One thing people overlook though is that Revie died of a horrible disease and the FA still snubbed him. Then they try to shove blatant Man United favortism down their throats. Jack Walker didn't get a mandated minutes silence at other grounds. Busby was no saint either (though nowhere near the lowlife Ferguson is) look at how some of the plane crash survivors were treated shabbily by the club.

I bet when Ferguson dies they will force clubs to adhere to tributes but you won't hear Rovers fans chanting Jack Walker's name in protest. Rather be brainwashed that Man United's heroes should be treated with a reverence denied to others.

This article sums up their thinking and I agree with a lot of it. Very few on here would be so visceral and passionate in Jack Walker's honour.

https://roblufc.org/2014/05/26/one-don-revie-why-we-were-right-to-sing-through-a-minutes-silence-for-matt-busby/

59 minutes ago, Claytons Left Boot said:

Hate Leeds with a passion. No one had ever heard of them until the mid 60s and up until then, they hadn’t won a bean. For a city of 700k they have, in the main, greatly under achieved. Teams like Rovers, Bolton and Huddersfield easily eclipse them on the record attendance front and in their support, they have hordes of knuckle dragging neanderthals, intent on hooliganism. I can’t think of anything good to say about them. Wan*ers.

Indeed they were nothing until the 60's but Don Revie is...well...revered. Maybe he was a crook (not that it stopped the FA making him England manager so their grudge was obviously down to his departure for UAE job) but their respect for him goes way beyond anything Jack Walker receives here in my opinion. The mentality Revie built the club around to a certain extent exists to this day. If Revie had "think BIG" as his motto there would be banners and flags all over the place. Not sugercoating them (ignoring for instance that Revie's own wife said he would have hated the Busby incident) but there are some things other clubs could learn from them on a mentality standpoint.

1 hour ago, AllRoverAsia said:

I suspect Dave Whelan came under intense pressure from his Family to bail out of Wigan to protect what was left of their inheritance.

What was "left" of inheritance must be substantial. Should be grateful for that. Whelan's family probably wouldn't exert sole corrupt influence over a trust fund though. You would really have to be the lowest from of grasping scum to do that.

Considering Whelan made the disgusting comment that Jack had "saddled his family" with Rovers presumably he does not want to "saddle" his own.

19 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

We did expand it. Venky’s have contracted it. You may have noticed it...
 

 

Jack Walker expanded it. All the club did after his death was to quit marketing across Lancashire and constantly beat people over the head with "small town this, small town that". There's only so many times people can point this out and how ludicrous that marketing approach was. There's no hope for the brainwashed.

16 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

How about a ban for anyone who has supported another team.

What if that's because they were driven out despite being right about many things? Certainly the core reason I joined this forum 15 years ago. Maybe 14 years too many. It's coming up to 20 years since Jack died. What am I supposed to do still be on here 50 years from now saying "well Jack would have liked this" or "Jack would have preferred his family not stabbing him in the back". I've sacrificed enough of my time and effort. Even my Mum said to me "this obsession with the Walker family has taken over your life but you don't even go anymore". How twisted is that? That's not support it's borderline schizophrenic. People say all I do is criticise fans what about those I've defended for being anti-Venkys and attacking the scum in media who backed Kean? I can't abide total injustice even when the same people have attacked me on other issues.

I know none of this stuff is going to happen here (the staff are too lazy for one thing and what the owners know about marketing could be written on a matchbox) it's fantasy but surely one club will take a radical approach. Especially with FUP and what's happened in last few months.  

You can still be hostile to other teams, players, etc. One of my first moves would be to issue a public ban on anyone who's spoken badly of the past. Ferguson was one person mentioned. What about the scum who defended Kean (including Ferguson) like Redknapp, Moyes, etc. Put them on the ban list and tell everyone they are on it.

What use are fans who criticise the slightest mistake? Once you ban them once (it wouldn't have to be permanent on a first strike) that might be enough for the message to sink in. Who knows they might actually start to enjoy sitting through a game without being a negative cancer on the fans around them.

3 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Blackburn is one of the smallest towns with one of the smallest catchment areas in the top two divisions, those the facts Vinners.

The club did so much work to make light of that fact, but alas a decade of neglect has thrown away that hard graft.

 Has applied for CITY CHALLENGE. How many times do people have to say this before it sinks in? Brainwashed isn't too strong a word. Stuff like this has driven me nearly insane in the past.

By being totally different to other clubs perhaps you can EXPAND the catchment area? Is that such a novel concept? 

Just now, Mattyblue said:

‘Big club in a small town‘, if you don’t mind, Gavla 

Or how about big club in a big town? This is the type of people I'm talking about on other thread. People who hold the club back and force other fans out telling lies and belittling anyone who objects. Anyone saying stuff like this would be banned from Ewood on my watch. Would that get rid of many people on here? Suppose it would. Good.

Just now, rigger said:

Many clubs in the 70s went down the edgy fan route 

I've mentioned taking steps to avoid attracting hooligans, etc. OK being monitored on CCTV may not be cool but it's the way to weed put hooligans, racists, etc. Maybe hire stewards who actually do their damn job. You need to get rid of the negative types who abuse other fans (the people for instance who drove out many of the anti-Kean protesters) or abuse other fans for what appearance, clothing, etc. I don't want to be too "politically correct" either (banning kids hardly fits that category) but if you allow drums, horns, etc without someone next to you whining about the noise people will be attracted to that. Ban anyone who is a negative influence on the atmosphere. I'm not saying everyone has to sing (some people don't because they are shy) but you don't have to be a negative, whining influence who only comments to suck any positivity out of the people around them. I've heard Union Berlin have zero tolerance on people like that. OK maybe if the team is losing 5-0 have some leeway where that's concerned but scapegoating certain players for a misplaced pass 2 mins into a game...get lost.

26 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

How do you think you’ll attract the next generation of support? Or stop the entire child population of England supporting a glory club (even Man Utd, gasp!) without letting children into grounds?

‘Earth to planet Vinners!’

Because if you build the perception of being edgy, cool and rather controversial they will be attracted to a different kind of atmosphere. Kids like what's forbidden to them and young adults aren't too far removed from that. There's no such thing as a "family club" and while football may be sanitised look at all the swearing, vulgar chants, etc. You take away the pressure of having footballers act like role models (and give them certain boundaries that aren't allowed at other clubs) and having kids brainwashed by players who don't really give a toss about them. At least if you get older and you are attracted to a different marketing approach you can make that decision for yourselves. Of course if you're more careful about the type of players you bring in (and lengthier contracts designed to stop them leaving or academy players who just leech off the club) they would be attracted to that as well. People say it would "hold the club back". Well so be it if you can't find 16 players across Europe (and beyond) who might be Championship calibre (who should sign for extra freedoms but certain contractual conditions) then you're obviously not looking hard enough. People say "oh you're holding the club back" by narrowing the talent pool.that's all people on here do anyway. Hardly anyone hates FUP and even the most basic or slightly radical ideas are ignored never mind stuff like this. Only signing basque players hasn't hurt Athletic Bilbao that much. OK it's possible they could have won more with different signing policy but they have never been relegated.

A lot of adults don't want to babysit their kids during a football match. Why is the atmosphere considered to be better at away games? One of the reasons is there's less kids there. 

2 hours ago, benhben said:

David Dunn odds on favourite for the Barrow job. Id take him to replace Mowbray...he might be awful but id take the risk at the moment. A blackburn lad in charge with an experienced no 2. Ill keep dreaming...

Be amazed if he succeeded there never mind at Ewood. He would fail for the exact same reason Woodgate did. 

1 hour ago, Traviscon said:

Just to clarify, do you mean stop anyone attending a matchday at Ewood who is under 16 years of age?

Yes. Whether they are with an adult or not. Coach tickets for children already have to be purchased by adults. Does anyone know the percentage of away tickets allocated for juniors compared to adults? Obviously it must be lower but by how much? 90%?

16 minutes ago, OnePhilT said:

Think his point is that we might have something to celibate.

My point is getting away from the whole "family marketing" watered down Disney nonsense most clubs go for. I'm not sure what the legal position is on this but one of my moves would be to stop admitting anyone under 16. The problem is if you cater to an "edgier" crowd you might attract some real neanderthal types (hooligans, etc) but if you're zero tolerance on certain issues but relaxed on others (something which could attract players/employees who are tired of being corporate puppets) you could attract people from across society and create a very unique atmosphere around the place. The goal primarily is not to be boring and making an effort to be different which for some reason is seen as controversial and radical. OK you can do some publicity stunts and stir controversy but it does not have to be the entire basis of a marketing plan. 

There really should be something like this at Ewood on the hill. Not as a prank but as a photogenic promotional opportunity. If the club paid for it then the council ought to agree. The only reason not to is anti-publicity. 

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/news/18551251.mystery-solved-ossywood-five-prank-15-years/

4 minutes ago, Stuart said:

Can’t believe you still feel the need to respond and can’t grasp the context.

Funny thing is people look at the likes of Wigan and worry that it could be us when Venkys finally turn off the taps, yet also seem to think we have loads of time on our side.

We need promotion. It’s not about “one game of football”, it’s about the business end of what could have been a promotion season.

You just look at things through a simplistic lens. Of course family is important but he needs to provide for that child for the next 18 years, not for one day.

Was the baby even born yesterday?

They could have considered inducing too. Can't be risky parents do it quite often so Father can flatter his ego being present at the birth.

If people believe Lenihan should have been present they could always keep that opinion to themselves. Rather than patting themselves on their back on how they have such high values. People don't realise that fans act as promotional vehicles for the club. 

54 minutes ago, Oldgregg86 said:

Can I just say I love rovers literally more than anything in life with exception of my one and only child. I would miss the champions league final if I was playing for rovers and they reached the final to be at the birth of my daughter. Lenihan has absolutely done the right thing

It's 2020 and there's cameras now. "Having to be there" just seems to be about ego really and patting themselves on the back. Far as I'm concerned parents should be judged on what their child turns out to be like (though in some extreme cases children will be a disappointment no matter what their parents do) not because they happened be in the immediate vicinity when the child was born.

Not sure what people expected from Lenihan though. He's not even a Rovers fan. His kid will be dressed up in a United shirt right now in all likelihood not a Rovers one.

1 hour ago, Lucimo said:

No you are right I don't care either. But I'd rather not laugh(publicly) for fear it will bite us on the arse at a later stage 

Should people never celebrate anything on the basis Venkys might pull out? I don't care about Wigan as such but you could say Whelan is Wigan. The club might as well be renamed Whelan Athletic. They never amounted to anything until the day he took over. FUP loving hypocrite who hopefully will now get his long deserved comeuppance. 

Did say recently that if the club focused on signing edgier, cooler personalities (the type who aren't interested in having a wife and bunch of kids) this type of issue wouldn't be a problem. 

Dack's said the images he posted of a frog and cup of coffee had nothing to do with Wigan.

Just now, Norbert Rassragr said:

This could be the start of quite a few clubs having issues, including us. There are only so many billionaires and rich Chinese business groups interested in buying a club, but plenty of shoddy con men and blaggers who can pass the tests. 

...and the EFL would rather open the door to them than billionaires with ambition. 

2 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

Whelan doesn’t own them any more and hasn’t for a while. I doubt his FFP stance would deter any buyers, unless you had a few quid lying behind your sofa....

Where did I say he owned them? I'm quite aware of that though wasn't aware they had another takeover just weeks ago! More brilliant EFL work. Perhaps if they spent less time bullying genuinely rich owners at crooked UEFA's behest takeovers like this and Charlton wouldn't happen. 

Thanks to Whelan's shamelessly hypocritical support of FUP they will probably find it harder to find a buyer. 

Guess what goes around comes around.

23 hours ago, rigger said:

didn't Gordon Lee have a similar policy?

What policy was that? He had a "no stars" policy at Newcastle/Everton but that was in a higher division. 

36 minutes ago, The Hypnotic said:

Another way of looking at it is that signing a player is a form of capital investment for a football club. I’m sure plenty of companies that have furloughed staff will keep investing in an effort to stay competitive with their rivals. Are football clubs any different?

Athletic Bilbao rarely pay transfer fees due to their policy of only signing basque players. Never been relegated from La Liga. I'm not interested in a "locals only" policy but with FUP what's the point in spending transfer fees? Sign players with edgier personalities, give them freedom and who's to say it wouldn't work? Bilbao manage it with such a limited catchment area compared to all of Europe like most clubs have. You could also have a policy of only signing young players on lengthy contracts. If they refuse to play at some point sue the hell out of them. Nobody would join under such circumstances? Who knows? Clubs should do things on their own terms only (those not crippled by FUP aside) and sometimes that's worth more than any transfer fee. 

I was surprised that Man United of all clubs offered refunds. Shame really considering most of their fans are lowlifes.