Bookies refusing to take bets.

In fairness to Sharpe, it's clear from the interview with Mowbray last week that he has been asking him questions Mogga doesn't like lately. It was a very defensive interview in which he pointed the finger pretty directly at Sharpe for having the temerity to ask questions about his decisions. He is far from a terrier of a journalist, but from that and some of the language he chooses in his articles sometimes, I'm pretty sure he is on the cynic side of the bridge right now. Just probably being careful of losing the LT their occasionally exclusive access.

I think the reason they haven't been crowing about digital plans is they simply don't have any to show, Chaddy. I'd save yourself the wasted anticipation of seeing them. It's clear they wanted to sneak this under the radar, at least for the time being.

Basically, yes.

Ok so, I'm not going to read the full plans. But I'm curious about them and others say they've read them. It barely seems to have been touched on through this discussion, which has centred over other issues around it, but I'd really like to know... So sure, I'm being lazy, but could someone who has read the plans give some kind of breakdown of what facilities are proposed for the new site? Ideally contrasted to what facilities are already in place on the old site (or maybe yet another person may be able to give that). I think it would be nice to have a sense of what actual facilities we stand to gain and which we stand to lose. I'm not really interested in how shiny the new building is, and only a little interested in players/staff per square metre. I'd much prefer to know the bread and butter to get a sense if it's an upgrade or a downgrade. Obviously with the regime's track record I expect a downgrade. If someone is capable of giving that breakdown so there's something tangible to assess beyond the asset reduction and legacy debates, I'd be vastly appreciative. I appreciate the plans may still be vague in some areas.

Got to admit, the training on Ewood thing made zero sense to me, but now with this announcement some dots connect as you say, whether rightly or not.

Stinks to the high heavens that one, and a recurrence of the notion here stinks even more. How was that kind of conflict of interest not illegal?

Without a journey? How is that possible?

Probably gonna hire half of the reduced site out as a leisure centre.....

On what basis though are you giving them the benefit of the doubt? In light of what happened at Coventry with 3 of the same key personnel. Asking, not having a go.

Yeh ok but what's your opinion on Mowbray's luck though?

Although he was never the quickest, I think he does look a little slower and fades more easily. Unclear yet on whether that's just not being match sharp again yet or if this is as good as he is gonna get physically now.

The Coventry thing also shows Waggott has form for not firing TM during horrendous runs, once with them, once with us (I mean more than once with us kinda, but like really HORRENDOUS runs that no other manager on Earth would usually survive). Tony had to walk at Coventry, may get to the same point here.

Not sure if someone else has posted this yet, but we actually lost 4 in a row in 2019 under Mowbray. Brentford, Bristol, Reading, Boro. Then we drew, Brum. Then we lost two more (Rotherham, Preston). Then we won! Then we lost three more. I know he survived it last time, but surely to god a similar run now would see him gone? Right? Right?

Judging from the join date and number of followers, that Twitter account is about as active as mine. I check mine about twice a year.

Can't help but notice from the highlights the pitch our u23s played on (Leyland is it?) is in much better nick than ours. I know it's not ours but couldn't we have paid a small fee to train on that instead? Or hell, even play on it.....

He has been interviewed one way or another though, as we have quotes. My point is don't do any sort of interview if he can't take being asked questions about his decisions.

You might think you're performance related Tony, but we are results related and we'd like you to fuck off now. As if results aren't a part of performance anyway. We have played like that most weeks, and here we are with several less points than at this stage last season! Obviously you're wrong Tony! Nearly every time we have the possession we dick it up.

And this! It seems like he is saying he picked him because of fan pressure (which is only felt online right now anyway), even though the fan pressure was only there because he refused to give any explanation about why he was dropped!!

People would love to stop the manager managing right now and with good reason. It's a ridiculously defensive response to people wondering why our best RB wasn't playing, especially when you answer it with 'no reason'. If it was for his tired legs to be given a break, just fucking say that! If you think nobody has a right to ask any questions about anything you're doing, don't do any fucking interviews!!

It wasn't. He anticipated the danger and got into the right spot to deal with it. He didn't just happen to be standing there.

Yeh he sure didn't anticipate that goal line block he did in the first half.........

Has anybody come up with some logical bullshit for why Armstrong is captain today and not, say, Travis?

“How is his progression? I still think he’s got lots of growth still left in him. If he wants to be a top player then he’s got to keep the work ethic going, develop his game.” There is absolutely nothing wrong with Ryan Nyambe's work ethic. One of the absolute best at the club for it. I know technically TM could be interpreted as only saying his current work ethic needs to continue, but reading between the lines of TM's general treatment and comments about Nyambe, that's not the interpretation I'm seeing here.

Ok, I can't find that term in the full statement he was posting either though. Is there another statement?