Bayes can say more as he's with the BBC, who as a public organisation can't be cut off quite as easy at the LET.

If there's anything we can do on this, we're open to it. General thoughts off the top of my head: We can stream it on the forum, social channels (as well as yours to help reach)? We could make a user group, like subscribers, for 'WATR Member' and give people within that group access to a WATR questions/comment submission form? We can send alerts to members with the latest minutes from meetings? There's a lot we could do to help if it was wanted...

This is the crux of the matter. No protests will be successful without someone leading them. Saying that, I thought the match when there was protests against Waggott - can't remember which game it was - where very good. Some clear Waggott out songs, some big banners, he didn't come out from the owners box.

The answers to all three of these questions have been answered numerous times on this website - so i'm clear, are you saying you don't know the answer to all three?

It wasn’t you - it was the post you quoted that broke the rules. You’re all good!

Even if we did it isn’t enough to make the squad strong enough.

I’ve hidden the original post because it breaks the sites rules. HOWEVER, I wanted to post saying it’s easy to comment from the sidelines. I went to the WATR AGM meeting recently, a small turn out and honestly my unhappiness with the club was clearly in the minority. I didn’t really speak too much because it was clear my views on this club didn’t reflect the majority of the room. WATR have had space on their board for as long as I remember which they’ve struggled to fill until the latest AGM. WATR are having internal meetings and MOU meetings with the club. Thats a big commitment especially to those additionally working, raising a young family etc. One thing I’ve noticed - ever since the Action Group era - is there’s a lot of talkers and very few doers. A lot of people who say they’re willing to do something and ultimately, for whatever reason, never deliver.

It’s been explained before why I (and many others) think they refuse to sell. Within their portfolio Blackburn Rovers shows as an asset worth over £200M. The fact that money is owed to the owners means that selling it would be such a loss that it’s almost not worth doing whilst they can afford to run it on as little money as they are.

We’ll sign 3/4 players. They’ll just all be shite and frees or loans without significant fee.

I am astonished there’s fans that are only just understanding the severity of this. Many people on this forum, the 4,000 podcast and other resources have been explaining this in very simple terms for many months now.

Adam Wharton ensured his hometown football club didn't go bankrupt.

If they win the court case they get their bond back. If they lose the court case the bond is taken by the government. Speaks volumes about the chance of success in court if they'd not willing to put a bond in. If you ask me. Allegedly. In my opinion.

He said “the recruitment team know the parameters they’re working within” or something similar in that article.

Do you remember complaining the transfer thread was going off topic because people were discussing the women’s team on Tuesday..?

Reminder: Instant, non-negotiable bans will be issued for people talking politics, or other peoples politics, outside of the WDWY section.

I think its managed decline. This might be wrong and you're the perfect person to tell me otherwise, so please do, but its my understanding that the asset in their group shows (correct me if I'm wrong) as a ~£200M asset. The fact that the £200M+ is money the owe themselves doesn't change that? If so, I think they've totally given up on making any financial return on the club and totally given up on any on-field success and have now decided to try and get the club as cheap as possible to run to retain the asset at minimal cost.

Given the success both on and off the field of the women’s team, alongside the owners now having no restrictions on funding, why has the funding of the women’s team not increased to match the teams ambitions?

E-mail media@brfcs.com and someone from the team will give you the comment you need.

On that basis can anyone find a rationale for this decision that isn't one of the following: 1) Our Leadership - either owners, CEO or similar, do not value women's football and don't want to invest in it despite being able to do so. 2) Our Ownership or CEO does want to invest into Womens football, but the Indian Court Case restrictions mean they cannot - which conflicts with the messaging about no funding issues from Steve Waggott

And there we have it in black and white. Despite earning tens of millions of pounds in transfer fees including: Forcing a generational talent out of the door to keep the lights on Selling an incredibly well thought after centre half to Spurs The 4M pound sell on fee for a player we sold for 3M as he moves to the potential Premier League winners this season The training ground - Jack Walkers last legacy - sold which we now rent from our Indian Overlords. We have a 'limited' transfer budget. At the same time last seasons captain, Hyam, one of our few international players, Sigurdsson, our only striker, Gallagher and our most effective winger, Dolan all out of contract in 12 months and show no signs of renegotiating new deals. If you're going to come here and try to find positives, or talk about optimism, you're going to need to show some receipts. Because as I see it, there's absolutely nothing to be enthusiastic about in regards to this football clubs short term success. My money is on relegation.

I do love an passionate off-mod moment 😃

Are you sure?

Seems to differ from the EFL website: https://www.efl.com/governance/regulations/#heading-annex-1-profitability-and-sustainability-calculation that says it is excluded?

When did the FFP change happen, @Miller11? That is so counter productive to growing women’s football, I’m astounded that’s the decision the FA (?) have made.

It’s B. It’s always been B. It’s a bond to ensure if they lose the court case, they can’t say “we can’t pay it, we’ve already sent it and spent it”. Waggott is just extremely clever with his words and in the most part our fans are too poorly researched to question it.