https://www.ribblevalley.gov.uk/planningApplication25634 The club sought planning permission in 2015 to construct floodlight pylons on the academy site. They sought this because it is one of the requirements of a Category A academy. The application was refused because the light overspill and reflection would cause increased visibility of the training ground, cause harm to nearby residential properties through noise and light disturbance. Also concerns about the impact upon ecology and protected species. This was why the floodlit pitch was then built at the senior site instead. So I wonder how they are going to get around this with their "all in one" complex down at the bottom?

You'd think the owners would value that and realise having sold Jones, Hanley and co already that there's value to our academy. But no, they're a plotting to downgrade it. Unless Venkys aren't in on the plot and its being pushed by others.

It seems likely to me that the 3 promoted clubs will go straight back down. Last time that happened? Wycombe need a miracle despite a good win last night. Rotherham are still in there despite a very good run over January. I still think Sheffield Wednesday will be just about OK. Big Club would be enjoyable but they've a nasty habit of surviving by fine margins and expect they will do it again.

Only 8 of the other 23 clubs have picked up less points than we have this season, we are 2/3 of the way through it. It would have been 7 had Millwall not got a late equaliser at Luton Town. We need to drop this act of misfortune that we are just on a bad run or suffering through luck/injuries. Over a majority of the season we've shown that we are mid-table. We've gone no nearer the top 6 than Millwall, Luton or Barnsley. Mowbray needs to go because of that alone. It's quite simple. Either we are much better than our results and position suggest, in which case he needs to go for not achieving what he should, or we aren't better than our position suggests, in which case what the hell has 3 years of slow build been for?

Yep. I predicted on Saturday that we'd get a minimum 3 points from these two home games, just because that's what we do. These death spiral runs of defeats usually last 3-4 games but no more. Watford will be a tough nut to crack but they don't score goals and we don't concede that many at home so I wouldn't be surprised to see a bore 0-0 or 1-0 either way tomorrow. Anything but a defeat will be hailed as stopping the rot against a brilliant side and even a narrow defeat and it will be all about the positives and fine margins. Coventry will be the one. They are a poor side away from home and if we don't win that one there will be panic. Fortunately for Mowbray he has form for pulling wins out of those sort of fixtures and with the squad comparison even I am confident of winning that one. Then the next cycle is underway until mid-late March.

I simply refuse to believe or accept Mowbray's suggestion that the training ground stunt is above his pay grade and inference that he's had nothing to do with it. This is a guy who has been undisputed 'boss' of the club now for 4 years. Survived longer than anyone else has under Venkys, is the man who goes off to India and has the power to influence his budget, recommend investment in players and training ground changes, appoints or recommends his mate from Coventry as Chief Executive. He has the club basically eating out of his hands and the owners like him. Yet I'm supposed to believe that he's not been even consulted on this and it has happened behind his back. Sorry Tony, I'm not buying it. He'll know this is a very sensitive subject that has the potential to spill over into something much more messy with the fans. He's distancing himself from the project and instead pointing people in the direction of invisible and silent 'superiors' who will never be identified nor questioned on it. The only good news is that he accepts it will take many years to deliver. Hopefully by then him and his mates will be a distant memory and we can forget all about this scheme.

If FFP is the motivation they could 'sell' Brockhall to a separate company at a fair market price and then lease it back to the club at a peppercorn rent. Similar to what Reading and Aston Villa did with their stadia.

If you go back and read Mowbray's comments when Venus joined Coventry as Technical Director it is interesting and baffling. I certainly don't think there was such freedom or scope when they were working at Celtic, or indeed at Peace's West Brom or Gibson's Middlesbrough. Yet the trio seem to have had immense power at absent ownership regimes at both Coventry and now Blackburn. Keep on joining dots.

The sale of Ryton for housing never came to fruition. I'm sure the changes in personnel there were entirely unrelated, as was the fact that they haven't looked back since those changes winning two promotions. So they are still at Ryton. There were more talks in 2018 about building houses but then in 2020 they spent money improving Ryton to get it up to scratch ahead of promotion to the Championship. Both Brockhall and Ryton are prime sites for development of housing and quite affluent areas. Big difference is that Ryton is or was outdated and much smaller than Brockhall, whereas Brockhall remains a world class facility that doesn't need expanding or upgrading. The ONLY acceptable reason for the Rovers plot is to get everyone under one roof and on one site. And I dont think that is do-able on either of the Brockhall sites, as neither are big enough alone for the requirements of a modern senior training ground and academy. This simple insurmountable issue was why Jack Walker developed the second site elsewhere. A simple fact that the bottom site didn't have the room nor freedoms to build what was required so he went up on the other site. Unless brainbox Waggott has managed to do what Jack Walker couldn't do 20+ years ago with all his money, ambition and contacts and develop an all in one facility on Brockhall then the only conclusion to reach is that the planned facilities will be significantly inferior to what we already have. Given sweeping up rubbish and power washing are beyond the capabilities of Waggott's administration I know which I think it is.

Mowbray was probably hoping Nyambe was injured for the rest of the season. Would make things a whole lot easier before he exits stage left and Mowbray could then get Bennett back in every game. It not being a serious injury and Mowbray's failure to recruit any decent alternative in that position means he is under pressure and expectation to play him, even when he clearly doesn't want to.

People reading too much into this. The Twitter administrator has the birthdays of all Rovers players, including academy lads and ex players, saved in their calendar to wish happy birthday to. They won't have saved the date for Mowbray's anniversary. It really is that simple. He's going nowhere.

Having failed miserably in his target of the top 6 now for 3 years he will have to arm himself with something else to try to keep favour with the Indians. By telling them about how much players are now worth or indeed selling Armstrong for good money to a top flight club he will be able to lean back on that and promise more to come if they stick with him. He's not as clever as he thinks he is. But he's clever enough to have worked out what he needs to do here to keep things ticking over nicely with the owners and keep him playing football manager for another year.

You're probably right there. The only thing that might upset the cosy little routine down at Rovers is the impending catastrophe on ticket sales. Waggott has us down to 2,500 now and if Mowbray's still here I can't see many buying. Other than that it will be 'as you were' especially with no India summit meeting and Pasha still out there. There will be no boat rocking when they've got their man doing their bidding on the ground and under contract until 2022.

A short history of events for those still catching up on things. Episode 1 - Steve Waggott 2004-2010 - employed at Charlton Athletic, first in the Community Trust before ending up CEO of the football club. Our very short-lived Director of Football Paul Senior was also working at Charlton up to around 2004 according to his LinkedIn profile.... 2011 - Waggott joins Coventry City where in March 2015 Tony Mowbray arrives as manager, and in June 2015 Mark Venus becomes 'technical director' - a move that enables Waggott to concentrate on his 'other responsibilities' at Coventry having been dealing with recruitment until then. https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/mark-venus-joining-coventry-city-9289138  November 2015 - Waggott decides to leave Coventry City although no reasons given and doesn't have another job lined up. https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/coventry-city-chief-executive-steve-10392288 February 2016 - after 3 months out Waggott becomes CEO at Gillingham working alongside Paul Scally. https://www.coventrytelegraph.net/sport/football/football-news/former-coventry-city-chief-executive-10851093 January 2017 - after less than a year as CEO at Gillingham Waggott 'steps down' to become 'consultant' focusing on the new stadium development project'.https://www.gillinghamfootballclub.com/news/2017/january/change-of-role/ At some point between January 2017 and October 2017 Waggott leaves his 'consultancy' role at Gillingham and appears in October at Southend United, as 'head of operations' where his position seems to revolve around the 'transition from Roots Hall to Fossets Farm'. https://www.southendunited.co.uk/news/2017/october/reshuffle/ In December 2017 he leaves his consultancy job at Southend to take up the position at Rovers as CEO. https://www.southendunited.co.uk/news/2017/december/steve-waggott-moves-on/)  Aren't we lucky that we've someone in place to oversee this much needed training ground project who has been headhunted by clubs such as Gillingham and Southend to oversee their developments (that still haven't even started to happen). Personally speaking I'm not impressed with what I'm reading.

I have to say also that as upsetting and concerning as this news has been it has stirred a dormant emotion inside me. Over the last 12-18 months I have really questioned my love for it all any more but then this sort of development has hit a nerve and wound me up about things like I haven't been for some considerable time. Not for good reasons or the right reasons, but it at least reminds me that I still care deeply about the club and what it used to be and should be. It has also brought things into focus with the three stooges in place there now. Previously I had them down as genuine and honest albeit limited in their abilities. This has rapidly turned into an intense dislike and a desire to see them gone from this club asap For me everything is so much clearer. There are enemies on the payroll and I want them gone. Suddenly Watford and Coventry at home becomes insignificant especially when I can't even be there. Its also good to see so many of us on here united in our passion, concern and horror at what they have planned. Its refreshing to see so many who care rather than the deluded numpties on Facebook who can't see the wood from the trees.

Strangely Venus wasn't assistant manager at Coventry. This is very odd. He has followed Mowbray to every club Mowbray has been manager at and has acted as his trusted sidekick/assistant manager. At Coventry he didn't join as Mowbray's assistant. He joined the club as Technical Director overseeing recruitment and the 'football structure' and he got a seat on the board as a result. Very interesting as to why Mowbray would chose to do that rather than put him on coaching duties like he has everywhere else. All very strange. It is very clear that he joined Coventry as a director on the recommendation or instruction of Mowbray. Once again it raises questions of how and why Mowbray is appointing friends as directors to a football club where he is already manager. I think there is a lot more to come out in the wash here with this. I'm going to be busy this week

Having visited the academy site many times both as a spectator of the under 18 team and also through work, studied these vague plans in the document I am pretty confident that the site cannot accommodate what is required and supposedly sought by the club. There simply isn't the space, and that is before we factor in access, environmental issues, neighborhood opposition etc. Lets take the indoor pitch - the existing one must be 50ft high and there's no scope for building above it. The 'new' one will have to be the same height and cannot be built on top of. What does this mean? Well the 'plans' in the document show that technically there is space on the existing car park/academy site for the indoor pitch. But what they aren't showing are all the other facilities that we will also need down there outside of the footprint of the indoor pitch. Most of these facilities are essential and not optional - even just as a senior training facility - changing rooms, canteen, kitchen, gym, office space, analysis room, boot room, laundry room, plant room, storage. Where do all these things go outside of the footprint of the indoor pitch and car park? The only place they can go is on the grass down there. A few problems with building out onto the grass. 1) As soon as you start doing this you lose pitch space. At the moment there are 5 pitches down there. Build out and that immediately becomes 4. The senior squad and u23s currently rotate between 4 pitches on the STC. Then we would also have the academy, u18s etc. 2) The academy site down at the bottom is itself in a sensitive area and I'm pretty sure contains strict restrictions on what can be built down there. I believe those pitches prior to Rovers' using them were sports pitches used by the hospital/staff before it shut down. The reason Rovers took over those pitches was because they were restricted for development - they couldn't be developed for housing and the academy building down there now was built on the footprint of the old changing rooms. The reason Jack Walker got those pitches for Rovers to begin with was because they were limited to sports use rather than development so were available 'on the cheap'. So it certainly isn't going to be as easy as building over whatever they like to fit everything they need down there. They are going to be heavily restricted and they know this, hence the references to building on the existing car park and no reference to building over grass areas. Then we come on to the strict requirements of Category A academy status. It isn't a pick and chose optional game. There is a long list which gets longer every year of facilities and items that the club must have access to in order to qualify for Category A status. An indoor pitch is one of them. They also need a pitch with spectator access/use for u23s to play games on. They also need an outdoor artifical pitch which they have up at the STC. So one of the 4 or 5 remaining pitches would have to be ripped up and relaid on that basis. They also need a floodlit pitch, which again is on the STC pitch and would need installing down at the bottom in an area where there is likely to be opposition to it. Accommodation is a requirement - a set number of rooms, including dining areas, and classrooms for the scholars - where are these going to be built? On top of the indoor 50ft high pitch? Lets have a think about staffing levels. Again having Category A status stipulates a certain level and number of coaching staff. There must be 50 players in either the first team squad or u23 squad. Probably another 20 u18s. Then at least another 50-60 staff - management team, medical team, analysis team, office staff, kitchen staff, groundsmen. You must be looking at accommodating in excess of 120 people easily on a daily basis. These people all need access and parking. The road down to the academy is a single track lane running through what has become a housing estate. It just won't work. I'd feel confident that this little scheme was a non-starter on the above basis but unfortunately they will have done their homework and will know all this already. This is where the con comes in because they will push ahead with it despite knowing this, knowing full well that we won't be able to get these facilities built down there but by the time the penny drops or the Category A status is lost the houses will be built.

Performance related pay for Waggo perhaps?

Hypothetically it wouldn't make any difference to me. You don't sell your crown jewels full stop. Once they get away with this one then how long before they fancy selling the other site at Brockhall, or chunks of Ewood Park off? Aldi want a new supermarket in Blackburn so lets sell that car park that 'never gets used' so they can build on there. And on it goes until the club has nothing left other than a run down stadium and a name. Yes we need a new Riverside stand. Many ways that can be achieved without having to sell off Brockhall. We have billionaire owners who never refuse a cheque but even without them we could sell a player or two, grow sponsorship, fundraise over several years.

EVERYTHING that Waggott has done since he first darkened our door in late 2017 has been to try and eek out some extra money from what is already there. I firmly believe that he only got the job because he persuaded the owners that he had the skill set to increase revenues and cut losses by X amount, which is why they agreed to employ him on his considerable wages. He's shown no initiative, bright ideas nor has he delivered any improvement in attendances, atmosphere, facilities. This is his last big hurrah before retirement, great for him and his balance sheets but potentially devastating long term for Blackburn Rovers. Not that he will care, he'll never step foot in Blackburn again after his stint here is over.

I've wondered for a while what Waggott actually does.# £300,000 a year for him to plot to sell off our prized training ground. Good work if you can get it. Pack your bags Steve, you and your mates aren't good enough for this club.

The simple answer to your question is this: Leicester's plans were to genuinely improve the club and its facilities, their owners saw a world class training ground as integral to their future and spared no expense in building 'state of the art' facilities to be proud of Our plans are to make a few million quid on the quiet no doubt with all sorts of snouts in the trough, condense everything down at the bottom site and cobble together something on the cheap in place of the demolished site.

We will fluke a few points from these home games. I expect at least two. Mowbray has that habit of pulling results out when the pressure is building. We need 12 to ensure safety. That's all we've got left now and he needs sacking on that basis alone.

I don't think the Coventry one ever happened. They claimed that they had identified a site for the new training ground but as of 2018 it was still being considered and last season they upgraded the facilities ready for the Championship. Maybe its because they got shut of the stooges and haven't looked back since.

Waggott and Mowbray get excited about buying new drones and computers and refitting the Brockhall changing rooms and have to publicly thank the owners for their support in doing it. Building a brand new training complex to house our academy and senior squad under one roof and it being better than the existing set up?