JHRover

A close relative of mine worked for the Community Trust several years ago and he was working to the same policy. I say several years ago we are probably talking 10+ years ago, which is a long time in football to totally neglect and ignore a huge swathe of your support base.

All correct but the club have invented a rule that tells them they cannot market Rovers in Hyndburn or South Ribble because those areas 'belong' to Accy Stanley and Preston, and we wouldn't want to go upsetting people would we? We won't even look for sponsors outside of BwD judging by Watson Ramsbottom and Totally Wicked. Totally small time, lazy, yet bizarrely the 'local' obsession is taken by some as a badge of honour or something to be proud of. A conscious decision to save themselves time and effort but ultimately spread across many years, combined with decline and demographic change in Blackburn, WILL be a hugely damaging, potentially fatal move for BRFC.

They've managed to avoid replacing any of Waggott, David Lowe, Keith Downing, Arnor Sigurdsson, or indeed most of the other departures in recent months, so if they can manage with not replacing Dolan they will be quite happy. Remember the priority here isn't on replacing people or getting better, it is about cutting costs and doing the bare minimum required to sustain the operation and minimal cost and expense. If they think they can manage it by not signing anyone, or by bringing in a low cost loan or short term signing, that's where they will look. I'm still convinced that Waggott's removal was cost cutting and they will only 'replace' him with a nonentity box ticker if the rigours of compliance with the rules and regulations get too much and they need someone to front it up and provide a facade whilst dealing with the formalities.

I think a question should be raised at the next Forum meeting as to what the difference is between a Fans Forum meeting and a Supporters Consultation meeting. There is a difference because the former have taken place at Rovers going back decades, whereas the latter were introduced a few years ago following measures introduced by the EFL, took place for a couple of years with Tony Mowbray turning up with tales of life in 70s Teesside, and then as with Shareholder meetings were ditched during the Covid era under the guise of 'safety' and neither have been held or even mentioned since. Perhaps Pasha, Sufi or Talbot could explain why the club decided not to resume those meetings after Covid. That's because the shysters spotted an opportunity, as they often do, to save time and money and save themselves a job by cutting those meetings and lumping everything into one with the Fans Forum

We try the membership scheme but offer perks that most people aren't really arsed about or don't actually need, but actually offering a serious saving on tickets would be a clear incentive and probably lead to significant increased membership sales, as opposed to the pathetic numbers sold previously. As ever with this lot it's the low hanging fruit they are looking for. Coining it in from a few bumper away followings is easy, just have to set a price and let them in. If Rovers fans don't like it tough "Should have bought a season ticket then" attitude

The club's focus and priority comes into clear view with this latest act All the focus and concern at decision making level is around the opposition and more importantly how much cash can be extracted from their fans. The impact on Rovers and Rovers fans and absolute irrelevance, £35 a time in the away end so the same behind the goals in the BBE. Like it or lump it. No discount scheme or members prices either which many others offer to give home fans reduced rates whilst still getting the away support cash What next. Wrexham possibly Category A* for the tourists. Just ridiculous and an opportunity for a decent home crowd first game of the season wasted. They'll be happy though because they can profit from Birmingham's promotion and feel good factor

We played two friendlies in Marbella during the world cup break in December 2022 against Ajax and Hearts.

Don't waste your time or energy moaning about Derby or Eustace. Spend it moaning about the people who have allowed this situation to develop. This is professional sport. Eustace and Derby are merely taking advantage of our strife.

Just need to make sure we've enough stock then and we aren't turning people away including those with infants looking to buy the away/third strip....

I'm interested to know when and where we will need to wear the green third kit given the colours of our home and second strips. Who will decide?

All part of the 'Rovers IS Blackburn' strategy - only refer to Blackburn/Darwen landmarks, only make any effort to promote the club/sell tickets in Blackburn/Darwen, only engage sponsors based in Blackburn/Darwen. Smaller and smaller we go.

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.