Mattyblue

That new fangled thing called ‘YouTube’.

Well, that worked out well, didn’t it. Maybe there’s a bit more too it than arranging buses for school kids.

One of the few ‘successes’ of recent years when it comes to Ewood is a Blackburn End lower that was pretty full most weeks (obviously by just concertina-ing the remaining fans into camera facing areas, I.e BB Lower and JW, but still) … so of course they’ve put a sledgehammer to that too.

How very 2021.

What would a Bored Ape Rovers edition have gone for?

Yes, a comparison to the games either side of it seems a fair enough barometer.

Why would a club run by administrators (I.e their whole remit is to rescue the business) instruct tickets in just one stand to be taken off sale nearly a week before the game. Of course it’s a Rovers decision.

6,000 people is not a success when there wasn’t much more that in the ground on Saturday.

End of the day we’ll see in a year or so time if it was effective and if it was a first step of anything in particular.

No corners here, total open mind. I’ve already said, I expect c6,000, no different than Oxford. If it’s c3/4k then definitely a success.

That’s the stuff!

Ive already said. What the Coalition did last season to smoke the three stooges out their foxhole was excellent, plus use FOI through Lancs Police to get the fact a ‘boycott’ is already underway into the press. 6,000 people at a league game for Blackburn Rovers. A club that had an average crowd of 25,000 as these owners bought the club. There’s your story right there and will have just as much national media interest as this non-boycott will have, *plus* keeps match goers onside. As at the moment the only people winning with this are the regime as the fanbase is well and truly divided again.

…and they won’t do that either as Saturday showed.

Exactly, Paul. Nothing will happen v Watford that isn’t happening already. But if you want to call it ‘official’ now, fine. Still don’t see why none of this couldn’t have been achieved through an FOI police request and a media campaign, which would have kept the remaining match goers in the tent. Like I said brfcs-ers and The Coalition don’t understand the actual reality of where the fans in the ground are. But crack on

No Rev I interviewed every fan on the way in on Saturday 🙄 It’s called ‘anecdotal’. I am telling you now that 5/6,000 people at least will be in the ground, ergo it can’t be deemed a success as a ‘boycott’. Like I said if that doesn’t matter as it’s all part of a bigger campaign, then fine (which of course begs the question, why do it at all and not focus on other things that do work in and of themselves)

And you’ve repeatedly said how it’s a good idea when the evidence of actual fans that still go says the exact opposite. Protesting by numbers instead of thinking what will actually work. But if we don’t actually need boycotting fans for a boycott to be a success as we’ll actually judge it on having a few weeks of an odd press article before the media moves on, then fine.

How is it ‘irrelevant’ to say that a boycott that doesn’t have a sizeable number of match goers boycotting isn’t much cop? Campaigns, whatever the cause are about hearts and minds and bringing people with you, if this boycott doesn’t grab said hearts and minds of the very people it is supposed to - I.e the folk being asked not to attend, then this part of the campaign is a failure.

As a tactic has it worked elsewhere? Yes. Would these owners care? I’m highly dubious going off their track record, but who really knows, so it’s a start. Will a high percentage of the remaining match goers go for it? In my opinion, no. Point three is therefore the issue. The Coalition and this forum are coming from a position of where they are and where they think the match goers also should be, not where they *actually* are. Of course it’s only one game, of course it’s for the greater good, but if the majority of those still attending Ewood don’t see it that way and to them ‘regardless of owners you still go and get behind the team’ and yes, ‘who’s this lot telling me what to do?’ then it will ultimately fall on it’s arse as a campaign.

Glenn too! Ste B still goes, I think (but I spotted that he’d moved to the other side of the Blackburn End a couple of years ago, so would need confirming)…

Gets some media attention for a little bit, fair enough. That Daniel Storey article was very good. But of course the media cycle moves on in a week or two and as the regime will have just stayed in their submarine till it dies down they’ll just shrug it off. The ‘official boycott’ on its own terms will do nothing a savvy media campaign would do anyway - like we saw last season with the three stooges in their hostage video - but what it has done has lost the Coalition a lot of ground with the majority of match goers, which is kind of the opposite of what they were aiming for.

It’s going to be ‘officially’ tried, but c6,000 will still be in the ground, not a million miles off what we’ve seen in the past couple of months anyway. So what are we getting from it over and above what has already been happening?

Social media is the Wild West, obviously the crux of the whole thing is getting a critical mass of that 9,000 or so that will (actually) attend for a 3pm Saturday game to not do so. Does the Coalition still think that will happen? As I have very big doubts after the conversations I had on Saturday and since.

What’s still to cut? Cut the wage bill further (Cantwell? get shut of those wages), close the Riverside, downgrade the Academy, have another go at putting houses on Brockhall, loads to go at.

Alarm bells with who? Still plenty of cut backs to be made yet.

Been a couple more in The Times/Sunday Times too recently in a similar, ‘Christ, how good is this lad?’ vein. Still, least we got a similar fee to Tyler Morton and only ten million behind Jobe.