Is there not a counter argument to that which runs along the lines of "No-one could possibly be that stupid"?

The rumours about all being not as it seems with Lowe's employment have been doing the rounds for years. Something definitely not right there. As for the suggestions coming out that Waggott is to some extent an innocent victim in this and isn't the main problem - I'd wager those are emanating from errrr.......Waggott. Technically, Pasha answers to Waggott and we've been hearing for a few seasons that Waggott's only a figurehead and will be retiring at the end of the season anyway blah blah and he never does and has recently taken a huge uplift in remuneration to boot - whilst other areas of the Club starve. At the very least, even if Pasha does has the final say or the owners' ear, Waggott goes along with it all and is complicit. They're ALL equally to blame.and need removing. Ultimately of course the blame lies with our absentee landlord owners for turning a blind eye and letting them all get away with it. Been happening the the majority of their regime under a sizeable selection of different shysters.

The three (four with Owen?) imbeciles running the Club have created a real problem by a) Appointing this guy in the first place. and b ) Giving him a three and a half year deal. Not one supporter would have picked him and I think it's clear even at this early stage that the players just aren't having him and it won't work. Probably not much point sacking him before the end of this season now but I'd hate to think he'd still be in charge for the first game of the next campaign. You could perhaps cut him some slack if we were playing well but not quite getting results but typically we're conceding the opening goal inside the first 5 mins and not even looking like scoring ourselves. If we continue at this rate next season we'll go down with about 8 points. Terrifying

Is that Boro's fans or ours advising Ismael he's getting sacked in the morning?

Wasnt very full to start with but the BBE has completely emptied second half.

Do we think we'll score another goal before the end of the season? Let alone win a game?

Naughty from Dolan there. We're witnessing a complete meltdown in morale, discipline, everything.

"Steve Waggott, you're a wanker, you're a wanker." Music to the ears.

Well we excelled ourselves tonight - couldn't even hold out for the usual 3 minutes. At kick off was explaining to the missus how we'd conceded early in every Ismael game. 45 seconds later the ball flew in right on cue. Edit: and now two! The players look like they're trying to get Ismael removed at this point.

On Ribeiro, he's OK, arguably better than Pickering but the real story behind the headline is that we will be weaker next season at LB as unsurprisingly we are making no effort whatsoever to sign Beck which is what a genuinely ambitious Club with aspirations should be doing.

Thank God.

Sorry the edit function isn't working for me.

I was wondering who on earthld have known! gave the thumbs down to me saying I loved the brilliant skit on "Who the **** is Alice." I should have known!

I know you're only sharing it in humorous vein but the clear difference is that Kendall was an up and coming new manager at the start of his managerial career and as such I suppose deserved a chance. This guy never has achieved much as a manager during his career in the first place and is clearly on the downgrade anyway. There's more chance of me winning Euromillions tonight than Ismael turning it round like Howard did!

the sort and that Wilesden probably cracked it when he said it might mean a lien being placed over other funds for an equivalent amount which could I suppose theoretically impact their liquidity, but still, they could send funds if they wanted to, they just don't want to. Save any bitching for the 3 stooges, not me.

I'm not arguing with you about it, Suhail said in the interview that there were now no problems sending money over due to the "interim measures" they'd taken which I presume was the judgment obtained and reproduced on here which stated that a "guarantee" had to be provided if money was sent. Despite claims that this entails them having to pay double I suspect it means nothing of

Love it! Can we get Chubby in to record it and then sing it at half time?

Please stop de-railing chaddy's arguments with facts.

100%.

If Chaddy is allowed to make an early snap decision on his prowess, then so am I. I'm not impressed. Bit of pace but clearly zero end product.

I am fully aware of the qualification in the accounts thank you very much. You are obviously the one that doesnt understand it. The qualification in the accounts is just auditors who are passing the accounts covering their arses. The qualification goes onto state that as money has been remitted previously a precedent has been set and on that basis they believe that the accounts can be signed off. Both Pasha and Waggott have said repeatedly there is no impediment to funding. Its probably the only thing Waggott's been honest about in years. In his wisdom he probably said that thinking it sounds better to say they "can" send money over as opposed to "the Court won't let them" I actually think it's far worse that "they can but simply don't want to" than if it were a case of "they'd like to but are prevented from doing so" but Waggott's obviously too thick to realise that.

I was busy Tuesday evening and couldn't bring myself to watch it yesterday, just listened and what a depressing half hour it was. (Tin hat on) never having heard from Suhail before I didn't know what to expect. He came across rather better than I was expecting. The other two though Christ - anyone who thinks Waggott isn't a major problem needs their bumps feeling. There's a saying I favour about politicians - "How do you know when a politician is lying? Their lips are moving" and Waggott falls firmly into this category. He's been lying for so long that I don't think he has any grasp of what's true and what's not anymore. Waggott and Gestede did a fair job of digging their own grave, however whilst it was satisfying watching them squirm a bit, a really independent and diligent interviewer could have completely buried them and planted a couple of flowers on top for good measure. Apologies if Im repeating points made elsewhere but key points I took: Suhail confirmed beyond doubt that there is no longer any impediment to owners funding the Club. Interviewer should have pressed him further on why, if that was the case, have they not been doing so. The obvious answer is they simply don't want to. Interestingly unlike in the past, there didn't seem to be any real resistance to the notion of the Club being sold. No- one is ever going to offer to pay off their debt though irrespective of whether you class the current debt as £200m or £300m so until they accept that, nothing will ever occur on that front. Waggott should have been pulled firmly up on his ludicrous claim that it's becoming more common for managers to move mid season. The interviewer should have asked him to specify when was the last time a manager moved at that stage of the season from a side in the play off positions to one in the relegation places. Also he should have been asked why, if it is now so commonplace for managers to move mid season, we put out such a vitriolic statement when he was allowed to speak to Derby, especially when we agreed to a rease clause in the first place! (They're so busy lying they can't even remember what they've said in the past and keep their story straight) Gestede should have been pulled up on his comment that once Eustace decided he'd like to speak to Derby, there was "nothing we could do". Should have been asked to specify if we made any attempt at all to keep him by offering him a new deal or agreeing to address his concerns on players contracts. Only we could describe a summer when we're set to lose at least ten players as "exciting". There seems to have been a deliberate attempt to destabilise the promising position Eustace got us into this season in favour of going on another never ending "journey" to nowhere and fictional "player development" which Gestede unfortunately seems fully invested in. The other worrying thing is how completely they seem to have gone all in on VI. The interviewer should have pressed Waggott much harder on what exactly were the KPI's that supposedly made him the outstanding candidate for the job after his recent failures. Having lauded him as something akin to the second coming in this interview you wonder if they're ever going to be brave enough to admit their mistake and pot him if as we all suspect he continues to tank.(We're not a sacking Club) Overall all though complete kudos to Glen and all involved for achieving so much in so short a space of time. As others have said it was slightly distasteful seeing these 3 charlatans lined up in the famous old Board Room like they were going to be shot for duties that they should gladly carry out from time to time as part of their normal role anyway. They clearly didn't enjoy it though so the pressure needs to be maintained and ramped up!

Spot on.

To be fair I think there are some terrific presenters and co presenters on TalkSport along with some terrible ones. Great ones Jeff Stelling, Danny Baker and his crew on Trans Euro express, Neil Custis and Henry Winter, Hawksbee and Jacobs, Perry Groves, Dean Saunders Adam Catterall who's from Blackburn and a big Rovers fan, I actually like Simon Jordan most of the time, and there's a DJ called Majestic who's on with Alan Pardew Sunday evening. Ally McCoist Adrian Durham and Charlie Baker are decent enough. Terrible ones Alan Brazil, Shebaghn O Hern, Max Rushden, Andy Goldstein and Darren Bent, Jason Cundy and Jamie O Hara with Jim White firmly bottom of the pile. How he-s carved out a career in the media, God only knows. If Glen or anyone from the group are reading this the lesson from today is "Pick your Presenter'. I would try and get a slot on any show hosted by Adam Catterall who's a huge Rovers fan. I think he might be on 10p.m . to 1a m. Friday night/Saturday morning. I wouldn't even chalk today up as a defeat. It was more of a damp squib. Anyone neutral with a passing interest in the story would have been left wondering why White and Jordan were so hostile towards such a reasonable sounding guest on their show. Keep calm and carry on!

Guy called Robert came on and put his case very calmly and reasonably but got very short shrift from thick as mince White and Simon Jordan who had his owner's hat on Completely different from last week when someone came on a show with Sam Matterface and Troy Deeney and got a very sympathetic hearing. The Club had obviously prepared themselves for this. A lot of the debate centred around Gestede'sexperience or lack thereof for the role and someone sent in a message which White couldn't wait to read out which went as follows: I've had a message from someone I know in the game who says "I know Rudy Gestede exceptional individual" Anonymous source. funny that. You win some you lose some I guess. The important thing is to not lose heart and keep plugging away. Personally I wouldn't be concentrating on Gestede, he certainly shouldn't be exempt from any criticism and is perfectly fair game but in the general scheme of things he's well behind the owners, Pasha and Waggott in terms of being the main problem. I sent in a text saying they'd been completely unfair to Robert with reasons why and asked them to read it out. They haven't so far.