wilsdenrover

There’s absolutely no point refs booking ‘keepers for time wasting if they’re not prepared to then give them a second one.

Only been at Brighton since January.

Beadle - Brighton Hinshelwood - Brighton Quansah - Liverpool Cresswell - Toulouse Livramento - Newcastle Hutchinson - Ipswich Scott - Bournemouth Anderson - Forest Elliott - Liverpool Mcatee - Man City Stansfield - Birmingham

Set your expectations lower. You’ll probably still end up disappointed but it won’t feel so bad.

I know this was a rhetorical question but I can’t say I love modern football one little bit.

I don’t think so as any training compensation and solidarity payments due under FIFA regulations only covers transfers up to the calendar year in which a player turns 23. If he’d moved last year (or earlier) we’d have been due a (small) percentage of the fee.

Football has fans not audiences (or it used to anyway).

Two reasons it will be a pile of shit… There are no interviewers with the ability to ask any real questions - it will be a load of nonsense like ‘I guess you’re disappointed to be subbed?’ Player media training means any answer given will be what they’ve been told to say not what they really think. Because of this, every interview will end up also most identical in its content. In the meantime, instead of witnessing this, we could have been (outrageous thought I know) been continuing to watch the match.

Be a shame if fans were to start swearing loudly during the interviews…

We’d be the one in lane 2:

When does this list get butchered by the TV companies?

I think they truly believe they can recuperate all their losses through being promoted. Whether they would or wouldn’t is open to debate, but we’re unlikely to find out unless they stop sabotaging (whether deliberately or through incompetence) our chances of a return to the top flight.

I admire your optimism 😁

I don’t know when it is because, as much as I’ve tried, I can’t find information anywhere confirming a date or whether one has even been set yet. In terms of what it is - as far as I understand it: * The Directorate of Enforcement have made their complaint (confirmed in last court order) to the Adjudicating Authority - in other words they believe their investigation has revealed a case to be answered. * The Adjudicating Authority (could be one person or multiple peoples) will hold an inquiry, looking at the evidence, allowing the Venkys to defend themselves etc. * They will then either be found guilty and a fine issued or they will be found innocent and the matter will be brought to a close** ** Both parties have a right of appeal and a right to appeal that appeal. In terms of the anticipated outcome, I think someone said the DoE has a 95% success rate. In terms of the fine, this can be anything up to three times the amount of the monies sent in contravention of the rules. I hope this helps.

Maybe things will change now the investigation has reached the adjudicating phase - or maybe this is something else which will drag on and on and on* * The investigation itself started in 2021…

Get your mind out the gutter 😁😁

As I’ve nothing better to do 😁, I’ve had another read of the court order dated 23/6/2023 which sets out Venkys’ argument… They appear to be saying (because of the timing of their investment) the 2004 FEMA Regulations are relevant (not the 2022 ones). Under the 2004 Regs they’d need permission (due to the investigation) from the bank to send funds - something the bank had been happy to provide. Under the 2022 Regs they need permission from the Directorate of Enforcement - something the DoE are unwilling to give. This argument is yet to be fully considered in court… What has happened is - the £3.54 million being approved as an interim measure + A series of separate applications either requesting permission to send further funds or to vary the conditions required to do so. An absolute shitload of adjournments.

Southend are playing Cardiff and St Mirren are playing MK Dons at the same stadium so there’s no guarantee our matches will be against Spanish teams.

12pm

It’s not our first rodeo.

I wonder what sort of take up they’ll have for these 🙄 https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2025/june/25/2025-26-etc-trial-dates-announced/ Oh and ‘changes in structure’ - that’s one way of putting it. https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2025/june/25/rovers-women-trial-dates-confirmed/ ‘Begin a new journey’ - what an absolute piss take.

I’ve no particular issue with four senior centre backs and then relying on youngsters. It was the club who suggested (by seeking a left footed CB and to retain Batth) they didn’t think four is enough.

I’d forgotten that one! We can’t be blocking those (dare I say cheaper) youngsters with better, more experienced players can we.

Based on that article: We wanted to sign a left sided CB and for Batth to stay but now we’d be happy with signing the first but relying on a youngster in place of the latter. A right winger is a priority so Weinmann not staying doesn’t alter our plans. Re the first - presumably the club are happy for our defence to be weakened then - if not why, does it appear we’re not pursuing a Batth replacement? Re the second - if Weinmann leaving doesn’t alter our plans what were we going to do with him if he stayed?? Everyday there are more questions than answers.

I’m going to do some more speculating here. The £26 million was requested (as evidenced in order of 7/6/23) for Venkys London Ltd, Venkys Overseas Limited and Venkateshwara London Limited - but with no details as to proportions. The Order dated 31/10/23 then tells us this £26 million was to cover their commitments for the year 23-24 (suggesting ‘payment in advance’) Venkys Overseas Limited is the company which they claimed was for rearing of ducks etc (source - Directorate of Enforcement press release 2/9/23) As you know, Venkateshwara London Limited own the training ground - I’d postulate some of that £26 million was to enable them to pay instalments due (to the club) on the purchase of this. The fact they then took out the loan against the training ground (I think someone may have suggested £9 million?) possibly supports this. In October ‘23 the next £11 million was requested - the breakdown in the relevant order (31/10/23) indicates this was also for 23-24 commitments (which I’d suggest makes this part of the initial £26 million) £3.54 million sent + £11 million sent + £9 million loan on training ground = £23.54 million (not far off - maybe the remainder was for rearing more chickens🤔 * ) * Despite the aforementioned DoE press release stating no business activity being initiated in the eleven years since Venkys Overseas was incorporated 🧐🤨 (nothing dodgy in trying to send more funds to them then…) I’ve made a few assumptions along the way there so I might be spot on but equally I could be entirely wrong!! Edited to add an additional thought… The £15 million in March ‘24 could be the payment in advance for 24-25. Is this figure lower than the year before because of Adam Wharton…