If WBA take an interest it is a tough one for old Tony. Looking at it financially they will undoubtedly offer him more cash, a longer deal and a better budget to work with than cutback Venkys. Looking at it on paper he would have parachute money to bolster them if they didn't go up to have a crack at it next season. He might not even get an offer beyond this season from us or might have been told he isn't unless he gets us promoted. There's the emotional side having worked there before and seems to be popular still there with the fans. Flip side is that WBA are something of a basket case that have churned through all sorts of managers over the last 4-5 years and have a strange owner. If they don't go up quickly they will have to make substantial cutbacks and as shown with Bilic and Ismael and even Darren Moore before them they won't show patience or hang about if results don't come - Mowbray could well be fired and back on the scrapheap. I don't think he is a manager that handles pressure too well and performs better with lower expectations and demands as we have this season. He'd be straight into the spotlight there. From our point of view he often talks about the long term and loyalty and values so there would be more than a touch of hypocrisy of he dropped us in this position mid season to move to a rival. Could I blame him? Probably not because I think most sane people would want to avoid working with the likes of Waggott and Pasha but it wouldn't exactly stack up with his talk of loyalty. Then there's the travel. We often hear about how tough he has life commuting away from his family on Teesside to Blackburn. If that is a struggle not sure how he would cope with going to the Midlands, especially after his comments when working at Coventry.

Biggest concern with this is our match there in 10 days. If they get a proper manager in before then it suddenly makes that game a hell of a lot tougher. Flip side is if they go with an interim they might struggle. We should have enough of a lead - we need to do our 2 points a game and they'd struggle to overtake us with Guardiola in charge.

Swansea hasn't been a happy hunting ground for us - don't think we have won at that stadium. We need a win Saturday. They are struggling and ineffective, we need a win and a return to goals.

Two major issues I have with the FFP 'obstacle'. 1) Lets look at the income and savings made over the last 6 months. We have sold Adam Armstrong for a fee of between £15 and 20 million, perhaps spent £1 million on Edun, Markandy and signing on fees and the rest has gone. Even with Newcastle's slice we are looking at £10 million. Then there is the massive savings made on the wages since the summer. Getting rid of Armstrong, Williams, Mulgrew, Bell, Bennett, Evans, Holtby and the loans from last season must represent a saving of going £100,000 per week. Stretch that across 7-8 months and we must be looking at savings of £3-4 million. Lumped together there is no way we could not find scope in there to pay these players more whilst still achieving substantial savings. The way it works is that you pay Rothwell, Nyambe, Lenihan, Kaminski, Travis more and then when you sell Brereton in the summer a portion of that fee immediately covers the total cost of those pay rises. 2) It is ridiculous to use FFP as a reason - suggesting the club is willing and able to pay the players what is required but is being prevented from doing so by the rules - when we have seen the best way of quickly dealing with FFP is to have a big player sale from time to time. We are meant to believe that Armstrong was the sale that 'dealt' with FFP last summer and no doubt Brereton will be the next one. The only way that production line continues is by having players under contract. It is a complete contradiction of itself. You can't use FFP as a reason for not keeping your best players, miss out on their value and then complain about FFP rules stopping you doing business. You have to get ahead of the curve - which to be fair is what we did with Armstrong - and ensure the asset is under contract for a sale which addresses FFP. What we have at present is going to ensure we are always playing catch up with it.

How about a different theory on this. What if Steve Waggott is paid or bonused on how much he saves? If he is then why would he make any serious effort to pay these players more? Keep on driving the wage bill down = better figures on his performance. Just a possibility which wouldn't surprise me.

Only just noticed that Swansea host Luton tonight in one of their 'in hand' games. Hopefully this is good news for us as we have a full week recovery and preparation whereas Swansea will be focusing on tonight and only have a couple of days to prepare for us. I hope it is a gruelling match which wears them down and they end up limping to victory.

I don't think there is any money unless certain strict criteria are met. I also believe that Mowbray's power and influence have been reduced over the last 12-18 months in terms of flexibility on players - previously he had the ability to bring in established experienced players, often ones he had encountered previously, whereas recently they have been younger players with seemingly no link to him. We have seen fees paid out in the last few windows on Pickering, Edun, Markandy - but these fees are generally only very small and all are done with high confidence that the outlay will be covered quickly. All in all not a bad way to do business as ideally all transfers would grow in value but it places severe limitations on what can be done. It is clear there has been a shift in policy. I think Mowbray says a lot but a lot of it turns out to be grossly exaggerated or simply doesn't happen. I don't really blame him for that as there are so many components and cogs turning that him saying one thing one week and then a short time later things have changed. The days of him getting multi-millions to invest in a Gallagher, Brereton or Armstrong seem to have gone, replaced by a focus on loans and a few hundred grand deals here and there. In my view that change sits directly with the inability of Mowbray to head off to India and sit around a table with the head honchos, losing his direct line to them and instead having to deal through Pasha who by most accounts is a Balaji man. Mowbray himself has admitted that communications have changed and that they have been difficult at times. No coicidence that the only 3 managers to last under Venkys - Kean, Bowyer and Mowbray - early on in their times jumped on a plane to Pune - it not only secures their position but also is the best, perhaps only, way of getting approval on significant backing. Back in the days of Kean we thought it bizarre that he would put himself through that difficult journey several times a year and wondered why it was so important to keep them sweet in Pune. I think we can see now why he did that.

Look at everything through the lens that Mowbray has lost his link to Mrs Desai by not going to India. That explains everything- the cuts, lack of new contracts, minimal spending, focus on loans, uncertainty on his own future. The only way of getting anywhere with this lot is by getting on a plane to Pune and talking them round. Can't do that then it is very difficult. I keep on banging this drum and the more time that passes by I become more certain that this is the fundamental issue. It therefore matters not what position we are in or how urgent the need for players we are left with a buffoon in Waggott crunching the numbers unable to do very much. I expect the Giles wage contribution is covered by the savings on the 3 departures yesterday which is why it took so long to get done.

I'm not writing them off, far from it, and on paper they should get second. But it is up for grabs and we are in the driving seat. But if strength on paper was anything to go by they would be clear of us after 28 games not behind us. People were raving about their squad in August and we've outperformed them so far. Their business in January is impressive but now they have to do the hard part and get them performing as a team - easier said than done. You don't spend that sort of money in January if you aren't under pressure and if they don't go up their parachute money drops. They won't be in financial trouble because their owner will prop them up but they know this is their best chance.

I actually think the more players Bournemouth sign the better. It shows Parker isn't happy with his side or is under immense pressure. Going to be some ask incorporating them all quickly into a new team under a new manager and there will be a lot of egos around. A lot of those already there might not be happy with replacements being brought in. Can only pick 11 to play and has to keep them all happy.

Yes. The only conclusion to draw from this is that those outgoings were necessary rather than optional. As I say for Butterworth and us I think a loan is a good move, and for me Chapman was finished here last year (still strange he was given another year to spend it all on loan) yet both were on the bench in our most recent game and now they can't be over the rest of the season. Seems quite a gamble.

We're run by Waggott and Pasha - what qualifies either of those two to run an operation of this size and stature? Tells us all we need to know.

For Butterworth himself I think a move to League One and regular games is the right thing for him and his career. No issue with that. I'm just baffled at the logic from Rovers point of view given that is now three attack minded players out the door today and none in. Walking a tightrope to avoid more injuries and suspensions because there are now even less options to fall upon. Of course Dack returning might be a bonus but it seems risky to be expecting him to be a significant contributor given the length of his absence and nature of his injury.

The Armstrong cash dealt with FFP didn't it? Or are we saying that we had to sell Armstrong, pocket all the cash and can't spend anything despite drastically cutting costs? I'm getting lost in the Rothwell circus - are you saying we stopped it? Or was it because Bournemouth moved on to other targets? Lets not end up bickering about it because I'm sure we can agree in the end it doesn't actually matter - FFP or no FFP, cash to spend or no cash to spend - by the looks of things we haven't really added depth which the Luton game shows we need - that's all there is to it. In a normal season of mid table mediocrity that might be fine but in this position they are very brave and confident in what they have or stupid.

I doubt the owners that matter know or care we are in with a strong chance. Balaji might but he doesn't control the purse strings.

Maybe, maybe not. Two sides to every story yet I'd tread carefully where the likes of Waggott are concerned and would certainly not jump to conclusions of the player being the one in the wrong.

Sharpe gets everything from the Club. He has no other sources. Of course his line is going to be that the manager wants him to toe.

I could have called an estate agent and agreed a fee for a million pound house earlier. That doesn't mean I have the money. I can't/won't pay it, so the deal doesn't happen and I don't get the benefit of the house. We can go around making bids for players left right and centre. Remember Assombalonga? Means nothing if we can't or won't close the deal.

That's very easy to say. Anyone can claim to have money. Spending it is the key. Familiar theme here though that despite claims of it being there for one reason or another it doesn't get spent. Still - gets some free brownie points for the owners who must not be criticised or questioned. When Rothwell's girlfriend is on social media responding to vile messages saying how people don't know the ins and outs and truth of things I suspect this is what she is referring to. I wouldn't be at all surprised if there was some pushing from Mowbray/Rovers end as much as Rothwell wanting to leave at this juncture.

Even if we ignore our current league position and the need to strengthen with promotion a possibility you would expect - at a club with a plan - more business with one eye on the longer term. Hedges and Markandy OK but a quick look at the summer we have 10+ out of contract/loan. Might expect a few more with a view to plugging that considerable gap.

I think Giles will happen, they are just delaying the announcement until the last minute rather than disappointing fans with an early announcement and no more business after that.

Undecided on this one. Usually a Saturday away game is a no brainer and the team deserve the support, but have to admit the journey, cost and kick off time is testing me. My mates are going to the pub for the afternoon watching the football there. Tempted to join them and save a lot of time, money and hassle.

Its clear that they are shuffling the numbers on the wage bill to try and make room for additions. Chapman out, Butterworth out, McBride out - the sort of moves that would suggest someone coming in but I suspect are actually late attempts to free up wages to do a cheap last minute deal. Venkys have set an annual budget and that involves a strict limit on the wage bill, no pay increases and very little scope on transfer fees. Loans the order of the day to avoid any long term commitment or fee. My suspicion yesterday was that Mowbray had decided he was going to sacrifice Rothwell shipping him off to Bournemouth for a few million on the basis that cash would enable him to do business today. That move collapsing means no money in the kitty other than for Giles for Wolves which will be heavily subsidised as they will want him to play regularly with a view to progressing next season. I had wondered whether our lofty position and with a prize tantalisingly close whether there would be a change in approach but this seems to be a January like every other. Lots of talk but come deadline day little action. No prizes for trying and failing. Say it every time. I did say at the start of the window that retaining the players that had got us here was the priority and no major departures would be a success if we used our budget to resolve the contract situations. But to be here with no progress on contracts, a growing injury list, very weak bench and options at Luton and short of the business claimed to be getting done - disappointing but not surprising.

I've just explained why. If we have no more money and clearly need some reinforcements perhaps Mowbray has decided this move is worth allowing to generate funds to enable him to sign a couple. I think it is common knowledge that Mowbray and Rothwell perhaps haven't seen eye to eye in the past. Of course any manager or club employee is going to portray the player as the problem rather than themselves. I'm not saying this is or isn't the case - I was just pointing out that there are always different ways of seeing things and all we are doing on here is interpreting what has been said by others. Someone said I didn't have proof for what I was saying - of course I don't - none of us on here do.

Nobody can say anything with certainty. Everything on here is either opinion, interpretation or based on what they have been told. My interpretation, based on what I have heard and read, is that the owners and their patsy have mucked a lot of people around with mixed messages, no communication and general incompetence when it comes to contracts. Lets flip this right on its head - all the furore about Rothwell stems from Mowbray's comments to Rich Sharpe yesterday. We are assuming Mowbray is being 100 % honest there. As I've shown already today Mowbray often says things that are exaggerated or don't happen. So it might be the case that Rothwell was willing to play yesterday, and isn't pushing for a move. It might instead be the case that Mowbray wants to sell him and is driving this hoping to get the cash from his sale to fund other moves. I've learnt not to trust anyone or anything around here and whilst I'm not saying this is the case it could be. Depends on whether you take Mowbray's words as the accurate truth because we haven't had Rothwell's version of events and won't do if he leaves. It has become clear there isn't much if any money without sales, which seems very strange to me, but we have seemingly now reached a stage where the only chance of money being spent on new players is by selling him. Maybe Mowbray knows this and feels it is a sacrifice worth making to bring in the 2-3 that he needs to fill out the squad? We just don't know. Lots of speculation yet as ever people are very quick to see the player as the villain and very reluctant to look closer to home at how the club has dealt with things. I see a pattern emerging on players and it isn't a good one.