Going to be a long 45 mins.

I give up. People obviously think championship footballers play for nothing and that for example loan players come here for free. Also I stand to be corrected, but my understanding is that it is Venky's holding Company which is £200m in debt and the only debt attached to the Club is the bank overdraft which is at a similar sort of level (c£20m) to when they took over.

Yes, let's forget about the two £12m players as it doesn't fit the narrative. Lol.

You do know our billionaire owners stick in another £15m - £20m p.a. on top of our supposedly derisory income?

Yes, that would be him, the chap that wouldn't sack Souness when it was necessary. Good job Newcastle unexpectedly came in and bailed us out. Seems a bit trite to be criticising Williams when we now have Waggott at the helm but you have to judge him by standards as they were then which were a lot higher than now.

You keep plugging Farke, and rightly so, but if you're looking at that calibre of replacement, Dyche has to be in the equation as well surely. Is there anything whatsoever to suggest we're remotely interested in either Grayson or Warburton?

Point is we've been done over by agents in the past pre Venkys as well. Two wrongs don't make a right though as you correctly point out.

Yes "canny" is definitely not the right word. That said being had over is not completely exclusive to them, Dahlin, Ward, Peacock, Dailly, Grabbi, Barry Ferguson, Amoruso etc etc......

Sorry, thought you meant Waggott thought he had authority to sack Mowbray on a date some time after Forest at home this season.

No point discussing further with you today, you've deliberately ignored the bit where I said "their record has been terrible overall" for the sake of being contrary.

Fair comment. I suspected at the time the owners were seduced by talk of a world class state of the art training facility but when the practical difficulties with Waggott's hare brained scheme were brought out into the open they pulled the plug. Someone must have binned the scheme off and I thought sensitivity might have been shown to the objections of the fans and the local residents. My worry with that view now is that it might only have been scrapped because it was thought the plan as it stood had no chance of success. There does still seem to be an appetite to consider alternative sites. I would have hoped at the time for a firm commitment the scheme would not be revisited and concrete proposals to upgrade the existing facilities by now. That said, under a different management regime, tangible plans we can actually see for a new state of the art training complex on a site that is big enough to command Cat 1 Academy Status might have some legs. I just wouldn't have any confidence in the current lot on the ground to deliver it.

You're being childish now, you should have stopped after "Yes you got me." The owners record has been terrible overall, the latest example imo being their consistent refusal to sack your mate Mowbray. The one thing that can't be discounted over the years however is their financial commitment to the Club. Currently they seemingly do not have any intentions of selling the Club at any point so, given that, if only that considerable financial support could be channelled properly under the auspices of competent people.

Bloody hell Matty you're better than that. You never heard of them trying to do the same at Coventry? If you can prove any connection between Venky's and Coventry at that point in time I'll concede!

So using your reasoning as outlined in para 1 above then: - as the proposed scheme did not eventually go through it must have been the owners who put a stop to it, and they who substituted the accounting exercise instead to prevent the necessity of the sale of a fixed asset to which you were so opposed. "Nobody does anything at the Club without the owners signing off" Right?

The fatal deficiency in your argument there is that Mowbray, Waggott and Venus tried (and likewise failed) to do the same thing at Coventry and Waggott freely admitted he was the driving force behind the replicated scheme here. I know you know that really as you're an intelligent chap.

But would you not agree there's a huge difference in the landscape between him miraculously scraping into the play offs at the last minute and taking us up via that route as opposed to us missing out on the play offs altogether? Personally I wouldn't want him in charge even if he took us up as I think we could do far better in that event. However I'd imagine that in the unlikely view of that happening my view would be a minority one and most people would be clamouring for him to get a new deal of some description even if it was only a 12 month rolling contract. Once his contract expires there would hypothetically be nothing whatsoever stopping both parties sitting down and discussing a new deal if they thought it was a good idea. I pray to God that doesn't happen myself but I really don't see the issue. He's bloody lucky he's been allowed the dignity of seeing his contract out.

That's the worry - not whether Tony has had his feelings hurt. He's been telling us every month that he's not bothered about his contractual situation so why is it suddenly different now when we should actually be concentrating on winning the final two games?

Give over Gav, it's one thing coming on here to wind people up, it's another to repeatedly accuse me of something I never said in the first place. I said Mowbray, as manager, was complicit in the scheme, it doesn't go ahead if he doesn't agree to it. You were dead against the proposed sale of the training ground anyway so you're being a complete hypocrite on that particular point.

Why? They'd get called up hill and down dale if they'd announced his departure at the end of the season and he then got us promoted in the meantime.

Suspect that has already happened.

Ha ha, go on Gav. Reel 'em in. Yes, they've treated him appallingly, not sacking him after a run of eleven points from fifteen games and allowing him to see out his contract in full. Wonder if he's due a loyalty bonus for seeing out his contract?

Jordan usually talks a lot of sense and is spot on here once again. White is thick as mince, although half the time he probably takes the opposing view purely for dramatic effect.

If true - why didn't he then?

The table quoted on here was obviously wrong. Or we're submitting false accounts every year.

Knew someone would say that. Fair comment I guess. Hypothetically if they'd been caught by surprise by our form up to January and decided to wait and see how it all played out then I don't think it's a particularly unreasonable stance to take. If however the position was he was leaving at the end of the season no matter what (which I think it was) but no succession planning has taken place behind the scenes that puts a far more serious slant on the situation than Mowbray being a bit hard done to.