I'm normally quite supportive of the manager/club relenting to a player when they want away. But I will be very disappointed if the club let Benni go. I'm mostly supportive of Allardyce, but he's made a mistake with his handling up until this point, in so far as he's almost encouraged clubs to come in for Benni. I'd be especially cricitcal of Sam if he lets Benni go on the cheap, because of the following.

Sure there is a risk that we'll being paying wages for a player who we cannot play, but it is a calculated risk. As another post has stated it, Benni will be desperate to stay in the World Cup frame. If we refuse to sell it would seem likely that at some point, he'll "come to". He'll realise that he'll have to make or break, so to speak, at Rovers.

Even if he doesn't "come to", is selected for SA and has a decent World Cup anyway, we can sell him in what's left of the window before next season.

Unfortunately, we cannot take the slight risk of Benni calling our bluff and refusing to focus on his football with Rovers. That means we will have to take the double whammy on cost and actually bring in a replacement for him in this window anyway. I hope the club are strong willed enough to take this financial risk, but I can understand if they relent and offload.

Was mentioned a couple of weeks ago - he had an injury which I believe would take a few weeks to clear.

Thanks roversmum :-)

Anyone know why Derbyshire didn't play for Olympiakos??? Is he injured, or dropped by the new coach?

EDIT

I should say, he wasn't even in the squad according to http://www.skysports.com/football/match_fa...3190164,00.html

First of all, I too would like to express my appreciation of Hughes tenure.

However, I posted on the next manager thread that either Hughes wanted to speak with City to coax Chelsea to chase him, or he was not as ambitious as being made out, and he was not ready for the Chelsea job, and the City deal seemed a good way to avert having to reject Chelsea.

Well, now that he has gone to City, I'd like to express my feelings on Hughes supposed ambitions. IMO, the Chelsea job would be impossible to refuse for any manager at a similar stage in their careers as Hughes. They have a strong squad, just missing out on two major titles. If you believe yourself to be an even slightly better manager than Avram Grant, you would think it possible to take them one step further. At worst, you don't, and you get heavily compensated for your failure when Chelsea pay out your contract.

So, given all the speculation that Chelsea were considering Hughes, it has to be asked why Hughes jumped at the City chance, instead of stalling or perhaps risking City's offer waiting for Chelsea. That tells me one of two things:

a) Hughes is ambitious enough to have taken the Chelsea job if it was offered. However, he didn't really believe himself to be in with a chance.

This would apply even if a perhaps unreported approach by Chelsea was knocked back by Hughes, his haste to take the City job tells me that his ambitions are not yet as lofty as managing a top four club.

Anyway I read how the situations played out, I really get the impression of . Reports were that Hughes and Ancelloti were the last remaining candidates on the short list. Given that Ancelloti seems well out of Chelsea reach, stating he didn't want the job, I really can't believe that as in a), Hughes didn't believe himself a chance. He must have preferred City to Chelsea. It's a cop out really.

Anyway, good luck to you Hughesy. I don't mind you finish your team above Rovers next season, so long as Rovers have finished no lower than 7th again, and your team has replaced one of those most despised "top four" clubs.

Sorry, I felt like being naughty. Couldn't find anything I wrote as I don't think I was on board at the time. I think my choices were 1. Strachan 2. Dowie 3. Hughes. And there was not much between them. Surprised at USABlue's hostility at the time.

Just picked up on this. I put my hands up. I was completely wrong. Am happy with Hughes, and have been pretty much soon after he joined.

Felt sorry for Nonda when he horribly skied that shot on Saturday, I've a feeling thats the last we've seen of Shabani, although he's hardly played this second half of the season and still managed 8 goals. I for one will niss Nonda, hes just had a terrible time with injuries, and that injury in 2004 has clearly destroyed a once brilliant player, this season as well he's missed alot of games through little injuries.

I don't see the big deal with that miss really. He'd just come on, and has had little to no time on the pitch. Bit harsh to judge him on 5-10 mins that he was on (he was on for that little wasn't he?).

Why on earth would that comment make you so angry?

Disillusionment with the sheer negativity of the comments that get posted. My fault... I'll take a hiatus away from this message board. Hopefully this thread will be dead and buried by the time I come back. Later.

I don't blame Neill for doing what he has done, but don't try and not see it how it is.

(Please don't use that word again) off and don't tell me how to try to see it.

What surprises me about this whole saga is how quick a lot of Rovers supporters have been to criticise Neill for choosing West Ham over Liverpool, whilst totally missing Liverpool's sheer arrogance in the whole thing.

They wanted to screw MH over the transfer fee... and having tried to pull a fast one that would have given them extra money to entice Neill with wages, offered him what I consider would be a comparatively (to the rest of the Liverpool back line) measly 30k a week.

Anyone care to speculate how much Liverpool would have offered if Lucas had been playing for one of the media darlings?

Furthermore, and although Neill was in a win situation too, I consider it a last act of compassion that he chose the club willing to pay a reasonable transfer. To this end, I equate it much with Souness going to Newcastle when the writing was on the Ewood Park walls that his tenure was coming to an end.

If it's accurate it is absolutely astonishing that West Ham have written it in. Surely the kind of players they are looking for are ones who are absolutely behind the cause.

One of the biggest problems a relegated team faces is cutting back on player wages. If they are getting Neill fairly cheap, in terms of transfer, they've little to lose if they are relegated and 50k a week Neill relieves them of that wage commitment.

Has anyone stopped to think that perhaps West Ham want to put in the relegation clause?

I knew I should have waited until after reading the entire thread to make the above post.

A quick trawl through the archives revealed the following:

LET 05/09:

ROVERS PREPARE NEW NEILL DEAL

John Williams: "It's still our intention that Lucas will sign a new contract with us and we will be presenting him with a new variation shortly."

"He did turn our first offer down before the World Cup but we will be offering him an improved version."

LET 13/10:

NEW NEILL DEAL PUT ON THE TABLE

Mark Hughes: "We've offered him a new contract and it's gone off this week."

Sounds daft but doesn't completely contradict what Mark Hughes said in the article of 13/10 above.

He went on to say something about "He won't have seen it yet"

I'm sure JW/MH/and LN must have spoken since though!

Spot on RB. I am very much an admirer of Lucas, but I have to say, I simply do not believe him. Unless there is a complete breakdown of communication between Hughes and him, either one of them had cause to question the going ons of the board and the agent.

Very simple really. Something along the lines of:

LN: You said an new contract went of last week. Why have I not yet seen it? (calling Hughes integrity into question)

MH: The board assured me they sent it. I'll ask them again. In the mean-time, you get onto your agent.

The only possibility is that perhaps they consider the "new contract", same as the previous contract offer... in which case Neill is being disingenious.

Regardless of all this, I don't think he should be jeered.

I've done my research.

Vinjay posted this, jumping to the Chelsea manager's defense, and deriding Rovers in comparison.

My response at the time.

As much as it is others to criticise this post, it is my right to say that Vinjay is not a genuine Rovers supporter. I vaguely recall one particular post where he/she all but gave him/herself up.

Some posts indicating that the poster wants Gray out of the Man Utd match.

Personally, I am looking forward to Gray coming up against Rooney again Seriously

Bob, your endings need a bit of work

Letting Shay Given leave was one of the worst transfer decisions Rovers have ever made.

I thought he demanded the transfer?

wanted to play for his childhood heroes I guess we could never stand in his way if the mighty Sydney Olympic came a'courting!

Your knowledge of football extends to the New South Wales Premier League? Or did you actually mean Sydney FC?

It seems as if the whole planet searches 'YouTube' at the moment, and occasionally you watch a clip that leaves you open mouthed.

Powerful stuff here

AS, I found the footage, but more specifically, John Helm's commentary, morbidly compelling. What's John Helm like? I tried to dig up a photo, and some type of biography of his career. Other than a few paragraphs on wikipedia, there is not much.

What's his story? Is he celebrity shy? Does he give interviews? Do punditry?

Oh, and he reinstated Darren Peacock in his first game as manager "because he'd heard of him" rather than waiting until he'd seen the team play. That was indicative of how I knew he'd be as a manager.

What the bloody hell are you talking about? You seem to hold on to the pettiest grudges of all time.

He'd just taken over a team that was in a fair bit of disarray... he needed to evaluate his squad, especially senior members. What else would you have him do?

I'm glad he evaluated Peacock early doors, and saw fit to get rid, rather than have him be in the squad weighing us down. Souness did a good job of clearing out the dead-wood at the start of his management spell.

Found this:

FIFA laws of the game

"Law 11 - Offside

Offside position

It is not an offence in itself to be in an offside position.

A player is in an offside position if:

* he is nearer to his opponents’ goal line than both the ball and the second last opponent "

Brilliant den

Hah, well I could not resist, I had to see him in action and as I thought originally if it does not work leave it alone. But NO I googled I downloaded and it still does the same thing. Now I sit with total apprehension, what did I down load exactly. Oh to have grown up in the nerdy age.

USABlue, you've got to download and install DivX to view this video. After doing so, you will be able to view in Windows Media Player as well.

A very proper thing to do from Manchester City:

Man City hand Thatcher ban & fine

What difference does it all make?

Had Mido said that he would not come to Blackburn because it wasn't a big enough club, instantly most Rovers supporters would be equally as angry as this apparent dishonesty.

What I suggest you, Rover The Moon, are really angry about is his right to form his own opinions.

Not having a go at you, I don't know your age, but continuing on the thread of the discussion... as you age, you notice the many irony of youth. The most obvious being that as a youth, your capacity for learning is at its greatest, but the nouse to capatilise mostly not there.

Back on the thread, the other is that youth are always protesting and asserting their right to form their own opinions... but in my experience, many young people have real problems accepting others rights to form opinions.

Just a thought of the day. Summing up, if Mido doesn't rate our club, then he is merely ignorant.

This is a little random.

1. Liverpool

2. Chelsea

3. Arsenal

4. Man Utd

5. Tottenham

6. Newcastle

7. Everton

8. Fulham

9. Charlton

10. Blackburn

11. West Ham

12. Aston Villa

13. Middlesborough

14. Reading

15. Bolton

16. Portsmouth

17. Manchester City

18. Watford

19. Sheffield Utd.

20. Wigan

-->

OH! You've got to let him back on now. Please let us have our fun