JHRover

Interesting, I didn't watch it but in what context are Sky presenters and pundits discussing a Rovers player during Leicester v Ipswich? I find that odd and quite unprofessional. Unless there's a campaign afoot to get that move done.

None of us know for certain that we are right or wrong, none of us will likely ever know the 100% accurate truth of the matter and very few will, and those involved will of course portay a certain version of events to pass the buck or cover their arses from the fanbase or owners. But if it's a choice between blaming the owners, the people who have caused or sat back and allowed more or less 13 years of failure and stagnation, or Gregg Broughton, I know which way my money is going. And if I'm wrong and it was all on Gregg or Silvester suffering temporary amnesia or forgetting how to do their jobs (not been a problem before or since) then the question is why have the owners employed and continue to employ them?

Maybe potential different owners would look at the £30 million+ we've p1ssed up the wall through negligence the last 2-3 years (Diaz, Armstrong, Lenihan, Rothwell etc) and look at the £20 million+ we are likely to bank with Adam Wharton soon (unless we balls that one up as well) and consider straight away that's half the money recouped just through better decision making. One good season and set of decisions away from PL football - if dingles, Luton, Brentford can do it then so can Blackburn Rovers. Speculate to accumulate and if you run out of money move on and let someone else have a go.

If it was indeed simply gross incompetence then how do we explain the following: a) That all the actors involved in that shambles - Waggott, Broughton, Silvestre - remain in position a year on and before and since then have had no issues at all in getting various deals over the line, including some of greater complexity than a 6 month loan deal. If it was indeed gross incompetence surely action would have been taken to remove those responsible or there would be similar examples of such chaos? b) That we have repeatedly over the years failed to get business done in the dying days of transfer windows, especially January? It seems to be a recurring theme that pre-dates Broughton and even Waggott. Common theme? Venkys c) We know that they have to run expenditure past India before it gets final sign off. Is Broughton going to go to India and seek permission to do a deal before he knows it is even a possibility? According to Broughton the pieces to the O'Brien deal fell into place in the last few days when Forest decided what they were willing to do. I suspect it was only in those late stages that they went to India for permission, and whilst they were waiting for sign off he did the 'leg work' of dealing with Forest and the player. There wasn't very much time otherwise. No I'm afraid all roads lead back to India on this one, either they actively stopped the deal going through or their negligence scuppered it at the 11th hour.

Because Broughton was under the impression that he had the ability and authorisation to do it. Hell they probably told him he did when he joined. His job is to have oversight and final decision making on transfers and the budget. We've heard this sort of thing many a time, about apparently there being good solid budgets and an intention to spend, it started way back at the start with the stuff about Ronaldinho and Beckham. From the word go there has been an effort to tell people that we are deadly serious and willing to spend big, but almost every time it doesn't actually materialise. Now this might be something along the lines of Balaji telling his underlings that they can do x, y and z, but then when it comes to final sign off from India the others get cold feet or don't agree to such an outlay. Or it might be one of the owners telling subordinates that they can do x,y,z and then when it comes to final sign off the phone doesn't get answered simply because they have better things to do with their time. I really don't know, but suspect it is something along these lines. Lambert was clearly under the impression he was getting a good budget, he was under the impression the Rhodes cash was coming for him to play with, then they pulled the plug. I suspect something similar with Broughton and O'Brien. He believed they'd OK it when final sign off was requested, but then found out that they wouldnt or didn't get an answer in time.

I still find it baffling that people believe that the O'Brien deal was ever going to be allowed to go through. I don't care what Broughton or JDT say or what people have been told, take a step back and look at all the transfer business this club has conducted over the last 3 years. From all the big wage earners being sold/released (Diaz, Dack, Ayala, soon to be Gallagher), to no new contracts to valuable players because they would cost too much (Lenihan, Rothwell), to Indian authorities blocking funding, to a policy of relying on the academy wherever and whenever possible, to not signing anyone outside of the age parameters and wage budget. I'm not sure where signing O'Brien on a substantial deal fits among all that or indeed if it was a complete balls up by the people at Ewood why they haven't been sacked, or why the finances for that deal have vanished rather than been allowed back into the kitty. I think it is safe to say that one needs filing under 'con job'. I don't doubt Broughton did the hard yards and got the deal lined up, I don't doubt the player himself was happy to come and play for a promotion chasing team under an ambitious manager, but as with the Lambert era what was printed on the packaging wasn't what was inside the tin and JDT and Broughton were made to look like fools by people higher up the 'chain'.

At the moment we have had 13 years of an Indian poultry company subsidising us at £15 million + each and every year with no realistic end in sight and zero willingness to engage in a sale or even employ competent people to run the club for them. They have no interest in the sport, the club or the town. They are now about £200 million down. Yet they are here. It's bizarre and inexplicable why or why they carry on with it, but they do. This shows there are people out there in distant parts of the world with the means and resources to do it even if they don't have any particular interest. Of course some interest would be preferable.

PNE and Bolton have proven it can be done, it works, it gets numbers up and they can function with lower losses than we have. So perhaps our great and wonderful leader could explain a single good reason why we don't adopt the same policies as they do, slash prices early and TRY to get the ground filled up? Apart from the reality, which is simply that word TRY which is too much to ask of him, effort and risk are in short supply so its much easier to rely on the default of maximum prices for what is a rapidly deteriorating product.

About 4000 sold in home ends on Friday evening so hopefully we can at least spare the humiliation of being outnumbered by tourists.

They'll just tell you that we can't spend it due to FFP or 'easing pressure on the owners' and you'll accept it without question and insist it is right, the money disappears into running costs. Been there. Done that.

Are you completely ignoring/forgetting that we need a judge's permission to cover bills, wages and tax? From where I'm sat even if we got £20 million given to us tomorrow there are all sorts of reasons why that couldn't get spent. You're persisting with this delusion that this is a normal club and that we are in the business of reinvesting money.

Pound shop operation. Wonder what players think of such nonsense in this day and age.

I've heard exactly the same, one of those sackings was when Gary Bowyer was manager and then he suddenly returned and has been here consistently since. In terms of timings this appears to have been around the time a certain shadow man started making decisions.

It was said when we appointed JDT and failed to appoint Carvalhal and Farke that working with the existing coaching staff was a requirement. Why? Is that healthy? Who decided that was a requirement? Who upstairs is qualified to decide that they are good coaches? What do Venkys, Pasha or Waggott know about the capabilities of coaches? Just another example of people being retained regardless of performance or capabilities because they are cheap or know the right people. It's been going on here since the scum bought the club and installed Kean as manager. It's not what you know but who you know.

Neither JDT nor Mowbray have been able to assemble their own backroom teams. Instead they have had to accept working with inherited staff: Lowe and Benson. And in JDT's case also Johnson. Regardless of their capabilities or lack of, it cannot be right that they are in place indefinitely regardless of manager/performance/results. The bigger question is who has decided that they are irreplaceable and why.

The media have always associated Mowbray with "good football", a consistent now for 20 years since he won the Championship doing with a strong West Brom side. If you repeat it often enough and for long enough it becomes fact in people's minds, even if not necessarily true. If you are a struggling Championship side wanting safety and stability and someone to guide you through to potentially a better future he's a good option and will expertly play the media with all the popular soundbites. But if you want promotion he isn't going to haul you there like Warnock or Bruce carved out their careers doing.

I suspect he resolved to hang around despite being made a fool of last summer, partly through a sense of responsibility, partly wanting to see it through and probably also because he was led to believe the issues were temporary and would be resolved soon. There were a few on here saying it was a temporary issue that would get resolved. Well it's been going on for nearly a year now and it's clear they don't see an end in sight. JDT is probably realising he's been completely strung along here by people who actually have no real idea what is happening or if/when it will get sorted.

Lets speculate for a minute. We have a choice, we can either stay in the Championship this season, but go into administration in the summer and start next season on -10 points, and face a real battle to avoid League One. But Venkys are gone. Or we can get relegated this season, continuing our horrific form through to May, but keep Venkys as owners, their 'issues' in India are resolved by the summer and we go back to their preferred way of doing things, but we are in League One, with no JDT and a small inexperienced squad probably well short of what is needed for promotion, we continue the Venky purgatory. Option 1 would potentially see job losses under administration, but as a Championship club we would have income probably pushing £10 million more than in League One and far bigger crowds / matchday demands, and would also see us a more viable option for a decent takeover. Option 2 would avoid administration, but in League One with plummeting gates, the revolting Venkys and Waggott still dismantling the club from within, drastically reduced income, gates halved and unlikely to compete in League One - surely with that comes substantial job losses - catering, matchday, stewards and further shrinking of the organisation? I know which option I'd pick and which I believe is better for BRFC in the medium to long term at least.

We had to jettison Buckley then Travis to get their wages off the books and allow us to bring in cheap signings like Telalovic and the two we signed at the start of January. Where are we getting the wages to sign anyone with any pedigree? The Kaminski / Phillips cash got us nowhere, the Diaz, Dack, Ayala wage savings got us nowhere, and we need authority from an Indian Court to meet our wage and tax obligations. I'd say the chances of spending money or offering reasonable wages are slim to none.

There are certain people who have been vocal about supporting selling Gallagher, supposedly because doing so would free up lots of wages and cash to go out and get someone 'better'. Well perhaps they ought to reconsider, because we can see here the sort of signings (at best) we will be going for if we need a Gallagher replacement. That's assuming the owners allow us to sign someone over the age of 30 which they were resistant to last summer.

So now you don't report on things as it would be 'sensationalist' (isn't that exactly what a journalist would want, a big sensational bit of news dropping into his lap getting everyone talking?) And the information has been available for 9 months, yet none of the people paid to find this sort of thing did anything and it once again was found by people digging online. They don't deserve to call themselves journalists.

Administration wouldn't necessarily see any employees lose their jobs, if those jobs are essential for the continued functioning of the business. Besides there's nothing to say that further cuts and job losses won't come with the next round of Venky cutbacks. People can lose their jobs with or without Venkys or admin. Conversely administration could see new owners come in who want to grow the club and with it decide to employ more people than Venkys do. We just don't know.

You only have to look at the complete lack of scrutiny regarding the man in the shadows, involved at the top of the club since at least 2015 and what have they had to say about it? Not a word, other than occasional passing references to 'the owners representative' How about; Who is this man? Is he really qualified to run a football club? What is his background? What is his remit? What is his actual role? Merely a messenger or de facto chairman? All important issues in the operations of a football club, especially if he's on the payroll. They wouldn't get away with it at most clubs of this size, most local media would ask some uncomfortable questions. Here they just play right into Venky hands.

The problem we have is that Waggott considers only Blackburn and Darwen to be our 'community'. He doesn't consider Chorley, Leyland, Clitheroe, Whalley, Accrington, Rishton, Clayton, Harwood, Ossy, Haslingden or anywhere else to be anything to do with Rovers. Evidence? Well I doubt he or anyone else can point me towards one single act he has taken in 6 years to encourage, promote, develop, entice support from any of those regions. Lets be honest they do hardly anything in Blackburn or Darwen either, but at least the community trust sends a couple of players out on their afternoon off to visit a primary school from time to time. It's the first fundamental mistake of a non-East Lancs outsider who comes in and assumes that Rovers=Blackburn and that 20,000 a week are going to wander down from Mill Hill ,Darwen, Feni. I think anyone who goes to Ewood will know that a very large portion - if I were a betting man close to if not more than 50% - of our season ticket holders - reside outside of BwD. Of course he will have quick access to this data. Fundamentally though it is easier to make excuses - like he's done with regularity since he arrived - than do anything to address it. He's now got another recently made up excuse that threatens the very future of our support base and club which is that we 'can't' target non-BwD areas because it would cause complaints from rival League clubs. I'd suggest he should resign immediately if he accepts that.

Hand to mouth existence Reliant on cheap loans No money for transfers Players not allowed to give their shirts away due to cost / limited supply Crumbling stadium No investment in facilities