This Blake's manager Mark Warburton was on the radio a couple of weeks ago and he was equally vehemently opposed to the season not being finished on the pitch and all the talk of scrapping the season. Maybe they should speak to one another and make their mind up.

It is financia from the Club's point of view, if it means they don't have to repay huge chunks of money they cant afford to broadcasters so much the better. I can't really speak for the Broadcasters, maybe sufficient numbers were (like me) too lazy to cancel their existing subscriptions and they think it would be worthwhile to put the remainder of the season on for free to whet appetites for next season. I wouldn't imagine they'd pick up huge numbers of new subscribers at this stage of the season normally. I still think as a very close second it is also infinitely fairer to finish the season on the pitch than void it as well.

Ok, thanks for clarifying your viewpoint. I disagree on the fairness aspect and I fully agree with your last paragraph above which once again seems to contradict the rest of what you are saying. They have come up with an alternative - BCD.

"Temporary best alternative." Absolutely. The question is, is it better than than either declaring everything null andf void or finishing the season via a mathematical formula? I'd say a big "hell yeah" on both counts. Then if you take the view that the lesser of two evils is to finish the season the question is then "If possible would you like to watch it on TV?". Again I'd give that a big thumbs up and for once if media and broadcasters did the right thing and as a one off made all games free to air until the end of the season as a one off I think that should be applauded rather than viewed as part of some machiavellian plot

(Imo) Great first half of your post when you seem to be saying the "new normal" is not normal but a necessary and temporary evil. Then you seem to contradict that in the second half by saying it's not for you so I'm not really sure where you're coming from on it. Are you saying it is or isn't necessary to resume BCD? If you're saying it is, but that it's not for you therefore you will sit it out until fans are allowed back in, I can fully respect that.

I agree with much of that post, most of it is very fair, particularly the part about "the new normal". Games BCD should never be considered as "normal" in much the same way as lockdown restrictions and social distancing should only be considered emergency temporary measures and not the new norm in real life as well. Where I do strongly disagree is your assertion that teams "finishing the season" is them going through the motions". For me it's about trying to finish the season in the fairest possible manner and by your own admission you've been pleasantly surprised with the standard of the Bundesliga and there 's no suggestion they've been holding back or half hearted about it. Hopefully the Premier League, Championship, and maybe even League 1 will be the same when they return.

Stuart's previous argument about why football shouldn't return no longer holds as much weight as tests now seem to be in plentiful supply so he is now turning his attention to something different entirely. The TV Companies are now the root of all evil in the game. Apparently.

Certainly as far as the Bundesliga is concerned, I would say it's been as far from "training ground football" as you can get. The product has been fully committed and of a technically high standard indistinguishable from a "normal" match in front of crowds. As regards your other point I'm not mixing up "normal" with BCD at all. However I'd say that if the Authorities deem that football HAS to be played behind closed doors then for me: 1) From both a neutral armchair supporters' point of view, and that of people supporting their own team, it's better to have some football BCD than no football at all. 2) Whilst not 100% ideal It's still infinitely fairer to complete as many Leagues as you can BCD than to declare everything null and void or end the season via a mathematical formula. (and most importantly) 3) By fulfilling fixtures a lot of Clubs might be safeguarding their future and ensuring there is still something to go back to when their fans are allowed to return. I actually think it's quite a self centred and arrogant standpoint to take that "I don't fancy the idea of football BCD, therefore if I can't attend in person the game shouldn't be allowed to be held. No-one is suggesting that this should be a permanent thing or even that football BCD is quite as good as "normal". It's a temporary needs must solution to cater for an exceptional and hopefully one off situation.

If you're referring to speeeeedie then that wasn't how I read his post at all. He wasn't being anti-Rovers, he was merely pointing out how strange it was that on a supposedly football m/b the prevailing view seemed to be against the return of football in general when that wasn't his experience from speaking to football fans in general outside of this Board. I tend to agree. For me we need to get EVERYTHING back to normal asap. It wouldn't bother me in the slightest if everything went back to the way it was pre virus tomorrow. However if that's deemed not to be possible, then having football behind closed doors for a limited period is better than having Clubs going out of business. In exactly the same way having social distancing and lengthy queues in shops is far from ideal but if the alternative is those shops staying closed and going bust then the inconvenience is preferable to the alternative.

Some strange views on here imo. A lot of people (who supported the immediate cessation of football) seem quite pleased with themselves that they have subsequently cancelled their Satellite and Cable TV subscriptions as there's no live football on. Fair play, I can't argue with anyone that's done that. Sensible move. However you can't do that on the one hand then complain about the fact that football are complaining they have to repay money to broadcasters. Why do they have to do that? Firstly because they have a contractual obligation to provide the entertainment they've been paid for and secondly because the TV Companies are losing money hand over first as well because everyone has been cancelling their subscriptions! They're all businesses at the end of the day It's a bit like the players complaining about returning too early when the Clubs only real reason to return earlier than would be otherwise necessary is the fact that nearly all the Clubs revenue goes straight into the players' pockets and they can't withstand having to repay a chunk of TV revenue. It really is hypocrisy and lack of self awareness of the highest order from the top players. We've seen the utmost resistance from them and the PFA to the idea of anything other than minor and temporary wage deferrals and when public sentiment seemed to be shifting against them, they somehow managed to head it off at the pass by forming a voluntary charity which we have no idea whether the majority are contributing anything significant, or anything at all to. The whole problem stems from the fact the players are paid too much. This is hardly a new concept and the upside of that in this Country is that apart from maybe Real Madrid, Barcelona or Nation State funded PSG, a move to one of the Premier League's top five or six Clubs is the most favourable option for the world's best players. The downside is that we all knew deep down it couldn't go on forever. We probably didn't expect it to be for this reason or so soon as the market for overseas rights hadn't yet been saturated where the PL was concerned. However we probably all expected that at some point the TV Companies would say "enough is enough" and either pull out altogether or start reducing their offers. You can therefore criticise the Clubs for the way they've carried on over the years leading us to this position. You can definitely imo criticise them if they try to make themselves out to be a special case, resist efforts to get them to return when the normal population has to, and even more so if they subsequently start asking for subsidies. I don't think though you can criticise Clubs for failing to foresee this particular crisis or the fact that they are in trouble because of it. No-one could have foreseen it.

You can be pretty confident in the accuracy of the testing procedure as they're being constantly tested therefore an occasional false test result (if indeed they do occur) shouldn't prove that disastrous. There is a slight risk that a player could contract the virus between testing and playing but the risk is relatively small, as is the likelihood that if any player does catch the virus it will be a major problem for them. If they're worried about a vulnerable family member, they're under no obligation to play as far as I'm aware.

I couldn't disagree more strongly with the above. You cant catch the virus from being In close proximity to someone who hasn't got the virus. I can't for the life of me understand why anyone would think that 22 footballers who have all been tested and cleared are at any greater risk than the general population who haven't, social distancing notwithstanding. Not that I think that either group should refrain from returning to normal, just that out of the two groups the public face the greater degree of risk such as it is.

It'll be 50 years at the end of the year since I first attended a game at Ewood. It's well documented I think the reaction to the virus has been blown out of all proportion and that the "cure" has been and will subsequently prove to have been far more harmful than the actual impact of the illness itself. Given that, I'm determined that the Crisis will not be the thing that breaks my long association with the Club and will renew on principle. If there'd been no crisis and my renewal decision was based purely on the quality of our manager and therefore my view of our prospects and the level of entertainment we've seen, I wouldn't be renewing with any relish at all. Before the Crisis I was thinking that there'd be a very good chance I'd end up renewing to support the Club and then if we continued in the same vein, probably not bother going to quite a few games. Don't know if people in general will share my sense of apathy regarding our immediate prospects on the pitch, my friends don't appear to, but I do agree as we've been saying for a while now that attendance figures across the board everywhere could be a bit grim as people tend to be creatures of habit and will have got used to doing other things Wonder what Waggott's solution will be. Squeeze the even smaller hardcore, that much harder or will he be able to come up with something a bit more innovative?

Think I heard they were hoping to restart in mid August or start of September. They seem to be struggling with the concept of how to resume training given that their game is as physical and close contact as it gets.

I'm struggling to understand your logic here. So are we saying that ALL non-essential businesses should remain closed until there is a vaccine. (Which may never happen, therefore everything will go bust and we'll be left with Supermarkets, Banks and Pharmacies) Or are you saying that every other non essential business apart from football should open as planned by the 15th of June but that football and footballers are a special case and should get an exemption?

I think in general, I'm as unimpressed with Waggott as you are. Can't disagree with your last paragraph but as regards your first I wouldn't be able to be quite so blase about it.

Bottom line is the Club loses a shed load of money in normal times anyway and even if all the players on furlough that only accounts for a small proportion of their wage. If anyone takes the view that it doesn't matter because it's Venky's who will ultimately foot the bill then I dont suppose they will be bothered but I think its incredibly dangerous to assume that just because Venky's can absorb an ever increasing mountain of debt on our behalf they will always choose to do so.

I'm not in the least bit bothered about a refund myself. It's not Rovers fault they were ordered to stop the normal season. I was anticipating that given the fact the Club can't really afford to give refunds, if they were given now they'd be clawed back by means of a corresponding increase for those who did renew next season. And then some. And if they weren't given now they'd be clawed back anyway in the form of an "unavoidable" increase next season.

Great news about being allowed to socialise outside with a small group as from Monday. I think something like this should have been brought in the last time the restrictions were reviewed but better late than never. I think that by being thick, Cummings has unwittingly done us all the most massive favour imaginable as the Government seem to be throwing us bones in the form of easing of lockdown to cheer us up and divert attention away from the farcical handling of the Cummings issue.

The players will be tested, one or two others may have caught it in which case they will self isolate and make a full recovery within seven days. If any other players do catch it and pass it on to their families, then they will also make a swift and full recovery in the absence of any underlying health conditions.

Question wasn't directed at me so apologies for butting in, but absolutely. Any players found to have the virus can self isolate for seven days then resume as normal. Absolutely not a problem. If it was the situation that we still had two or three players self isolating by the time the games actually restart then that wouldn't really be a great deal different to any normal season when Clubs had players unavailable through injury and suspension. We can sit here wringing our hands forever and come up with excuses about how we can't restart football or not open this type of business or this type of shop. However it is not realistic in the absence of a vaccine to expect no cases of the virus so if you take it to the nth degree and refuse to do anything because a few people are contracting the virus here and there, nothing will ever re-start or re-open.

I really don't understand the argument against football coming back, it's an absolute no brainer. 1) There's no doubt that the primary reason Clubs are coming back is money but they aren't coming back purely to line their own pockets, in the vast majority of cases they're coming back to try and ensure their very survival. 2) On the sporting integrity issue, if you take the view that crowds can't be allowed back into grounds yet, there is no perfect solution which is as fair as it was pre lockdown. Playing the fixtures out in full behind closed doors if finances allow is the least worst option. Finishing the season now, extrapolating the final positions out on a points pet game basis, then holding play offs as normal to decide on promotion and relegation is the next least worst option for me followed by doing the same only without the play offs. The least desirable and most unfair option is imo just scrapping the season and declaring all results null and void. That means if you've had a belting season all your effort has been for nothing and if you've stuck the place out, you've got away with it Scott free. Other non-essential businesses are now being expected to return on the 15th of June and the employees there don't have the luxury of being fully screened for any underlying health conditions and regularly tested that top footballers have. The only possible argument against football returning is that it diverts resources away from other areas and I can't see that there's any problem now with the availability of tests, if there is one, more the mechanics of getting the tests to people and processing the results.

Not perfect but nowhere near as unfair as ending a season on paper according to a mathematical formula.

We'll have to beg to differ. I haven't seen tonight's game (yet) e but I don't get any feeling of proceedings being less important because there isn't a crowd there. Maybe I'd have to see a Rovers game behind closed doors to decide fully. One or 2 commentators have said that since the return there's been much less rolling about trying to feign injury and harassing and back chatting the ref. Maybe players have realised there's more important things going on than trying to cheat at the moment.

When Madame's husband got a snowball in the gob? Damned if they do, damned if they don't on this one. You can't really blame them for not wanting to put up with crap like that and if they take the view that in general (like roversfan99) people will either never forgive them or aren't interested in anything they do or say, they might be justified in keeping a low profile and letting the people they pay to run the Club get on with it. Personally, I'd rather they were at games regularly and we heard a bit more from them about what they were thinking. But I think it's only reasonable to expect that if people were prepared to draw a line in the sand and judge them on what they're doing now rather than on mistakes made years ago.