could be 4-0 today if we put our foot down

Buckley playing well besides the goal

obviously this means he sees Samuel as a CF... but more importantly he doesn't see Gallagher or Brereton as a CF.

Is this acceptance the season is over ?

When Mowbray tells Steve he's had enough, Steve is going to hold a fair and transparent recruitment and not go back to the same agency.... so he said.

Why ? What would they get from doing that ?

Mitrovic in 2 minutes Shame for Leeds hahahaha

Samuel was lively when he came on.

For those there.... attendance is apparently 11,888

Graham not happy at all.

now being outplayed by Hull... at home.

Leeds losing HA

no more than 8000 actual

Have we signed someone called Maddison ?

Anyone know if Waggott is going to announce the abolition of the Waggott Tax ?

poor form plummetting down the table no transfers lots of injuries cold Feb night, snow predicted red button Waggott Tax from 6pm What is Steve Waggott and the club doing to get supporters into Ewood tomorrow ?

New signings would need 6 months to learn the names of the pitches.

Tony did say he was going to try to get another (rolling?) 6 months for Tosin from City. He was also (worryingly) at great pains to point out that Mulgrew has another year and Bell has an option on another year. Got it all covered off then.

He said we have 3 pitches... Tony calls them 1, 2 & 3.... and we might call them Tony Parkes, Kenny Dalglishhh.....or whatever.... Pitches called Tony, Kenny and Ray I think was where he was going. They better not pursue that completely ridiculous idea. Embarrassing idea.

From memory, the ACV doesn't in any way prevent the sale. But they have to give the trust the opportunity to buy it first. Therefore the cat will be out the bag at an early stage. In any case the eventual outcome would be the sale but the legal process would probably be protracted. I guess they would need a sale completed before June. Undoubtably this is still an option they will pursue if they have to.

I mean with respect to our FFP position. e.g. If we have recently signed a lucrative 3 year sponsorship deal with Venkys.

I think Waggott said they are on with this... lets see if anything materialises. Hopefully the fans forum pick this up and continue the pressure.

The stand is already sponsored by Venkys isn't it... Hasn't the RFS sign been exchanged for a Venky sign ? Cheston confirmed the Venky advertising all has a monetary value for us. No point changing it to another company unless they pay more and I bet they are already "adjusting" by the max they can get away with. It just hasn't had a public announcement about it's name as the sponsors dont require that as any normal sponsor would. I suspect they need time for the legals to check out the implications properly with the EFL before they just jump in on a wave of emotion and get it (legally) wrong. Or maybe I am giving them too much credit but that would be what I expect would need to happen before any public decision.

At the meeting, Mike said there were a number of options available to them should they need to make adjustments to the revenue. 1. They are already doing this. We asked about the venky adverts around the stadium and in particular the Riverside (was RFS) and the electronic boards. It was confirmed they have a monetary value for us. We probed, does that mean Venkys pay for it and the answer was yes i.e. Venkys are being invoiced for a proportional value for all the in stadium advertising. 2. They well know that any sale involves a process due to th ACV in place. They were followed up on it and said its not something they need to look to do at present.... i.e. probably a last resort but certainly the process cannot be kept under the radar. 3. If proprtional value. 4. Doubt fake invoices (fraud) would pass any scrutiny. 5. Not sure. I know he mentioned something about teams buying players booked against the academy. i.e. their fee and wages are exempt if academy players. What he did say was that the players were not listed as assets on the balance sheet and it was something open to them as long as its proportional. I didn't know exactly what he meant but I guess he means have all the players valued and show them on the p&L as fixed assets thereby getting a big (on paper) steroid injection to the profit. At the moment I think they are down as intangible assets. For certain they appeared relaxed as if they will whatever to comply before the June deadline. They have certainly assessed all their available options. Last point. I suspect the possible reluctance (if that is the case) to rename the Riverside after Tony Parkes, could be due to the commercial implications. i.e. It is presently called the Venkys Riverside (name sold for commercial revenue as you suggest) if not known publically.