The accompanying advertising for this bright pink offering reads "Be brave, be bold be Blackburn". Surely no-one is naive enough to think there is not an attempt to send a message out with this kit.

This is spot on as well. All that said we're down to a sudden death game, we have an extremely talented squad of players, and as the old cliche goes "Anything can happen in a one off game". As with previous tournaments it may come down to fine margins and a lot will probably depend on how proactive Southgate is and how good his in game management is on the night.

Absolutely spot on.

Whilst I usually like pink clothing I don't like this strip - in combination with the gist of the advertising it's a rather cack handed attempt at being Woke. A definite no from me. Will stick to the home shirt - if We've any left that is.

Reading upside downs explanation of the NOC I thought exactly the same. Waggott glibly claiming that future Court Hearings should be a formality as "a precedent" had been set by a transfer of funds being allowed once and various other Club statements since insinuating that the financial issues were close to resolution are misleading at best and a downright lie at worst. Maybe as someone (Wilesden Rover?) suggested these positive noises are for the benefit of our Creditors as much as anyone else.

CHOOSING not to ''cos of the bond. Thanks.

Good to see you're still coming out with the comedy belters. As for saying Southgate should stay on that is ridiculously premature in advance of tomorrow night's game. He's won nothing at senior level ever and so far has blown great chances against Croatia in the World Cup and Italy in the last Euros. If we win Sunday night congratulations to him, he'll have proved me wrong that we'd never win anything with him in charge and I guess the FA would give him the option to stay on for the World Cup but for me he should be replaced either way, things have gone very stale this tournament albeit We've lucked our way to this stage. If we lose again then there should be no question whatsoever he should be replaced - that will be three tournaments wasted with a very good squad who were capable of winning them had the right man been at the helm.

I know the answers to one and three but am not sure I've seen a definitive answer as to whether they're choosing not to fund us or are not allowed unless I've missed it?

Absolutely. No way that was a penalty in a million years. Southgate must have a lucky horseshoe wedged a mile up his backside after Bellingham's worldie with 80 seconds to go against Slovakia and that penalty decision last night. Better to be a lucky manager than a good one? Let's hope our insanely good luck lasts for one more game. Imo we could do with changing Kane and Rice who I thought were both very disappointing last night but he probably won't change anything so we'll just have to hope for the best and that the players pull us out of the mire with a couple of individual moments like they've been doing all tournament.

My word. Prize for most ridiculous post ever made on this forum goes to............ Gave me a good laugh anyway. A glittering career in comedy awaits you.

What rubbish. We've completely fluked it to this stage, in the process winning only one game out of five against teams way below us in the rankings. The criticism aimed at Southgate has been fairly constructive in the main based on tactics and the way We've played. I've not seen any personal abuse of the sort aimed at the likes of Graham Taylor yet conversely Southgate however has turned into a right mard arse making out you're not allowed to criticise him and the players. If we'd played well and reached this stage everyone would have been falling over themselves to say how brilliant he was. I don't suppose he'd have been complaining then.

Will take that story with a pinch of salt but if true, then yeah, because obviously there's an Adam Wharton round every corner. Not.

Each to their own but I think the situation at the Club over the last 12 months or so has gone way beyond that where you adopting a stance of "Critical friend" is required. Is there anything specific to lead you to think there will be a change of ownership? Prior to the recent shift in the financial landscape I wouldn't necessarily have expected a change in my lifetime (I'm 60) and even now I think they may try to ride things out.

Devil's Advocate Mode: The training ground is SUPPOSED to be still owned by the Club for all intents and purposes, the transfer of the training ground was SUPPOSED to be an accounting tool to get round FFP requirements for that season due to money from the Armstrong? transfer coming in late. Guess we'll only know when the Club is sold which I'm still not convinced is imminently on the horizon. Have to agree though, the plan appears to be selling off all the assets and Waggott has been doing a passable job of running us into the ground ever since he walked through the door.

OK thanks. I had seen that before but it didn't really register properly. So £4m Instead of £1m on every £20m sent over? A £3m difference. Might be the crux of the matter.

I have it in the back of my mind from the PL days that the more glamorous Clubs charge a fee for their attendance at friendlies. I may be imagining that though.

That's all well and good but we'd be 27 goals down.

Is that something that came in as a blanket regulation in India non specific to Venkys and if so when did it come into force?

I mean I thought the reason Wharton was sold for tuppence ha'penny was that the Court hearing was adjourned. The fact the case was adjourned is not in dispute is it? However If as you claim they can't fund, and are given permission to do so by the Court in August, free of any stipulation to provide a supporting bond then any pretence they are willing and able to fund will be laid bare. Conversely if there is still a requirement for a supporting bond then there is no way of disproving what Jackson says and as far as we're concerned it's splitting hairs. Either way we don't get funded.

Good old chaddy. Chief Entertainments Officer on the Titanic.

Where has that come from?

Based on what? We seemingly cant even put forward attractive enough deals to persuade McFadzean and Fleck to re-sign! (Not that I'd be in favour of re-signing either personally and in particular I wouldn't touch Fleck with a barge pole but it shows just how low we are setting our sights)

Mike Graham will be gutted, didnt he say Fraser Read was "a credit to the Club" and we were "lucky to have him" ? We have so many "Heads" of different things I'm not sure if anyone individually can possibly be left with very much to do. We'll have a head of handing the pencils out and making sure they're safely returned at the end of the day soon. Not bad for a Club that seemingly can't afford to sign any players

Champions League players but a manager who bombed at Middlesbrough despite being heavily backed, getting them relegated from the PL then getting sacked whilst they were in the Championship. That's the problem.

Was it not stated in the FF minutes that a lift in one of the Executive Areas needed replacing? Seemingly can't afford any players but at least we have our priorities right.