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.

Doing nothing to try and renew it until April 2025 and unlikely to have done a great deal in the 10 weeks since is a funny way of dealing with something as a 'priority' but once again we see that what they say and what they do are very different. All we get now is the standard textbook arse covering and blame passing as a popular and important player edges to a rival club. It would be outrageous at most places but here people are used to it now and most of the fanbase indoctrinated with the "we can't compete" stuff anyway. I suspect the Middlesbrough thing has been burning away for a few weeks and suspect it first emerged at Rovers' end right around the time Nixon was told that we had almost sorted his new contract extension. They knew then that he was going and wanted to get their story out first and pacify the fanbase ahead of the move occurring. Next up we will get nonsensical talk about Brittain demanding ridiculous levels of money and then a few 'big' names drip fed as targets, which won't happen and then we will sign a PL kid on loan to fill in. The money disappears although some have swallowed the line about us spending millions already this summer on the three foreign lads and therefore they can claim the Brittain cash has already been spent. I suppose if you believe that you'll believe anything.

Yes the batch signed in JDTs first summer - Hyam, Brittain, Szmods - were pre further cuts so probably just above the new threshold imposed half way through JDTs second summer. He knew then it was a recipe for disaster and tried to get out.

Got to drop one in this morning to try and soften the Brittain blow. I'm sure it will all get sorted 'imminently'

I disagree. I think there are a lot of people out there, who knowingly or otherwise are set to defend the Venky Regime come what may. Someone at Rovers 'leaking' something to Jackson or Nixon and then them regurgitating it to other 'journalists' isn't beyond the realms of possibility. Nor is someone invested in the regime having a spout off on twitter to defend their antics and their employers. Anyhow, doesn't actually matter either way because my prophecy of doom is coming true, as I said it would in January and ever since. No amount of insisting that Brittain was offered a great new deal will change that.

Why do we have to accept a future without a billionaire? Most of this league have done

Name me another non parachute Championship club where wages don't outstrip revenue

Turnover. £40 million+ received in the last 3 years. Outstrips any ticket sales or shirt sales rivals have collected.

Venky bastards out

So many being played like fiddles. Some never learn

So you reckon the players have got together and lied? Why would they? Start from that answer and then ask what else I've said is 'paranoia'

This is the smoking gun. The players themselves confirmed that they hadn't even been contacted by the club. Not 'in discussions' or trying to sort things out, simply not even contacted. Now unless 3 senior players have got together and hatched a scheme to lie to the media when their media duties come around, for absolutely no reason, the logical conclusion is that they were telling the truth. This also stacks with the total inertia and multiple failings by the club going back years. No number of club plants on twitter will change my opinion on that. Those working for the Venky regime - directly by the club or indirectly coining it in via commission, agents or favours - have a long standing history of lies, misleading activity and saying things that either haven't or won't happen. Brittain's imminent new contract just the latest - made up to try and get their side of things out ahead of the truth and sale.

Does anyone out there really believe the claim that we have been close to sorting a contract extension? They're playing you for fools if so. Nixon and Jackson are pawns being used to hoodwink the fans. I doubt they know or care.

Will be interesting to see how many 'knocks' and 'illnesses' have been picked up

Floods in Italy wasn't it? Or maybe that was another one.

We aren't a club that signs competition for places or solid back ups. If we spend money and make signings it is to go into the first XI and replace departures. So I think anyone expecting Brittain and the new signing to compete for a place was highly optimistic. Of course they will dress it up as this with the fiction, spread via friendly journos, that a good contract extension was on the table. But that doesn't cost anything.

Jackpot for the Venky stooges - sell a couple of players for cash AND hoodwink the fanbase, via Nixon, that we were close to agreeing a bumper extension.

Important to remember that whatever we are paying out in fees we are at least matching by what we are bringing in from sales. That's the 'model' imposed on us by the owners and their legal issues in India. There's no other way of it, unless we are borrowing money from somewhere. So even if you are daft enough to believe we are spending millions, ask who is being sold to fill that void.

"Spent nearly £5m so far and only lost JRC, a 35 year old Danny Batth and Dolan (who was always gonna leave), yet u will still have people complaining" A tweet a short while ago liked by 18 people. I mean where do you start? It is scary.

Suspect we will just insert a couple of hastily arranged behind closed doors friendlies at Brockhall to fill that gap.

It seems clear that Gestede has well and truly got his feet under the table with the signings we are making. There will have to be more than a few fingers and toes crossed that he knows what he is doing here because on paper it is worrying. Granted he is, like everyone else around this club, working with his hands tied behind his back financially, but it is a high risk strategy. We've seen a similar sort of thing before with the Shebby and Portuguese influx. And thanks to someone last night pointing it out it does concern me that we've now signed two this summer from Vincent Tan's Belgian club who signed Gestede for Cardiff. I don't believe in such coincidences.

Hi Rudy No other club quantifies investment based on future wages and costs down the line. Everyone else quantifies investment based on the fee paid to get the player. Why? Well there's a pretty good chance that we will flog anyone who does ok, which will probably cover the outlay. Cloud cuckoo land stuff if anyone believes that we've committed to a £2.5 million spend on the two foreign signings we've made. Of course the only people it suits to spread such a grossly exaggerated figure is the Indians and their henchmen. Is £5k a week for these signings something to be happy or boastful of? It's a lot to us yes, but to a Championship club that finished 7th last year that doesn't sound competitive or ambitious to me. It screams League One finances.

On the contrary the less self-sufficient we are the better. The more it costs these owners and the harder it is for them to provide that money the more likely it is they will leave or give it up. Unlikely I know, but more likely than if it costs them nothing and they can just leave us to rot on the shelf. We've done the 'sell at a time where we get good value' - Adam Wharton, Szmodics - where did that get us exactly? Less than 18 months on from both of those - £30 million collected and what has it achieved? Nothing, we've reinvested a pittance and are now looking for more to sell. So yes I hope we lose the lot for free, then chief stooge has to go to Pune for £15 million this year and they can't do it. Game over.

You're better off having a couple of proven performers who at some unknown point in future will deteriorate due to age, than having a couple of kids or unproven younger players in there who might never be good enough. We know Travis and Tronstad are good enough and we know that rivals will line up to take them off our hands. We don't know what on earth this regime has planned for their replacements other than they will be cheaper, which, generally, means inferior. Not to worry though, at least we've got Forshaw secured for another year! With the way this club operates age and value mean nothing. We've had the good side of it - Adam Wharton - hit the jackpot then bundled him out the back door and never saw the transfer money again. We've had the other side of it - Adam Forshaw on short term deals. There is no plan or philosophy other than ££££££. If they can fill the gaps with 35 year olds they will as long as the contract terms tick the Venky boxes. Don't delude yourselves that there is a long term build or they are focusing on development/building value. They aren't looking beyond the next couple of months and ensuring the vermin owners don't have to send as much cash over from Pune.

Is there something wrong with a midfield aged 30 and 28? You make out like that is old, or unusual. Or that it is advantageous to have a couple of teenagers there instead who we will simply release or sell as soon as we can anyway. You also seem to be contradicting yourself. You confirm that they will most certainly get 3 years and decent money elsewhere (not sure where you've found the £20k a week figure from) yet suggest they aren't worth that. Well if they can get it elsewhere that suggests they are worth that. We can either pay the going rate or lose them and most certainly decline as a result. Our choice. I am concerned that you are doing exactly what the regime wants - accepting their decision making based on a belief that these sort of players should be let go because either they are 'too old' or their wage demands are excessive, and there's no evidence for either of those things. They are simply Championship proven performers coveted by rivals because they are good and therefore able to command Championship wages. The problem here is Rovers being unwilling to offer that.