West Brom yesterday. Frozen at £329 for adults. Interesting as they 'don't know what league they are going to be in'. Presumably they subscribe to the bonkers theory that putting them on sale earlier might see more sold, whilst Rovers reckon it makes absolutely no difference.

They've only released that bizarre statement after facing a landslide of questions and emails demanding an explanation from supporters after the official police twitter account confirmed to everyone what I had long suspected to be the case. I know a few people who have sent in letters and emails requesting an explanation. I sincerely hope that those who meet with Waggott face to face will be asking why the club lied/misled supporters previously when they claimed that they had no say in the matter and they were acting entirely on police instruction in moving kick off to noon. That was minuted in more than one fans forum meeting. Now they've backtracked slightly and are admitting they do have some say in it as the decision is supposedly 'mutual' between Rovers and the police, whilst the police say they are only doing as requested by Rovers. As you correctly point out - NO other club voluntarily moves kick off times to 12 noon. There are odd fixtures that are forced by the police or by Sky tv to early times but I'm not aware of any other 12 noon kick offs this season in the Championship, certainly not ones that the club offered to move there. The next question is why no other clubs ask for it - and the answer is clearly because they don't want to annoy their home fans and want as many to attend as possible. This issue really grates on me. Not even because it causes me any particular inconvenience. I don't work on Saturdays, I live 20 minutes away, I can and will still attend. But I don't think it is acceptable for this to happen, I don't see any acceptable explanation and the club's attempt to explain it only raises more questions, like why they are moving kick off times to satisfy local residents and the Blackburn public who presumably contribute nothing to Blackburn Rovers whilst inconveniencing those who spend their money on the club. We have a modern and safe stadium, set up well for segregation purposes with separate stands, buffer zones and a compound for the Darwen End. Most other clubs have no such luxuries - old grounds, lack of space, home and away fans mixing - yet no issues. Forest can host Derby on a Monday night, Sheff Wed v Sheff Utd too. Interesting.

Don't set me off! I live in Ossy and sometimes work in Accy and I see absolutely nothing from Rovers. No school visits, no posters, no advertisements. Zilch. Surely there's some data somewhere about where Rovers ticket buyers live and I'd expect a large percentage of season ticket holders and those on the database to live in Hyndburn. As you point out, the lengths that Stanley are going to in an attempt to build a fanbase and get youngsters hooked is impressive, but also a source of embarrassment that such a small operation with very little going for it can do such things whilst we rest on our laurels. I've already pointed out that in my experience Stanley is an easier day out than Rovers in terms of getting into the ground, parking, getting away after, better food and drink etc. Rovers' efforts in terms of school visits is positive but it is a tired routine and they only seem to have any interest in Primary schools within BwD boundaries and do nothing beyond that. When I was a child I know I would have responded more to a free shirt or ticket from a football club than I would a player coming into school one afternoon. It's something I never thought I'd see but it is worrying. Stanley pro-actively working on a generation of fans and Rovers idly ignoring a hotbed of traditional support, either through laziness or some bizarre belief that it isn't our patch.

Yet the attitude at Rovers seems to be that we can rely on the same 10,000 to buy regardless so why make the effort to get them on sale now?

It wouldn't happen. Sky wouldn't allow it as a number of those would be selected for broadcast at other times. Life on easy street at Ewood. Unfortunately that is incompatible with wanting to increase attendances. They thought the issue was put to bed by hiding behind the police but now we all know that isn't the case, the club ludicrously has backtracked and is now claiming it is a mutual decision. Still at least the neighbours who contribute nothing to the club will be happy the game is kicking off earlier....

It would be helpful if the club could explain how 18000 football fans descending on Ewood for a 12 noon game and leaving all at once at about 2pm is in any way better for local people than it would be arriving at 2pm and leaving at 5pm. The club seem to be expecting a sell out away end regardless here so the only way to interpret this is that they prefer the lower number of home fans this will likely result in. If there's some unknown factor that results in local people suffering more at 3pm than at 12noon I'd genuinely love to hear it. Unless of course this is all cock and bull nonsense aimed to try and pacify fans now the cat is out of the bag and they can no longer point the finger at the police. They're just digging a deeper hole for themselves.

The pricing of hospitality at Ewood has been prohibitively high for some time now. In my view Northcote attempt to create an 'exclusive' image of their brand and don't really want average football fans involved. They'd rather have empty tables and boxes than reduce pricing or open it up for the general public. I'd be looking to utilise empty boxes by offering them round local pubs and clubs - 30 a head for 10 blokes for unattractive Championship games to include a bit of grub?

Ipswich charging adults 12 quid for their game v Reading this weekend. Reading charging adults 15 quid anywhere in the ground for their upcoming game v Preston. Meanwhile at Ewood.....

At least we can draw a straight line between this and the nonsense they come out with when an above average crowd results in newspaper stories about 'chaotic' parking in the area. A 31,000 capacity stadium but get 20,000 on and the club and locals cant handle it. Perhaps if they didn't charge 10 quid a car or shut down all the car parks people wouldn't park on residential streets?

So now they're factoring in local residents as a consideration in kick off times. It just gets better and better. Not bothered about annoying home fans or reducing ticket sales but at least the locals with no interest in football wont be inconvenienced too much.

Heard a couple of weeks ago that Rovers were moving on from Northcote providing the hospitality and now it seems to have been confirmed. https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/17460472.northcote-deal-at-blackburn-rovers-comes-to-an-end/?ref=twtrec Vinjay will be happy. To be honest I've been in the Red Rose suite quite a few times on matchday and the bar offering is dreadful. Hopefully an improvement will come.

When we won the League we 'pipped' United to it by a point (only because United failed to beat West Ham) and attracted all sorts of criticism for 'buying' the league even though we spent less than the other teams. When City won their first Premier League title they beat United on goal difference after Aguero scored a last gasp winner and yet that victory is portrayed as a clear decisive victory and never any mention that City blew their rivals out of the water financially to do it. Lampard's record at Derby no better than Paul Clements or Gary Rowett's before him, yet compare and contrast the media coverage.

I predicted when O'Neill went to Forest they'd make the top 6. A far better manager than Lampard who has received unfair criticism due to his image and style rather than results.

If Derby don't secure a top 6 position then Lampard has done a poorer job there than McClaren, Clement and Rowett, who all got to the play-offs or left them in the play-offs. Goes to show how powerful the media is in developing reputations for the favourites.

Preston sold 3600 tickets so far.

Ticket prices announced, a bargain £33 for adults for a clash of bottom half 2nd division sides likely to be a dead rubber game.

If we are serious about getting more fans to the ground then you make attractive fixtures as easy to attend as possible, and don't put obstacles in place to drifting fans. I'm not aware of any other club that wants to move games to these times. I'm not aware of any major incident(s) that have occurred in the last 30 years between Rovers and Leeds/Preston fans that make those fixtures high risk or dangerous in some way. Folk at Rovers stuck in a rut and their comfort zone ultimately happy with their 12000 a week and cash in on a bumper away crowd and will do whatever they feel they need to do to keep it going. It's their decision at the end of the day but I'm not going to accept sob stories from Waggott and co. about poor home crowds when the club is doing nothing to help boost that on the rare occasion we have an attractive derby fixture that more people will have an interest in. As for the away numbers it is a different matter entirely in terms of how people approach it. Only got to look at the Deepdale game with 5500 sold out away fans and 12000 home fans. Plenty of folk there who just go for the day out. They'll be the same at Ewood with more than half their average home crowd there as it is THE game of the season for many of them.

I admit there's not a lot they can do, which makes it even more difficult to accept them doing it voluntarily on the few occasions it could easily be Saturday 3pm. Two most popular games of the season and the club voluntarily restricts and reduces the number of fans turning up just to make life easier for those paid to put games on. Kick off at 6am or behind closed doors would in theory be safer and less of a risk but not appropriate and neither is 12 noon.

If Rovers want to complain about low revenues or below target attendances they have to recognise that 6 out of our final 7 home games being at inconvenient or unpopular times or days might have a detrimental impact on the above. It might make their day easier but will almost certainly reduce the numbers turning up.

How does it work though? If we believe the club's account - that a 7000 away following means the game must kick off at 12 noon - then where does the dividing line fall? What is the magic number to force a noon kick off? What happens if Preston don't reach that number? Is it the full Darwen End being allocated? If so then how come Liverpool and United weren't noon games? Burnley in the League Cup? What would be particularly outrageous is if PNE only sold 5000 in the bottom tier and so there would have been no need for a noon kick off either way. Seems that the club goes diving in eagerly expecting a full away end and making all sorts of concessions in doing so, but doesn't have a plan for what happens if 6000+ turn up. Lets face it, the only club at this level that can be relied upon to fill the away end or close to fill it every year is Leeds. Suffice to say whatever the excuse or blame game the club and police come up with the whole operation disgusts me.

Interesting that the League have only seemingly been forced into taking action as the deadline approaches and there seems to be a risk of a big problem developing if Coventry don't have a home ground next season and if the worst does come to the worst then they need to plan for next season. Only taking action when they've no choice but to do something. Typical - do nothing for years as clubs are wrecked and only act as the problem begins to cause problems for them and their image. You can bet if Coventry were planning on moving back to Northampton they'd happily approve it and leave it be for a few years. It seems the only realistic alternative for them is to temporarily move to Nuneaton's ground up the road but it seems that might not be up to League requirements.

https://www.ccfc.co.uk/news/2019/february/statement-coventry-city-confirm-receipt-of-letter-from-the-efl-board/ Coventry facing expulsion from the League unless they can provide confirmation of their home venue for next season. Tricky situation as their owners are still taking legal action against the Council who won't negotiate on the Ricoh until it is dropped.

It was clear that the club had lied about this when the Liverpool and Man Utd cup games at Ewood were allowed to take place on a Wednesday night with far bigger crowds than Preston or Leeds would attract. Were the police in a position to veto and insist on a noon Saturday kick off on the basis of spectator safety then they would have done so for those games, which in any measure were far greater risks than PNE or Leeds in the 2nd division have ever been. As it happened those 20000+ crowds, in Liverpool's case almost 30,000 in an FA Cup quarter final replay with 8000+ scousers in the ground, passed without any major incident. Remarkable. No other club does it, but then again most other clubs would draw the line at 5000 away fans, especially if more than that required and early kick off. They would sacrifice the extra 1500 away fans to enable kick off to stay at 3pm. To my knowledge there has been no fixture v Leeds or PNE in recent history that has seen any major trouble or safety issues. Leeds fans made a mess in Wetherspoons the other year (which they could still do for a 12 noon kick off). 5500 Rovers fans can go on the beer around Preston all day for a 3pm kick off without major incident.

It was clear that the club had lied about this when the Liverpool and Man Utd cup games at Ewood were allowed to take place on a Wednesday night with far bigger crowds than Preston or Leeds would attract. Were the police in a position to veto and insist on a noon Saturday kick off on the basis of spectator safety then they would have done so for those games, which in any measure were far greater risks than PNE or Leeds in the 2nd division have ever been. No other club does it, but then again most other clubs would draw the line at 5000 away fans, especially if more than that required and early kick off. They would sacrifice the extra 1500 away fans to enable kick off to stay at 3pm.

Almost every one of those Chelsea managers won a major trophy, all within a year of getting the job. Leeds have achieved nothing yet but their managerial chaos didn't relegate them to League One like it did with us. I agree, in an ideal world you'd keep a manager for several years and some clubs seem to chop and change for the sake of it, but I don't agree that a manager should be awarded more time in some sort of principled stance to make a point about giving him time. If results are unacceptable or faith is lost then the manager has to go. The problem is that we are too reliant on our manager. Even before Venkys we had a very traditional old school manager/chairman set up with John Williams running the club and old school Souness, Hughes and Allardyce left to get on with the job of managing the team. Clearly it worked for us at the time, but we were very reliant on those big personalities and lived in fear of them leaving as replacing them would be such a big ask. Allardyce was clearly the ideal man for Rovers when he was here, and I wish he had been kept, but I also don't accept that his sacking immediately signified the end of the world - if we'd have conducted a proper recruitment process for his replacement rather than appoint his bib and cone man we could have progressed as a club. Under Venkys our managers - until Lambert all of them very inexperienced and arguably not qualified for a club of this size - have held far too much sway and influence. As much as I respect and appreciate the job Mowbray has done - my concern is that we're now in a position where we are utterly reliant on him in terms of keeping the owners on the straight and narrow and holding the club together - we are completely unprepared for a scenario in which we might have to part ways with him. That isnt me for one minute saying I want him to go any time soon - but it is a fact he will do at some point and we need to be prepared for that. Other clubs meanwhile have structures that enable a swift managerial change without much disruption to the club and team.