jim mk2

You can't win football matches if you keep conceding soft goals This has always been Mowbray's problem.... for years... and nothing changes

2-0, so easy, not even a contest Commentators are saying Rovers have been playing well and are unlucky!

This is hopeless...... toothless in attack, weak, inexperienced and prone to mistakes at the back Watford 3-0

Long balls aimed at a 5ft 7in centre forward🙄

Another very, very soft goal

Another very, very soft goal

25th minute 0 -1, I was 5 mins out

Davenport's probably having a beer at home

Evans and Rothwell..... that'll frighten 'em

To be fair, I thought the 2 teenagers played well in the last match. Agree that line-up doesn't inspire confidence

I think we know the plot tonight We'll start brightly but gradually fall back and then concede a soft goal (they're always soft) by the 20th minute Watford take control and the match meanders along until the 65th minute when Mowbray throws on 4 attacking subs Watford confirm their superiority shortly after with the second goal and although Rovers finally wake up in the last 10 minutes the match is already lost Rovers 0 Watford 2, and save yourself £10.

2 quick wickets but we need India to bat as badly as us to get back in this game

England failings rather than brilliance of the spinners.

Test match lost in one session. Well played England

Sibley has good concentration and the temperament to play a long innings but his technique is so poor. His bat does not come down straight and he turns his wrist at most balls to try to play them to leg. A good bowler will get him out and I don't see him as a long term solution to open the England batting

What does "performance related coach" mean? It's a load of gobbledgook to detract from results. If results had been good, but the performances poor, he'd have said he was a "results based coach". Anyway, Tony, if you want to be judged on performances most fans would agree they've been very poor, and that's being kind. Another defeat tonight and please do the decent thing and resign

Waggott's the nominal CEO at Ewood. He's the obvious "brains" behind this scheme and will have sold it to the owners as a good idea to claw some money back (and probably get a bonus for himself). Venky's, who have little or no input in the day to day running of the club as far as fans can tell, don't appear to be the villains here

A warning for the future ? This is Coventry City's Highfield Road ground in the 1980s .......... and this is the site now

Rovers forward John Byrom walking down the street where he lived at the time, John Bright Street in Blackburn, also the street of where Fred Pickering once lived. Picture date December 1964.

Yep, fixes the budget debt for a short period but doesn't tackle the structural debt. Flogging off Brockhall is like selling the family silver though. In the end, there's nothing left.

Still doesn't put that much of a dent in the club's overall debt, especially after "executives" have taken their slice (allegedly), though no doubt the club's owners will be relieved to get some money back. And still begs the question, what are fans going to do (if anything) to oppose it?

The rule of a third in property development doesn't work any more. Building costs have soared, especially in the past 12 months,.

Hands up anyone on here who has any ideas on how to oppose this or has resolved to actively do something?

I think everyone agrees this is all very bad news and no one is in favour. So how are we, the fans and everyone who cares about the club, and presumably the community around Brockhall who I assume will be against the proposal, going to oppose it? This is going to need concerted action. Fans complaining on a messageboard won't stop it happening

Agree except that Rovers isn't a "product". It's a club and vital part of the community and the town and people's lives.