Your mindset seems to be to question those who are basing their opinion that Venkys are unlikely to get this/these decisions right and/or that agents wont be key to the decision on the basis that the last managerial decision was 6 years ago. Surely the onus is on you to tell people why you assume that they HAVE suddenly changed and now know how to run a football club? Much more minor in the grand scheme of things but you can see signs that they are not emotionally interested and invested in the club. They claimed that they would attend a game this season, they didn't. The manager wasn't able to reinvest any of the Armstrong money nor was he given money when 2nd in January. The owners seemingly haven't communicated with the manager etc for at least 6 months. The owners flatly declined a fairly moderate 2m necessary spend on a new pitch last summer despite it not falling under the criteria of the common excuse of FFP. It seems like the managerial search falls on the remit of Waggott rather than the owners, which itself is likely an example of delegating such a key task to someone who perhaps isn't suitably up to that job. You don't know that the club know who they want to interview nor whether it will be "shortly" as you say. Watford sack their managers often before things are allowed to manifest and turn really sour.

All that video is doing is giving the referee a chance to see something that he may not have fully seen. One man at the pace of a match at that level with the potential for a number of the 22 players getting in the way, he is unlikely or cannot be expected to always get a clear view. It's one of them I suppose. VAR is a way of getting more decisions right and giving referees much more evidence on which to make key decisions upon. That being said, it can take away the element of spontaneity. It isn't perfect but I am not sure that anyone who is dead against it can strongly criticise decisions made in competitions where it doesn't exist, considering they are so against the most useful solution.

The ref did decide based on what he saw, which was in line with the current rules. VAR often gets the blame for when decisions are given according to the laws of the game that people perhaps don't agree with, which is a totally different argument altogether. I was against VAR initially but you cannot argue that it doesn't improve the accuracy of decisions.

VAR again was not the issue but will no doubt get the blame. All that VAR did was allowed the ref to be highlighted of a handball that under the current rules was then correctly given as a penalty.

I think you are being very naive assuming that Lenihan will wait with any certainty. The first thing is money, if a team offers him a decent pay rise, like the vast majority of people, he will probably go there instead, its a short career and he will be Also, he will not wait indefinitely and you know what our club is like with unnecessary delays, things having to be signed off in India etc. Even if he is interested to see who our next manager is, if we don't appoint one in reasonable time he will have long gone. Interesting that you have copied onto here every single twitter interaction with journalists over the last week or so, but not the below which suggests that the imminent appointment you seem to expect doesn't seem particularly likely. Nothing was clearly lined up as was mooted by some.

He only had a cameo at Stoke and didnt play in the return game. He did start v Sheffield United when he wasnt stand out but did a decent enough job and kept his place for the following game at Bristol City where he was less effective and was dropped for the next game at home to Peterborough. We won 4 nil and coupled with a move to a formation with only 2 midfield slots we then went on a winning run so he cant justifably feel aggrieved at being taken out then. His main downfall has been his terrible injury record which continiously prevented him from gaining momentum and ultimately when he did play he didnt make sure he couldnt be dropped. I tried to find the quotes you mentioned but couldnt. But I very much doubt that the likes of Buckley are massive talkers, maybe he was wanting more authority from Davenport who when he did play often let games pass without really influencing them.

Even in those 2 years he has had injuries, he missed the last few weeks this season I think with injuries. Has he ever really announced himself when he has played? This season no one in their right mind would have dropped Travis or Rothwell and he seems to get better and better by not playing. I know its the easiest narrative to pin everything on Mowbray but not sure its the case here.

With me? I don't think its unjustified pessimism that causes me to fear the worst regarding key decisions made under Venkys ownership! I suspect that in a couple of weeks the role will still be vacant.

I think I would describe that as blind faith. I suppose it wont be Venkys directly picking unless an agency muscles in and their "naivety" wins again. Farke yes, Carvalhal probably yes I would consider to be good appointments. I expect someone probably not mentioned yet and not for a long while either.

With the likes of Nyambe, Lenihan and the extension in Brereton's contract, they are all proven regular players at this level so it is straightforward to try and tie them down even before a manager comes in. With Davenport, he has had 4 seasons and has never proven his worth so it seems counterproductive to try and keep him on the off chance that he looks ok when he occasionally features. Davenport's main issue throughout his Rovers career has been injuries so he isn't fit for purpose even as a potential squad player because he isn't reliable on. I don't think he has been particularly short changed by management either in that he has at times filled in and looked ok but he has never made himself undroppable, perhaps partially down to his struggles to keep fit for any extended period. He has been here for 4 years now and has not impressed for any significant period, seems to make sense to me to move him on and allow him to try and nail down a spot elsewhere (probably League 1 or 2) rather than potentially lumber him onto a new manager.

Ideally we will go for a manager of the calibre that you mention, but as I said I don't have faith that we will, we just have to look back over 12 years to see why.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/20138428.remaining-decisions-rovers-blackburn-finalise-retained-list/ Hints that Davenport and Butterworth might be kept on which would be the wrong decision both financially and from a footballing perspective. Davenport has been here for 4 years presumably on not insignificant wages having been at City and has spent much of that time injured. When he has played he hasn't really impressed and has never kept a place in the team, just let him go. Butterworth is terrible, he can't run for longer than 5 minutes and he comes across as lazy, I remember that Boro game when we had to carry him even though he had come on supposedly to give us fresh legs when we were short of forward options. He didn't do anything at Fleetwood, let him find a club lower down.

"Throw £20m at as every year" is not a reasonable summary of what happens. Taking the actual amount as gospel, it implies that the money is injected as a means of ambition, when in fact it is common place across the Championship that teams make losses and have to offset them via debt or more likely issues of share capital. I dont get why so many naturally assume that the sole limiting factor is FFP, as if Venkys deserve the benefit of the doubt to assume that otherwise they would be investing more. Take the example of the pitch, they chose not to invest 2m to re-lay it but that was exempt of FFP. Why would they come here? Luton finished 6th, its not even as if we offer more money anymore. It isnt just confidence, he has clearly developed technically and physically. He uses his body which has naturally filled out much better, he wins fouls, he holds it up, he does so much more. But I really dont like this idea that the fans expected the finished product. They didnt but what was on show was a player who for 2 years looked so out of place, the fans were remarkably patient in my opinion.

Imagine that indeed, dream rather than reality I suspect.

I actually think that his finishing has gone from being wild to being very clinical and technically good. I think back to his second at home to Peterborough, his goal at Peterborough, his first v Cardiff and his goal at Bristol City all come to mind. Mind you, he has got his fair share of penalties and tap ins to get the numbers up as any goalscorer needs. I can't see any transfer links at the moment being right considering we have no manager. But Pearson will have already been on a decent wage at Bournemouth prior to a hike following promotion, I can't see how that deal could ever happen.

Transfer recruitment was an example of the sort of task that a head coach wouldn't be responsible for, not a sole job description. Carrick was an example of a rookie manager, my point was that it might be easier to justify employing a rookie or a no mark as a head coach under the proviso that he has less responsibility anyway under that particular structure. The 6 man shortlist was an easy headline that was very premature but is ultimately not far off being impossible to disprove, in order to get people to read his nonsense. The general consensus is that we are still taking in applications and haven't narrowed everything down yet, although that doesn't stop people from harassing journalists for hourly updates and micro-analysing the betting odds. I have no confidence that either of these job roles will be filled by competent people or indeed with any speed or efficiency. Lets hope I am proved wrong against all historical examples.

If I had to bet on a Burnley side fighting for their lives at home to a Newcastle side who have nothing to play for with a couple of ex dingles thrown into the bargain, I know where my money would go.

My point not specific to those 2 individuals regarding a novice is that they theoretically would be seen more suitable to a head coach role whereby a director of football (your favourite role) is taking some of the responsibilities (eg transfers) away from him considering he would have had no experience of dealing with any of them in the past. I don't want a novice based on his playing reputation but the assumption that everyone has taken from the story that we want a director of football/sporting director is that Farke or Carvahal are coming rather than a novice or a waste of time, especially considering Venkys track record. Regarding Nixon, I don't follow him, although it is difficult to ignore his tweets on here whereby you have shared his mythical story about a shortlist, (which doesn't exist considering we are so early in the process and even then, he didn't know all of the names anyway!) his opinions both on video via Radio Lancashire and on twitter regarding his views on the situation, his advice on not paying attention to betting odds and a regular commentary of cryptic nonsense and opinions from him! I just find it funny that people tweet him so often when they will only receive cryptic answers and as if he does know who will be our new manager and would reply if someone directly asked him, otherwise he would keep such a story quiet when he is a bloody journalist!

Nixon is seemingly absolutely thriving in the pack of gossip hungry Rovers fans asking him every hour for another cryptic update.

I think Burnley will (unfortunately) beat a Newcastle side that will be on the beach.

Owners should not be interfering with decisions regarding transfers, the autonomy should be given to the manager on such decisions. That is the main worry going forward, that they did that in the first place. I would have struggled to see 2 players being finalised in a couple of days.

"Interest in the job has been strong, with applications from managers all over the world, though no shortlist has yet been drawn up as Rovers take an open mind to their search." Worth highlighting ahead of people coming to premature conclusions regarding whispers and betting odds. Miles away from an appointment.

Having a Sporting Director or similar may be more likely to attract a total novice like Carrick or Ferguson in that their role will have less responsibilities, although we all hope for a Farke or a Carvalhal. I do fear that not only will this lengthen the gap before any appointment but it also creates a second key position which with Venkys track record may well lead to a poor appointment. You look at previous appointments under Venkys in a similar position, the last one was Senior who was here for a very short period, we signed a player from his agency and he slid off without trace as soon as we went down. It may increase the influence of agents etc.

Just regarding the sentence in bold, is that true? Mowbray spent all last summer seeming frustrated that none of the money was being allowed to be reinvested even before Armstrong had actually been sold, and kept saying how we could only sign kids on loan from the Premier League but that it would be close to the end of the window before that happened because we could not offer much financially and had to "sell ourselves" as a club that would allow these players a platform to play regularly etc. He has repeatedly said that he doesn't like relying on the loan market and mentioned needing experience last summer but didn't have the budget to do that. He had Josh Maja in the building but even then that was a loan deal and it was only a medical issue that prevented the deal from going through.

He seems to have developed with age and maybe with confidence so it doesnt seem logical for him to revert back to what he was like a couple of years ago, his third season was a major improvement on his first 2 without being remarkable so its not been a sudden zero to hero type transformation. Contracts and finance all put to one side, compared to the season just gone we clearly will be a massively weaker team without him, and that was shown when he was injured and we couldnt score goals in his absence.