12 minutes ago, booth said:

So basically, they'll sell when they can pocket the promotion money.

What a set of dunces.

It's Nixon, so I'd treat the story with a lorry load of salt but even if it were true they'd have to be fairly quick to sell us as a PL Club given that promotion is arguably a licence to get tubbed for a season then go straight back down.

All indications up to now (before the current Court case) were that they'd never consider selling, ever, and in the unlikely event we did ever get promoted under them you'd think being in the Premier League would make them less not more inclined to sell.

On 16/03/2024 at 00:16, Ewood Ace said:

If you think I don't criticise The owners or CEO then you are very much mistaken. None of those are signing the players though, we are in a relegation fight and had a paltry budget in January I just think that if Broughton was going to spend money on a player it would have been useful to spend it on someone who can play a big part in that fight against relegation.

Broughton is a symptom of the owners and like many of those employed before him (and the current CEO) is a chancer who is massively out of his depth.

Absolutely spot on. Whilst we know everything boils down to the owners I have no idea whatsoever why some people insist on giving Broughton and to a lesser extent Waggott a free ride.

Broughton has signed three strikers in his time at the Club none of whom have registered a single goal for us and one of which wasn't even fit enough to play. He spent what there was of the summer budget on the calamitous Leo and what there was of the winter budget on a prospect that now we are told cant play because he needs protecting. And also brought in a 37 year old and a crock who lasted 15 mins

He's also overseen two absolutely unprecedented January cock ups in succession. Apart from that he's done OK I suppose. Lol.

Currently keeping his head down whilst all the fall out from January dies down and then will no doubt re-emerge unscathed next season like nothing has happened. Its sickening.

A lot of people don't even like Waggott being given grief because they claim it deflects from the real problem which is the owners. I really don't understand this point of view - if they're doing a terrible job, both should be called out for it.

Apologies if it was mentioned earlier in the thread but Elliott Jackson at the LT was being a bit of a cheeky bastard this week when he started a story with the headline that Eustace wasn't going to let all the "noise" about the owners situation deflect from his preparation for yesterday's game. Thereby  insinuating that any concern about the subject is a bit of a fuss about nothing. 

That sort of attitude will look a bit silly if the situation does not resolve itself and we ultimately end up being relegated and/or going into administration. I doubt he'd be so flippant if the Club he supported was in a similar boat, that's if he supports anyone.

2 hours ago, sharpysharps86 said:

Gallagher's form when he came back from injury was promising but he's fallen off a cliff in recent weeks. Deserves dropping but the problem is who do you bring in? There's literally only Telalovic available to come in.

Might as well give Telalovic an extended run in the team and see if he can discover some form as Gallagher literally offers nothing, so even in the worst case scenario you'd not be particularly any worse off.

It's like the argument about selling Gallagher. Even if he hadn't been replaced we'd not be any worse off on the pitch and at least we'd have had the money in the Bank.

Furthermore to have turned down a reported £2m for him with six months to go on his deal, with the potential there to have replaced him  permanently at equal or less cost with the younger Mcguire was particularly barking even by our standards.

13 hours ago, simongarnerisgod said:

i rate hedges,he works his **** off,got a sweet left foot and is hard to knock off the ball

dolan is ok once in ten matches,got no concistency at this level,same with buckley

Strange to see Hedges being praised to the rafters, I think he is absolute garbage, a complete waste of money even at £200k. The ultimate journeyman footballer.

Conversely whilst Dolan is a bit hit and miss I think he has a lot more quality about him and generally puts in a far better shift.

Each to their own I guess.

54 minutes ago, simongarnerisgod said:

thats his major failing🙄

His major failing is he crosses the white line.

Decent point today though in isolation.

Just need a couple of wins from anywhere.

5 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

I’m not insinuating anything of the sort. If they didn’t want to carry on owning and funding us they would’ve stopped a long time ago.

I’m considering ways they will still be able to keep doing so despite the court case being delayed again, just as I expect they are.

OK thanks. Sorry for putting words into your mouth.

But in devil's advocate mode why not embark one one of those other methods long before now as an interim measure if they were keen to get money over?

39 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

 

Apologies, I think I may have jumped the gun on the above. Didn’t read Josh’s posts in full.

For every pound they have sent so far, they have had to guarantee with equivalent. But they can’t send money without permission. 

The case that is ongoing is not directly linked to Rovers or VLL, which probably goes a long way to explaining the silence from the club. If anyone at Rovers was even aware of how the case had gone (or hadn’t) before it became public record, I expect they’d have been forbidden from commenting on it.

I suppose now we will see what Venky’s appetite to keep funding is, as there will no doubt be ways around it. Without a No Objection Certificate, or a one off exemption, VENKATESHWARA HATCHERIES PRIVATE LIMITED can’t send remittance overseas. The purpose of this hearing wasn’t just to get that agreed, but it would’ve been one desired outcome.

I’m speculating here, but I don’t see why they couldn’t get money over from elsewhere, or apply for the certificate directly to the enforcement agency away from the ongoing court proceedings.

So to summarise:

They currently can't send ANY money over without permission and if they do so it has to be matched by a security bond for an equivalent amount.

However it SEEMS as though there should be ways around the problem if they wanted to send money badly enough so are you insinuating that they might see these problems as somewhat convenient?

If that were the case, why bother going to Court at all? They could just do a Waggott, shrug their shoulders and say "We've done all we can."

The future of the Club hangs in the balance and the LT are back in 3 wise monkeys mode I see.

It's like the whole thing just isn't happening.

6 minutes ago, tomphil said:

Giving benefit of doubt maybe they are preparing one final big case to say look let us fund it as normal without having to apply to the court every few months.  

Sounds a bit that way. The question of whether the Government are technically entitled to intervene in this manner ought to be a fairly straightforward one - either they can or they can't.

5 minutes ago, J*B said:

My understanding of this was that this means for every £1 they send here, they also have to send £1 to a bank account owned by the Indian Government as essentially a bond whilst the case is underway. Can anyone confirm/clarify that?

That seems to be the general understanding from those that have looked into it but don't think it's been confirmed by a official source as such.

STILL no word as to what happened.

If we had a proper CEO he'd have been right on top of it and put out a press release long before now.

The Club at operational level is an absolute joke.

As far as the relegation battle is concerned it could be pretty important whether or not Leicester have been automatically promoted before they play us on the final day.

If they've been on the lash for a while and are mentally on the beach it "shouldn't" do us any harm.

Although I'm sure we'd still find a way to look the more sluggish and less motivated of the two sides.

1 hour ago, DuffsLeftPeg said:

No excuse culture.

Stop making excuses for him. No wins, that’s the only stat that matters. 

This annoys me a bit. JDT's recent results were even worse.

Think it was a great result that Boro beat Brum.

We can only influence games that we play in so it's up to us to perform and bring something home on Saturday.

If any results involving other teams fall our way it has to be considered a massive bonus.

Can't deny either  the thought of Mowbray and Venus taking Brum down is also immensely satisfying although of course there will be no-one who wouldn't wish Mowbray a speedy recovery from whatever medical issues he is facing.

8 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Item one on the list was filed yesterday…

You're right sorry. 

The main title seems fairly nebulous subject matter unrelated to the matter at hand. Perhaps their Advocate is trying to argue that as a matter of principle the Authorities are not entitled to be intervening in this manner.

7 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Affidavit filed on Venky’s behalf yesterday (no further details appear to be available for this)…

That was filed on 30/05/23. It doesn't seem particularly pertinent to today?

Which is just as well because if it was it doesn't give theimpression of any hearing being a mere formality.

23 hours ago, SIMON GARNERS 194 said:

We are in a very unique and frustrating position as a Club...the folk running us from Pune Towers dont know their Arse from their Elbow. I dont want a Manager waxing lyrical when all around is turning to shyte,I dont appreciate being told its White when its clearly Black.

 "Its not a must win game"....same again for Boro?

Turning a blind Eye to all wrong for the sake of large remuneration? no doubt it happens a lot but its not right.

Technically Eustace was right when he said Plymouth wasn't a "must win" game. We didn't win it yet the last time I looked we hadn't been relegated (yet)

That said we all knew how vital it was to get a win. I don't however read too much into him saying what he did other than it being a fairly transparent attempt to take some pressure off the players, who tbh have shown themselves to be a right load of whinging prima donnas over the last nineteen games  and during that meeting with certain fans and Waggott. Eustace's only job at the moment is to keep us up.  If he's decided that the only way to get some sort of tune out of them until the end of the season is to blow smoke up their arses and tell them how wonderful they are, then again I have no particular problem with it. (If it works)

Where the problem will lie, if he is indeed what you could describe as "a yes man", is next season and beyond when the Club will need someone in place of JDT with similar drive and ambition who is actually  interested in results on the pitch to push Waggott Broughton and the owners into being as successful as we can be.

4 minutes ago, DuffsLeftPeg said:

Exactly, my daughter is 12 a couple days before! Why’s it not under 16?

Get the kids in, you also get the parents who then spend on food & merch, it’s really not rocket science.

Well, they could spend money on merch if we had any.

38 minutes ago, Staffordshire Rover said:

It’s 7.30pm in India and there is still no news. 

We didn't hear anything until ages after last time either. It was down to an Eagle eyed poster on here to spot that the case had been adjourned.

The silence from the Club was deafening- as it usually is when bad news is afoot - like when a planning application to bulldoze half of Brockhall had been sneakily slipped in under the radar but was spotted by someone on here ( MattyBlue?)

11 minutes ago, DavidMailsTightPerm said:

I am interested as to the level of funding - enough to cover losses including or excluding Wharton fee - i.e. will we have a transfer fund this summer or will it be swallowed up to pay ongoing losses.

You would have thought that as any request to the Court for funding is to keep the lights on only and is not intended to be earmarked for funding transfers, then any amount authorised would be reduced by the amount of the first installment received for Adam Wharton.

On the other hand you'd sort of hope any monies to be received for Raya in summer might be able to be put towards transfers.

Remains to be seen I suppose.

5 minutes ago, RoversClitheroe said:

Imo all the JDT out people must feel slightly silly.

Eustace is one of the worst appointments we've made.

I wasnt a JDT out person but I have to say I don't think the majority of people are giving Eustace any sort of chance.

Is this mainly down to the fact (unlike JDT) that his comments would tend to indicate he won't be rocking the boat or giving Waggott a hard time at any point?

Do I think Eustace is the man to take us forward in the long term? Not sure on the basis of what we've seen so far. However I am pretty certain that JDT would have taken us down had he stayed and if Eustace keeps us up, by whatever means, he'll have done his job for this season.

6 hours ago, OldEwoodBlue said:

Watched Liverpool City yesterday.

What a brilliant game.

Harvey Elliott had a fantastic game. 

 

I actually thought it was a really disappointing game given the quality of the two sides. City weren't at it at all I didn't think

1 hour ago, lraC said:

Ok, just for fun, I have looked at the games on Saturday in all of the 4 top divisions and the number of shots per game/ team are below. There were none with 0 but a couple with 2 and 3.

It might be prove very little, but given at least what a few of us on here suspect, it might tell a tale. I suspect no shots at all, is a VERY rare occurence.

MU 15 Ev 23, Bo 32 S U 13, CP 21 L T 8, Wol 8 Ful 23, Arse 17 Bre 9

Car 15, Ips 8, Rov 8, Pl 21, Hull 8 Lei 15, Mill 12 B Ham 16, NoR 5 Rot, 2, PNE 5 Sto 13, QPR 10 Boro 7, South 21, Sun 13, Wat 19 Cov 8

Bar 11 Lin 17, B Pool 5 Ports 11, BR 6 Der 15, Bur 12 Pet 14, Cam 4 Nor 8, Char 17 Car 6, Exe 11 BWFC 13, Ox 17 Chel 10, PV 16, Shrews 8, Read 15 Wyc 10. Steve 12 Fleet 4, Wig 10, Ley 10.

Acc 16 Bra 17, Bar 8 Col 9, Donc 14 Crewe 9, For G 5 Wal 17, Gill 26, Tra 10, Harr 17 Cra 18, MKD 9 Sal 9, Mans 22 Swi 20, Morc 6 Wrex 20, Notts C 8 Wim 8, Stock 27 Newp 3, Sutt 9 Grims 20

In Devil's advocate mode, if you were trying to throw a game isn't it likely you'd chuck in a few off target efforts in an attempt to make it slightly less suspicious?

No shots on or off target strikes me as being completely outclassed and/or completely not arsed rather than deliberately trying to throw the game.

And looking at the respective line ups for that Spurs game I'd go for a combination of the first 2.