RevidgeBlue

Not wanting to defend Nixon in any way shape or form but am I missing the point here - why is he feuding with a pie because someone is utilising the username "southstandpies"? If someone used the name and avatar of "Mr. Blobby" would he be arguing with that character? I did think someone listing the ingredients of a pie in lieu of this person's name was very witty though.

He's not wrong about the Henning Berg decision though. Given the situation in the match at the time and subsequent rumours of Gerald Ashby's links to Man Ure that decision stank like a tandoori kipper.

You have to look at the bigger picture, despite the fact we just happen to have won a couple of games I hope there are some co-ordinated forms of protest planned. It would probably be unwise to give any detail about them on here though as the Club would snuff them out at source. Let's wait and see.

A remarkably abrupt U turn. Has Mrs Chadster put her foot down and said "You're not spending £90 on that pile of crap!" 😉 The Polo shirt is 1000 per cent better but still smacks of doing it at minimal cost and without a great deal of thought. I'm not keen on anything with a cheap transfer instead of the proper badge with the red rose

That'll presumably be why he's threatening to sue said fan for the highly contentious (if untrue) allegation he's being paid significant sums to disseminate info on Wednesday's behalf. Id have thought it would have been far more likely he'd do it free of charge anyway on a "If you scratch my back I'll scratch yours" basis. It doesn't take much to get under the fat twerps skin. He lost his shit with me once and got quite personal when I questioned why he was so insistent on trying to prise Steven Warnock out of Rovers.

Not sure if this is the right place for it but saw an article online yesterday on EFL world claiming we still hadn't agreed a fee with Newcastle for Zac Gilsenan. Edit: Whoops sorry Rory Finneran.

Cheers Wilsden. Are those EFL guidelines? (I was under the impression that the FF existed before any guidance of this nature and 2 additional meetings of the sort prescribed above were meant to be being set up in Waggott’s time but it never actually happened) So theoretically the Club could pare it down to just 2 FF's per year. Either way can't see the bit where it says it's permissible for the Club to censor/embellish the minutes.

Been nothing else to crow about since 2010 has there?

Cheers SG. I have that "No nay Never" book but haven't read it yet. I would actually have been quite impressed if the contribution from the Rao's had been along the lines that things had not gone as they'd hoped during their period of ownership but they were determined to put it right etc.

Club would never allow that I dont suppose. Pretty sure it wouldn't even have been allowed in the Williams/Finn era when the subject matter was generally a lot less contentious but even then snippets of commercially sensitive information were divulged.

I may be wrong but I dont think there's any obligation on the Club to hold a "Fans Forum" as such, it's entirely at the Club's discretion. They are however I think meant to be holding some other form of supporters meeting as prescribed by some guidelines or other but that slipped quietly by the wayside. Perhaps someone more au fait with the regulations in this area could clarify?

Id say the top picture is clearly wrong and the ground was lower down in what appears to be another empty plot to the bottom right. The plot in the yellow box has a slope of around 45 degrees! Edit: to add to this although there seems to be a Club letter with "Wagtail" in the address I think at the time Leamington St finished at the junction with what is now Granville Rd.

Am I right in thinking the book is part of a generic series written by a Company who produce anniversary books for Clubs? If so it would have been far better to have been written by an eminent Club historian like Harry Berry or Mike Jackman.

Comments on the above O2G? Id say its clear that for some time the FF has been a vehicle for more harm than good even before the recent controversy about the minutes. However now if minutes are also being regularly censored and/or doctored as a matter of course then everyone should simply refuse to attend and go public with the reason why.

Catastrophic.

You probably won't have had a chance to read it yet SG but Im guessing the 2 pages is like a "tribute" to the Rao's and not the summary of their 15 years of ownership? I wonder what the over-riding perspective on that is in the book? Is it fairly critical or neutral?

Great find. More evidence the ground started at one end just the other side of Granville Rd by Leamington Rd Church. At the other end there's no earthly way it could have stretched any further than where St. Silas's Rd is now.

Someone else mentioned that there was a Rover St named after the ground after it wascobbled over which was later renamed Wellfield Rd as it still is today. Wellfield Rd is a very flat bit but Im guessing it would be slightly further over towards East Lancs Cricket Club than where the pitch was or at least would have marked the boundary of the ground on that side.

I was thinking the opposite about the Ipswich game in that we're finally hitting a bit of form. Ok -I know we should only have been replaying the last 10-15 mins against ten men anyway, but, I think it would have been a lot worse replaying the full 90 mins within a 2-3 weeks.

It's looking increasingly likely it isn't a wind up. If it is, they'll have to knock one up for chaddy - he wants one!

That's the only straw Im clutching on to. The white one shown did appear to have official Rovers branding on it though on the label and at the bottom if you zoomed in.

Will you be buying one then?

Allegedly the blue and white one with the "150 years" on the front is unsurprisingly fake but the white thing with the over-sized Maltese Cross is the actual thing. If it is, will the team be wearing it on Saturday?

Apparently O Neill has just withdrawn his interest so you can calm down a bit. Must have been reading your comments! 🙂

It's hardly a surprise Carragher will stick up for O Neill given the fact they have probably worked together as pundits. I dont think O Neil was as bad at Wolves as you are suggesting. Although I do have my doubts about whether reappointing him would actually work on the basis of the general rule "They say you should never go back"