RevidgeBlue

Evans, Christ. Whenever you see either him or Bennett on the team sheet you know we aren't going to win. What's the betting we see both him AND Bennett on the pitch for a large chunk of the game tonight? Could be ugly.

If that is exactly what he's said, it should be a sackable offence in itself. As already pointed out, it's a team from the same division not a team from higher up the pyramid in a Cup competition!

Thanks for the reply. The more titbits of information about this proposed scheme that people are unable to unearth I think the more inevitable it is anyway that the cash grab for the housing will soon be accompanied by an announcement that the Academy is being scrapped or downgraded and we'll be moving towards a different model. (Which would probably consist of us simply making even more phone calls to PL Clubs asking them to let us borrow youngsters in exchange for game time) Of Course "New state of the art training centre" if you take it at face value sounds a lot more palatable than "Academy to be scrapped" I would ask them if they've costed out upgrading the existing sites to make them "state of the art" as presumably that would be a lot cheaper in itself than knocking down the existing Academy and building a completely new facility. If they say "No" then the next question then should be "why not?" to which the only logical answer would seem to be that someone wants the money for the housing. Also need to try and ascertain what the net profit would be from the scheme, where the money would be going and if it was going back to the Club what purpose it was being earmarked for. Might also be useful to cite Mowbray's comments from the Lancs Live article in which he said that the current Academy site on it's own would not be sufficient. So why would it be any different with a new building? Good luck.

If you were trying to do your best to ensure the plan went through that would be a good idea. Would it not be better to keep that up your sleeve and use it as an objection to the proposal rather than pre warn the Club of any potential objections so they can think of a response? I think it would be however be fair game to give them both barrels regarding the covenant protecting the use of the land and that the plan would not be respecting Jack's legacy.

Not what I said to be fair. I said having this particular person being "involved" in the running of the Club once he had got the appropriate qualifications wouldn't particularly alarm me. I also thought it was self evident that that meant he would have to obtain the necessary experience before taking on a major role. (If it ever happened)

It's awful isn't it and we've had eleven years of this Arguably more if you go back to when Hughes left. A whole generation of young fans lost.

In the past whenever we've been on long lasing runs we've nevertheless had the knack of only losing narrowly and often grabbing a late consolation goal to falsely make things appear things were closer than they actually were. Wonder if this will be the case tomorrow? I sort of feel like it will be a thumping.

Nyambe?

I thought it was rumoured to be Mrs Desai's son? I met someone I understood to be him a few years ago when, if it was him, he looked about 17 or 18. Really polite intelligent young lad. If he was involved in the running of the Club I wouldn't have any worries subject to him having acquired the necessary qualifications in the interim of course.

Gav's going to love this one....... I'd rather Venky's funded us for a while longer (under a decent manager) than we go into administration and Waggott pops up again fronting another shell Company looking to purchase our golden share on the cheap. And when I say "rather" that's somewhat of an understatement.

Correct, yes. Depends if they're gullible enough (yet again) to swallow the line about a world class state of the art training facility. To spin it on it's head, if it's a nefarious asset stripping scheme originating from the owners why isn't Saint Tony speaking out strongly against it?

Yet Coventry floundered under the stewardship of Waggott, Mowbray and Venus and there was an eerily similar plot afoot at Coventry to "put everything under one roof". Then as soon as those 3 leave, Coventry go from strength to strength. Come on Gav, you can't blame that on Venky's!

Mowbray's lack of enthusiasm for the plan exposes it for what it is, an asset grabbing exercise. The only positive he can put on it is that everyone would be under the same roof. He can stroll across the road and look at the kids now if he really wanted to FFS. He also admits that the current Academy building on it's own wouldn't be adequate. "Probably above my pay grade to comment" If he as the man in charge of footballing matters can't then who the he'll can? "These things take time" I.e. Hope no-one realises there's absolutely nothing wrong with the existing facilities and that me Steve and Mark are long gone before everyone realises the Club has been scammed". Someone save us from these 3 chancers- on and off the pitch.

Arguably they could - which makes this scheme to recoup potentially no more than a year's running losses all the more bizarre and makes you wonder if they'll be the actual beneficiaries of the scheme.

We could carry on like that all night. Do you have any definite information to suggest he is?

You surely don't believe that given the Coventry connections this Brockhall plan is purely coincidental do you? Or that if Mowbray doesn't object to it he won't be well rewarded for it at some point down the line? And for the avoidance of doubt I am not suggesting there would be anything technically illegal going on.

Just been attempting to do a bit of homework and tie this in with the timeliness of Otium Entertainment Group Ltd. which is freely available on the Internet. Otium Entertainment were I think technically the owners of the Football Club after they came out of administration and who I think purchased the Club's Golden share in the Football League and the FA etc. Otium started with different directors and initially appeared to have a nominal share capital of 1k. A notice to strike the Company off the record from Companies House presumably for lack of activity and failing to file returns was sent out in April 2013 and discontinued in May 2013 presumably when they got a response. Waggott was appointed as a Director of Otium Entertainment in September 2013 resigning in November 2015. Venus was appointed as a Director in July 2016 and resigning in March 2017. In May 2014 a return was filed stating that the allotted share capital had jumped to £2661000 and it appeared to peak at a stated £3296000 in June 2015 before retreating back to £64,194 in a return filed a couple of weeks later at the end of that month. Not sure what to make of this or whether I understand what has been going on. My gut feeling is that something not quite right is going on and at the very least is it not extremely undesirable that the CEO and "Technical Director" should also technically be part owners of the Club. If anyone would care to elucidate and/or explain that I've got the wrong end of the stick please feel free.

Thanks for clarifying that. Excellent post that I fully agree with

It will be now. How long do you think he'll be here after this goes through? (If it does)

Sounds very low to me, this is Brockhall we're on about, I'd imagine the very cheapest units would be well in excess of £300k and the bigger ones way more expensive than that.

Obviously we're not self sufficient, and we have no absolute right to expect Venky's to keep ploughing £20m p.a. into us indefinitely, but as they're way richer than the Walkers, is it not reasonable to hope they wouldn't flog of the fixed assets of the Club for short term gain? Especially when there's a covenant specifically prohibiting a future owner from doing this sort of thing. And that's before getting into the realms of ascertaining whether or not it is actually their baby and that all net profits from this would be flowing back to the Club.

I haven't had time to go through all the links to the Coventry stuff in detail yet, was a training facility ever built there or did they end up with nothing?

Haven't checked. Write to him direct at the LT and e-mail I presume?

It was weird yesterday that someone posted a reply to a tweet from Sharpe whereby he was basically agreeing to a comment along the lines of "It's the Club's land to do with as they wish and no-one goes after the farmer who sells his land for development" A few things arose out of that. 1) He was obviously taking the line from the Club about any new facility being "state of the art" at face value. 2) Is he so blissfully ignorant as to all things Rovers related that he is unaware of the covenant protecting the use of the land at Brockhall? 3) Is he unaware of Waggott's/Venus's/Mowbray's involvement at Coventry? Everyone need to contact him and tell him to get his finger out of his backside and investigate it properly. I know he just takes everything Mowbray says at face value and never questions it normally but this is even more important if anything.

Great Post, didn't realise you were a fellow QEGS (very) old boy!. Sounds like you're about 3 years older than me and I left in 1982 so we probably would have been there at the same time. My best friend also went to QEGS and now lives in London and has been a financial controller for a big Company. His Dad was Indian and many years ago when we were pissed as farts we came up with the bright idea of having a holiday in India and pitching up on the V's doorstep to offer advice. Needless to say once the hangovers kicked in the hare brained scheme was never mentioned again but yours is a sound idea. If you want any support or help just ask.