Tugayisgod

I don't think he was as bad as some made out when he did play. Granted he's no world beater, but he's a steady Eddie with proven championship experience. Believe he may get a run out for the u21s tomorrow

Never thought I'd say this but I think we need Forshaw back fit asap. ! Noticed Sam Morsy being made available and could be available in January. May be worth a punt, getting on a bit now but still kept Travis out of the Ipswich side when he was there.

I'm at a loss to understand what has upset them so much, as local journos are always wary of getting on the wrong side of the club they report on. Having said that, there's nothing now to stop the Telegraph printing stuff they may otherwise not have done, let's wage war on the bastards and get them out

The Lancashire Telegraph side of the story. Absolutely pathetic from the club Blackburn Rovers Football Club has banned the Lancashire Telegraph from its property due to alleged unfair reporting. The ban has come after the club expressed unhappiness at Rovers correspondent Elliott Jackson’s coverage, including around transfers, which the Lancashire Telegraph argues is simply Elliott doing his job as a professional, diligent journalist. Elliott and the rest of the Lancashire Telegraph’s staff have now been banned from setting foot on Rovers' property, and the club has also tried to coerce other EFL Championship clubs into blocking Elliott's access at away matches, including this weekend’s game at Charlton Athletic. The club says it has tried to foster a positive relationship and takes issue with stories critical of the club; the Lancashire Telegraph argues it is not a mouthpiece for the club, and it must accept the rough with the smooth, just as all major organisations the newspaper covers do. The issue, the club says, stems from a post by Elliott on X.com that it claims was false and that contained quotes that were wrongly attributed, and also Elliott’s coverage of the departure of the club captain Lewis Travis. It has also taken issue with so-called negative reporting about the club. First team coach Valerien Ismael said in a press conference that Travis wanted to leave, and Elliott argues he did his job, working his contacts to pursue the story and get the full picture for the fans. The Lancashire Telegraph’s position is that this is simply diligent, tenacious reporting, which is commonplace in all forms of journalism, particularly so during the football transfer window that the club is fully aware of. If the team is playing badly or not appearing to be active in the transfer window, Elliott is well within his rights to be critical, we say. A spokesperson for the Lancashire Telegraph said: “To be surprised or upset by this strikes us as either incredibly naïve or engineered as an excuse to try to stifle negative coverage. “While we appreciate the opportunities made available to the newspaper, including access to players and transport during pre-season, this should not be used to try to stop us from reporting the facts when the club deserves criticism.” They added: "We're disappointed in the action taken by Blackburn Rovers and remain committed to finding an amicable solution and a way forward. “Ultimately, the club and the Lancashire Telegraph are here to serve the fans. “Readers can rest assured we will continue to provide exemplary coverage of the club, telling the stories that matter about the club they love." Elliott has defended his X post, which has since been deleted, as accurate, and the Lancashire Telegraph has seen messages which corroborate this. The English Football League has said access to stadia sits with the home club, and while visiting clubs can make requests, the home team is under no obligation to meet these requests. It said the EFL’s preference is for all access to be granted to provide supporters with the best coverage of their clubs possible. Blackburn Rovers FC was contacted for comment.

It's beyond me how any Rovers fan believes that this is the "correct and only logical decision" But then again ...

Big Sam was right all along 😀

It is an exceptional case due to the fact it was 11 v 10 for the majority of the ,2nd half. That makes it unprecedented and no doubt the main issue for the EFL to consider. I for one DON'T believe a full replay is the only fair outcome, I think it's totally unfair to be honest.

Got high hopes for this lad 🔥

If you don't want me to post his stuff, just let me know. No skin off my nose

To be fair the original post was 6 hours ago, maybe my fault for only posting it last few minutes

Update.... EFL need extra time on tough Blackburn v Ipswich call New Just now By Alan Nixon The EFL will take extra time to sort out the disputed Blackburn Rovers v Ipswich replay decision. Both Rovers and Ipswich have made their submissions on time after the match was abandoned in the 80h minute. Blackburn want the points or a replay of the final stages with a man advantage because Ipswich had lost Jacob Greaves to a red card. Ipswich want the game to be played again in full which would give them 90 minutes to get a better result. The EFL can pick any one of the three outcomes and are taking their time because both clubs are digging in their heels. There is also a search for a precedent in similar circumstances and that is also a problem. The Blackpool v Huddersfield match was abandoned a few years ago and that was ruled to stand at 0-0 - despite ending just after half time. The EFL only came to that decision after Huddersfield turned down the chance of a replay because it was the last game of the season. Both Rovers and Ipswich need points and have much to play for, so there is no comparison with the other fixture.

If you are talking about a decision that seems the fairest to both sides, then I think you play the final 10 mins with 10 v 11 behind closed doors. Obviously replaying the full match is at a complete disadvantage to us, while awarding is the points would upset Ipswich who would quite rightly claim they could have scored in the remaining time (albeit remote) So therefore it only leaves one decision however logistically difficult it might be. I doubt it's what the EFL will decide though.

I was about to post something similar but you've pretty much covered everything. Really thought that the three relegated teams would be too strong for the rest of the league but at the moment it's not necessarily working out that way ( as we showed against Ipswich). Like you say, still very early to judge, but despite that 7-1 hammering I think QPR may have the best front 4 in the league with Kone, Chair, Poku and Saito. Defensively not sure about them. Interesting that it may not be as cut and dried as some thought

We had 2 diabolical decisions against us that season. This one obviously, but one which I felt was even worse was the one against Utd at home when Henning Berg made a great tackle on Lee Sharp. Gerald Ashby the proceeds to give a pen and send Berg off. Andy Gray on commentary could not believe it and not could anyone else in the ground. The worst decision I have ever seen, luckily it didn't cost us in the end !

Really? I remember this game well

Blackburn and Ipswich could have to replay their Championship match in full after it was abandoned in the 80th minute. Blackburn were 1-0 up, with Ipswich down to 10 men when the referee temporarily suspended the match due to heavy rain. After a short delay, the match was abandoned due to a waterlogged pitch. Sky Sports News understands that any decision on the replay or awarding of the results is down to the EFL. However, Jacob Greaves' red card will stand, no matter the EFL's decision. In a statement to Sky Sports News, the EFL said: "This afternoon’s Sky Bet Championship fixture between Blackburn Rovers and Ipswich Town was abandoned due to an unplayable surface. "The decision was taken in agreement with both managers. The Board will consider what action is to be taken as a result of the abandonment, in-line with EFL Regulations." According to FA Rule 20 (E) (iii), the EFL will decide if the match is replayed in full and the league's management committee is "empowered to order the score at the time of an abandonment to stand". EFL regulation 34.2 states that if a match "falls short of 90 minutes’, it may be ordered to count as a completed fixture or be replayed in full or in part on whatever terms and conditions the board" decides. Blackburn said on social media that a decision will be taken by the EFL board in "due course". "The game has been abandoned due to a waterlogged pitch. Full details will be communicated," Ipswich said.

Bit strange there's been no post match comments from VI as yet ?

Yeah, I think most people would agree that it was probably the right decision as it was starting to become farcical. The issue is will the league show some bollocks and come up with the right decision

Edit, win at Watford 😄

It's so fucking frustrating because it has detracted from what was a really good performance again, coming on the back of the win at Hull. I wasn't optimistic going to the game today, but thought we were excellent throughout.

A big pump. Righto

The main issue is, and always has been the fact that the pitch drains into the river. If the river is overflowing there's nowhere for the water to go. I'm not sure what the answer is but I'm pretty sure it's not the pitch itself that's the problem

Can anyone confirm the whereabouts of Harvey Higgins? Some have mentioned he's injured, hopefully he's not been quietly moved on elsewhere.

Mike Sheron to leave Rovers