I don’t think Wharton is going anywhere for the moment. I certainly hope he stays. Take him out of our side and we will struggle to get out of our own half.

4 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

I had to watch it a few times but I thought I spotted Pickering ‘grappling’ with Helik and then Helik breaking away from him.

That could be utter bollocks though as I have the eyesight of a modern day referee 😄

I agree entirely that he shouldn’t have been marking him (if indeed he was!!)

Nobody was marking him. The genius with the iPad and the FA Level 2 in coaching goalkeepers course has decided our players are better off standing away from opponents when they have a corner, and marking space instead.

Just now, Herbie6590 said:

Up for it @Miller11 ? 🤔

Absolutely!!

1 minute ago, J*B said:

It’s just like fake news on Twitter, someone says it and it’s then repeated until it becomes true. 

Smells of episode two of @Herbie6590’s new niche podcast POB (price of Blackburn), titled “Life Before Venkys - what was it like and what is true?” so that we have something on record to revert back to every time younger fans make up that the place was on fire. 

That sounds like an extremely necessary public service. I’ve lost count of the number of times I’ve had to dispel the myth that we were in oblivion until they came along. Like talking to a brick wall most of the time though.

46 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

I'd have thought it could act as a kind of unofficial mouthpiece for Rovers fans. Trust members are supporters and aware of the mood around Ewood, so in event of a contentious issue (eg, the Cambridge ticket controversy), it could release a statement giving the fans' point of view.

It might provide a comment after one of Tomasson's press conferences, backing (or otherwise) his views on the problems with the squad and the club's difficulties in making signings

There's lots that can be done to get the Trust (and Rovers) more in the media spotlight and yes, I do realise it does depend on people coming forward and putting in the time and effort

We’ve taken more of a proactive approach of late to be honest. Previously the Digital Day announcement would’ve led to us putting out a statement on our platforms, then contacting the Telegraph, Radio Lancs etc and giving them a soundbite which would likely never see the light of day.

More recently the approach has been to contact the club directly and tell them:

a) What the prevailing mood of the fans is

b) Why they feel like that

c) Recommend alternatives/solutions

d) See how we can help implement them 

I’ve made a real point over the last 18 months to not just complain, but to try and provide solutions, and it’s definitely seen some success.

I definitely take your point though, content and Social Media are two areas we would absolutely love a bit more help in.

41 minutes ago, RoversClitheroe said:

Are the trust any closer to direct contact with the Venkys?

Probably not. Might be able to give a fuller answer later this week.

1 minute ago, jim mk2 said:

Does the Rovers Trust have a press officer pushing Rovers to the forefront of the MSM?

Looking at the website, the News Section has very little that would be of interest to the media

To take the threatened winding-up for instance, I couldn't see a news story, or some sort of comment piece

No, we don’t. The board is a small number of volunteers who commit varying levels of their free time. Were always on the lookout for more help from individuals with time and appropriate skillsets.

It’s a long time since anything at Rovers was of interest to the main stream media. It’s painfully difficult for the Trust to get anything in the local press or radio Lancashire most of the time.

20 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

Thanks Duncan , as usual a great professional response,  and update .

I get the emails, but can't see any minutes of meetings on any of them, is there emails I'm not getting?

On another note, I have asked this question previously privately, but will ask publicly as it does bug me,

On the Trust history page, the trust has continued to not put my down as a previous board member, despite being heavily involved before the amalgamation and also former secretary, the only one the Trust does not put on!!!

I appreciate we have newer board members, who at times appear to post in a manner that I'm against an organisation which I've promoted throughout, signed up and pledged. 

I'm allowed to ask question of the trust as a supporter without feeling I should not.

The reason I stood down from the Trust was when I acquired the smoking gun regarding SEM's contract with the club , the trust failed to release this into the public domain and felt they did not want to put their head above the parapet (Granted 90% of the current board was not in situ).

I therefore stood down, and released it myself to ensure the pack of cards came tumbling down around SEM etc,

Any way would of asked this in person, but have done a number of times

No problem mate.

The emails we send are usually in the form of a newsletter, as well as ad hoc one off news items. We generally don’t send the minutes via email, but they are available on the website. With the updates they aren’t all on there at present so we may have to look at adding an archive for the older ones.

https://www.roverstrust.com/news-resources/minutes
 

The history page is not on the new website any more. It was very incomplete (including the omission of yourself and others as well as missing key achievements and activities) and it became very difficult to try and bring it up to scratch as there isn’t any continuous board member who has been involved at every step, so the decision was taken to remove that section. Hopefully the site is more user friendly nowadays.

In due course (probably before our next AGM), I will write an article outlining the history properly and mentioning all those who have contributed… it’s quite a list! And find a more appropriate home for it on the site and in future Trust literature.

9 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Are there no circumstances where you’d think divulging information would trump maintaining the trust’s relationship with the board?

 

To be perfectly honest in the last 3 and a half years there hasn’t been anything confidential of the slightest bit of interest. 

To answer your question though, there definitely would be instances in theory. Long term health of the club is far more important than anything else.

32 minutes ago, superniko said:

Likewise, i've been a member for 3 years and haven't received a single piece of communication on anything (newsletters, meeting notes etc.)

Can you drop me a DM with your name and email address. I’ll get it sorted

12 minutes ago, J*B said:

Thanks for this Duncan, really interesting read.

I think the Trust would benefit from more transparency which could be hard to do. One way, which would be relatively simple, would be to have a members section of the Trust website. Within that section you could:

Upload all minutes of meetings

Live stream the AGM

Have transparent members polling - so members can see what the majority of the membership think. 

I also think you could perhaps do with improving comms on here, especially as clearly there’s different opinions at board level of The Trust (which is great, by the way). Can I suggest that official comms come through @Rovers Trust and non official comms through personal accounts? We could also add something to highlight the Trusts board members on here so that people can differentiate members, much like we do with the moderation team.

If someone could look into my membership that would be great - I’ve been through my emails this morning and have received no comms at all since rejoining just before the AGM at Billington Brass Band Club. 

Our systems and processes were in an absolutely horrendous state and unfit for purpose, hence the investment in our website. It’s not been as quick as we’d like but we are hoping to implement some of the above very quickly. Live stream of the AGM is a definite one. We also need some more active volunteers for working parties and board members, which we are planning to be more proactive in recruiting for.

I think a Trust board members badge would be great on here. I’ve got the login to our profile, I tend to just use my personal one through laziness and the fact I don’t get ads.

Regarding minutes we are obligated to publish them for both board meeting and MOU meetings, so no excuses there. 

2 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

Of course it would be good, but away from here most fans still think the club would be worse off without them - so how are you getting a protest off the ground?

I think the tide has turned. Seems to be a lot more “Venky’s Out” sentiments than “Venky’s are keeping us going” for the first time in years.

2 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Tronstad? Kevin Gallagher and Andy Bayes full of praise for his performance and said he was our best player 

He might scrape a 1/10. 

Garrett was our best player by a country mile. Wharton tried to make things happen. Not gonna be too hard on JRC or Gallagher as neither could move, but the rest were awful. Special mentions to Wahlstedt, Brittain and Hyam who were a disgrace.

1 minute ago, gazza1981 said:

I was right Moran is playing centrally,

Fuck off

Hyam, Brittain and Wahlstedt should all be subbed off now.

Brittain twice now 5 yards behind the rest of the back line playing people on side. Doesn’t have a clue what is going on around him. Something very wrong with Hyam too.