but clubs change hands with regularity and I think you could count those that rival Venkys for appalling mismanagement on one hand. 

43 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Ismael spoke to the owners last week. 

Of course he did. 

Notice we never get any specifics when this gets thrown out there. Just a random 'the owners' and never any detail of who out of the gruesome four (if any) were on the other end of the line or what was discussed. 

I suspect if anyone had any interest and asked Ismael which of the 'owners' he spoke to and more importantly what subjects they spoke about information would be very thin on the ground indeed.

Similar to when we get the AI manufactured 'statements' from the 'owners' every year or so that don't have a name to them.

"We've done all we can" claxon again. 

Amazing how these issues never seem to plague all the other clubs around the country, including those that easily sell out their allocations, yet poor old Rovers are always the ones who suffer from these things.

Almost as though there's a common theme here of a tinpot corner shop operation always looking to do the bare minimum

1 hour ago, Herbie6590 said:

 

Great stuff, and mightily inconvenient to those who obsess about things such as town size, demographics, wealth, how many people live in Bolton, small town unfashionable club (whatever that means is anyone's guess).

Simple statistics show that this club is failing big time and is circling the plug hole of oblivion under these owners whilst a chunk of the support base make excuses for them and their failings.

You'd think one of the few benefits to an 'online only' or digital ticket regime would be that it would allow people to buy more flexibly and for the home club to more easily monitor demand and make decisions, as well as not having to worry about the problems of Christmas staffing and closures.

I imagine part of this is that between now and 29th (we don't open Mondays for some crackpot reason) the shop and staff are probably only in for a few hours overall.

But no, it seems the opposite is true and the unprecedented step of refusing to sell them for a whole 6 days over Christmas is the preferred course of action. Really odd behaviour from two skint and struggling clubs who need every penny and attendee they can get

Anyhow, Sheff Wed obviously don't seem concerned about shifting a few hundred more tickets at £30 a pop plus concourse spending, and Rovers don't seem bothered about ensuring more fans can go and support the team as it battles relegation.

So I again ask myself, why would I bother? 

I imagine Pasha's jaunt to India is just a case of him taking stock and perhaps agreeing a 'strategy' for January (which probably involves a further round of cost cuts and wage reductions with a portion of the proceeds being allowed back into the squad. 

Suggestions that he's been summoned in response to performance/unrest likely to be well wide of the mark - more likely it will be bonus time for a jolly job well done in bringing in more cash whilst capping the wages.

There's no evidence going back over 15 years that these people have a shred of interest or will act over trivial matters like league position, results, collapsing attendances or fan unrest.

Wouldn't be surprised if Steve McClaren got it. Ex Oxford player and coach, just come available after leaving Jamaica. 

Suprising, as much as they have struggled still think he'd be your best bet to stay up in their position. 

I've created this now because I just wanted to check / moan about something. I saw yesterday on the Club's twitter page that tickets for this game go off sale today and there will be no sales on the day at Hillsborough, and that purchases are online only. 

This staggers me even by recent football standards, that tickets are going off sale over 6 days before the game despite there being no chance of a sell out and with them being skint. 

It seems to be a deliberate attempt to deter people from making a late decision to attend, ignoring that most people will have other things to worry about and spend their money on in the lead up to Christmas and that plenty would like to make a late decision on whether to go, perhaps after the Middlesbrough game. 

Mind boggling. I was tempted to go but can't commit until later in the week. Looks like the decision has been made for me. 

18 minutes ago, Tomphil2 said:

We are a league 1 club now in everything but name and it's only a matter of time.

Indeed. And then they get us there it will then be time to point at Bolton, Huddersfield, Bradford, Cardiff and shout 'we can't compete with that'.

Then a few more years and they'll be pointing towards Notts County, Swindon and Oldham and 'we can't compete with that'.

The trouble when you've got no pride or ambition and are solely interested in cutting costs and corners is that there's no end to it - you can always find more to cut, more reductions to be made, more excuses to throw out.

Play the game long enough and I'm sure we could say that we can't compete with the likes of Carlisle and Southend.

Not sure how I feel about a guy who has won 1 all season at home and taken us to the cusp of the relegation zone getting 'backed' in January. 

Of course 'backing' has lots of different forms and unless we are suddenly going to spend money on both fees and Championship level wages we are going to be shopping in the same aisle as the summer.

We could sign 5 on 1st January and that would qualify as backing. But if they are more dross like the summer there's little credit for that.

Of course it would be typical for these owners to suddenly release funds to support Ismael in January after doing zilch to support the last 3 managers who had all dragged us into promotion contention.

Suspect the Stooge in the shadows is nervous and plans to use the early days of the January window to dilute fan anger by shuffling the deck with players. Getting Pickering out will naturally free up space for a couple of cheap incomings and unfortunately a lot of the support base will lap it all up as evidence of Venkys backing the club and about how they're doing nothing wrong.

Dare I interpret this as a desperate bid to claw in some extra cash by trying to persuade fans to hand over extra money to listen to Ismael?

Perhaps suggests that things are really, really tight down there?

Or are they really thinking that loads of people are going to shell out in January to listen to him as he's potentially reached 1 win in 13 home games?