Place of birth doesn't have anything to do with ability, but I think it does in terms of the fans bonding and commitment with the club. Signing Nonda really brought this home to me. The bloody Congo for God's sake. Dreamt of pulling on the Blue and White halves when he was kicking a rolled up sock around the streets of Brazzaville no doubt. And now he wants a contract because he loves Levers pies and shopping in Mill Hill. I bet his family send him food parcels. If Man Yoo can find room in their team for 3 or 4 Mancunians over the last few years, all of whom could have been replaced with better players, I don't see why we must be made up of mercenaries. How many of the current team will be writing a weekly column a la Garner, Keeley and Gallacher in 5 years time? I am convinced one of the reasons our crowds are dwindling is that many people don't really care how our imported buch of mercenaries do against other teams imported bunch of mercenaries.

A bit harsh to use that sign against yourself Roversmum I, unlike Vinjay, am fully aware that the Walkers don't own the club, so where's the relevance in Jack's daughter attending? Would that be the daughter who is married to Mr Matthewman? I would bloody well hope that a director and his missus turned up. My point was that the Trust had ownership imposed on them rather than them being positive, proactive owners. Most businesses that have distant, unwilling owners usually end up drifting.

I'm in two minds on this. I agree with USABlue that, from what we see on the telly over here, when he has come on he has, to use Mark Hughes's yardstick, made an impact. But then I also agree with Abbey - he's had over 50 chances on the pitch, so can someone please make their minds up and either play him regularly or sell him. Man Yoo give fringe players some bloody good runs in the team before keeping or selling, and I don't think they have less riding on games than we do. Give him ten full consecutive games and then he's in or out.

Totally agree. As usual, some interesting and humously made points (e.g. Man City being obsessed by Stockport vs Oldham) tend to be overshadowed by some ill-thought out lines of argument. But it's good for someone to be mentioning the elephant in our kitchen - we are owned by people who aren't interested enough to come and watch. I made it to the Bolton game, so where were they??? Abramovich made it up to Ewood on a crappy night to watch his team in their 4th priority competition. Bloody foreigners. Ahh, but who'd want to buy a provincial club with small crowds? See what a disaster it's been for Pompey with their new and more interested ownership?? On another thread, our Malta-based accountant tells us that after the new Sky deal kicks in, we will be among the 25 richest footy clubs in the world, yet the Pavlovian response to Vinjay's argument is we're too small! Let him back, and use 'ignore' if he bothers you that much. Anyway, back to wondering if PNE will come up....

I watched my recording of this last night (NTSC I'm afraid Bellamy11) Several things struck me about the game: i) I had forgotten just how much we dominated the first half - could easily have gone in 4-1 up. ii) Tim Flowers save from Beardsley was the best save I have ever seen given the circumstances. How this man didn't get voted into our all-time team I'll never know. iii) Most of all, the game was a rude awakening as to how much I despise the modern game. Not one instance of a player diving, faking injury, gobbing off at the ref. Offsides was offside. Plenty of players I actually knew something about. A ref who didn't hog the limelight (Philip Don) And of course a raucous crowd sans drummers. Today's game is crap by comparison. iv) I thought only the Admiral of today's squad would get into our team that night - just imagine him and Hendry together. I thought about Savage for Batty (who was pants that night), but his disappearing act after a booking would have killed us.

I don't buy your numbers old boy. Last season we had 18,000 for the game with at least 2,000 from Bolton; that leaves 16,000 from B'Burn. Given the further declines seen this year, we'd have been lucky to see 15,000 at A+ prices IMO. That would have left more like 2,000 home fans paying versus 7,000, compared to current trend, who turned up on saturday. Many poster said repeatedly that NO-ONE extra would turn up if prices were lowered. Who knows what would happen at 15 quid for every game next season, plus other schemes to put bums on seats for the less glamourous matches, it's never been tried? A+++ pricing however has been tried and has turned the ground into an embarrassing morgue that will not attract fans, sponsors, corporate guests or live match fees. It's the entire revenue stream of 30m+ that would suffer under your plan to fleece the dwindling band of loyal diehards.

Much to my surprise, as they had been season ticket holders for yonks (I stood with them in the Plymouth 5-2 epic) I met my two cousins outside the ground who informed me that this was their first game for over 2 years - citing cost - and it was only the 15 quid offer that had got them down. Personally, I thought the game was terrific value for money - where else can you get such an emotional roller coaster for 15 quid? However, given that most games are not that intense, I would blanche at paying double that price for half the entertainment on a regular basis. Not because I don't have the money, but because the typical game doesn't give enough value. Also, will all the posters who have spent the last year saying that prices don't impact attendances please recant now. I reckon the club must have taken around 40% more on the gate than last year.

My first live game for nearly 2 years and I have to say I thought we were excellent for most of the game; as good football as I've seen since the 94/95 side at times. A couple of points not brought out so far: - while Neill's marking was beyond belief, am I alone in thinking that a keeper should be coming for corners 5 yards out in the middle of the goal? Freidal is a great shot-stopper, but his inability to dominate his 6 yard box frustrates me. - Pederson was far worse than I had seen on highlights so far this season. I will be shocked if Hughes doesn't bench him by next week. - Apart from the penalties, Benny, Nonda and Roberts are all excellent in my opinion. And to think only 2 years ago, our number 1 striker was @#/?! - Bert and Bentley make a fearsome combination down the right. I was one of Bert's biggest critics as a winger, but what a revalation, I thought he was a joy to watch

Not good enough from Brad to let a corner drift along the edge of the 6 yard box. No man on the back post. Poor goal.

Comical defending by Liverpool for our goal, though I do say McCarthy makes all his goals look easy. Everyone seems to be playing well, but I too would feel better if Neill got closer to Pennant.

0-0

Just over 7,000 miles. I had to come over sometime or other, so the half-price did influence the timing to take in this game. I'd much rather watcha rip-roaring derby in a near full house than take in an away game darn saaf, which was the original plan. The price is also compelling my brother and his kids to trek over from York (all season ticket holders post the JW revolution until they moved), so it'll be a full turnout by the EiT clan together with my old dad in the JW Upper. As I was the only family attendee in the dark days of the third division, our 500% increase in support will be comfortably above the total increase experienced by the club! Au contraire. Last year only 18,000 odd turned up, of whom c13,000 didn't pay anything on the day. Let's assume the 5,000 all paid full price (wrong I know, but we don't have the figures) and the club will have taken 150,000 quid. Let's also assume this year everyone pays full price of 15quid, so 150,000/15 = 10,000 walk-ons required to breakeven. 10,000 + 13,000 ST holders =23,000. Not counting increased programme/beer/pie sales, plus the added benefit of a better match experience to tempt people back sooner than they otherwise would have done. Most of the matchday costs are fixed; a few extra stewards and bobbies, so I think it is a racing certainty Rovers will make more money from this game than the corresponding fixture last year.

Well I'll be doing my bit by attending

For sure this will be the acid test, assuming they generate awareness with the public of both towns, which I'm sure they will. But of course the key thing with initiatives such as this is for the club to define beforehand measures of success. Cash on the day may not be too different to last year, but a full house brings more benefits if it can be repeated. It's good to see the club are rethinking their current approach, laudable though it was to try summat new. Squeezing as much money as possible from previously loyal customers is almost always a cash-positive move in the short-term. But most businesses don't do it as it usually initiates a spiral of death. Anything under 25,000, which is what the fixture attracted in the third division, would be a major disappointment.

Perhaps the best comparison, not that we are privy to the numbers to make it, would be the gate revenue received this game versus the same fixture last year, which is bound to be down substantially as the number of people paying on the day was down by around 40%. I see the logic in bumping up prices for when the visitors are a) full of famous stars, and/or bring a huge following, but I think the new strategy for this year had been over-zealously applied. Personally, if Man City, Everton or Wigan were playing on my back lawn, I'd shut the curtains. And I suspect their fans view a trip to Blackburn as something less than a grand day out as well. By all means charge Man U, Chelsea and Liverpool at 35 quid and accept a less than full house, but Wigan is not a premium game for Rovers fans, nor is Blackburn for Wigan.

1-0 Rovers

3-0 Rovers

Implement it next close season and let this seasons ticket holders have theirs for 8 quid; it'll only cost another 500k, peanuts compared to the total income that is at stake. That's because I believe executive management is ultimately about results, not trying hard or difficult conditions passing for excuses. The City gate would seem to suggest that the home support is now down to around 15,000, a figure none of us would have believed when I first began questioning JW's track record. The ship is sinking and short term milking strategies are just making it worse.

BA probably said the same about the price of airline seats before Ryanair and Easyjet found new markets through radical pricing strategies. Continuing on the current course will kill us faster than we can imagine. Ewood will reach a tipping point where no-one - fans, corporate sponsors, TV cameras and good players - will want to come because its a graveyard. The risk with radical reductions in ticket pricing is small in comparison. Even if we lost half our gate income, that's less than 10% of current turnover, something a competent CEO should be able to weather....

Everyone on here seems to assume that the only measure of success for increasing attendances is the direct gate revenue. I was trying to point out that, since gate revenue is a lowly third in our sources of income, that perhaps the club should view Ewood attendances in a broader perspective, and that other sources of income might be indirectly linked to the attendance level. If every seat for every game was a tenner and we sold out every week, the gate revenue would be 5.7 million - no change to what it is now. But on average I would argue that we would win more games thus finishing higher, be on telly more, and sell more of those embarrassingly empty executive boxes, and be much better off overall. I have often read on here that 'lower prices don't work', but we don't know that. We only know that random and infrequently applied lower prices for the most unatttractive fixtures don't seem to work. But is that a surprise? Football watching is a habit that needs to be built. A tenner to watch Fulham amidst a sea of 35 quids to watch Everton and Man City makes no sense at all as a pricing strategy when the ground is 40% empty. But anyway, it doesn't matter if I have any ideas or not. It is clear that JW doesn't have good any ideas either. At least me not having any ideas doesn't cost the club 250k a year in salary.

3-0 Boro

The policy is indeed failing, and it is also badly flawed. We make peanuts from visiting fans when set against the money from league placing, TV appearances and corporate, all of which could well suffer much more as the stadium becomes increasingly empty. If the crowd is worth a goal, we're going to be 1-0 down at the start; TV doesn't want to show empty stadiums; and the corporate crowd will soon need amplifiers on their external noise dial, if they are still interested in bringing their clients to a morgue. By attempting to cash in on the supposed price inelasticity of visiting fans, the entire income stream is being risked. And please don't give me the 'if you can think of something better, e-mail JW' He gets paid a fortune for thinking himself.

4-2 Rovers

Exactly, I feel ill now. I'd forgotten how woeful our defending was that day.

Fair do's to Gayle - he did score two good goals that gave us a chance anyway, his second was a cracker. Was a miserable penalty though. I listened to the 2nd leg on the radio - as mentioned before by someone else, it gave me an aversion to radio footy that has lasted to this day. And Courtney did pay us back with interest at Wembley, so hard to hold a permanent grudge there. I also think it would have been a disaster had we actually gone up; a Burnley-esque plummet could well have followed.