[Archived] Venky's are good for Rovers...

[A cup of beans]

It shows the characteristics of many of the main protagonists and is a must for all new posters.

great line!

[imy9]

Id wait until the Wolves match is behind us before starting out on that road imy. You might easily end up looking a right plonker.......

btw mob.... take your pick.

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/british/mob_1

You have claimed that Nicko is a paid member of Kentaro, amongst other great gems, with all due respect I am not the one who should be worried about looking like a plonker!!

Mob- you said take your pick so you think they are criminals? That was what I thought you were inferring which is why I wanted to know your insider information.

[pedebumchin]

This thread should be part of any BRFCS induction process, and all new users should be made to read it before posting.

It shows the characteristics of many of the main protagonists and is a must for all new posters.

Its only 3 pages long, I challenge you all to read it in its entirety and I'm sure you'll get what i mean

Its certainly opened my eyes to a few of the characters on here.

[47er]

I know appearences are deceiving but I was put off em the minute I clapped eyes on em.

That's true. I accept that.

[deryck guyler's spoon]

I know appearences are deceiving but I was put off em the minute I clapped eyes on em.

Quell surprise.

[tony gale's mic]

You are such a bore. I can't read one page of this forum without reading your opinion again. Give other people a chance to have their say. If your opinions change, feel free to notify us. Otherwise we all know where you stand so kindly keep schtum.

People like you are too thick to understand a few basic things, so I feel it bears repeating. And I'll carry on doing it.

If you don't like it, you know where to go.

Thanks.

[deryck guyler's spoon]

People like you are too thick to understand a few basic things, so I feel it bears repeating. And I'll carry on doing it.

If you don't like it, you know where to go.

Thanks.

How do you get that the poster is thick from that? Dosn't seem thick at all to me but then I'm not a doctor. Plus you wont carry on being an obnoxious pr1ck if you are banned.

I should know

[tony gale's mic]

How do you get that the poster is thick from that? Dosn't seem thick at all to me but then I'm not a doctor. Plus you wont carry on being an obnoxious pr1ck if you are banned.

I should know

Funny, because what happened there is that I posted something fairly non offensive then got flamed in return, for which I responded back.

You should really keep up.

[deryck guyler's spoon]

Funny, because what happened there is that I posted something fairly non offensive then got flamed in return, for which I responded back.

You should really keep up.

The time lag can make keeping up difficult at times. So, without trawling through the thread, I see that you are being unnecessarily abrasive again.

I have been a bit that way myself for which I have copped a couple of bans. You seem to have something of a hair trigger when it comes to hitting the reply button and have become the boards most prolific flamer.

It has, however, earned you a mention on that EPL poll site. Sadly you were namechecked in the same breath as Thenodrog.

[Tris]

People like you are too thick to understand a few basic things, so I feel it bears repeating. And I'll carry on doing it.

I've had enough of this.

I can't speak for anybody else, but I would suggest that Rev Blue is asking a question here which many people want to see answered ...

Can you possibly make a post without insulting someone?

Just looking back over the last 10 days - apparently not -->

Moron. ... Worst post of the year? ... I feel embarassed to support the same club as you ... You're just a troglodyte ... Rather be boring than be too damn thick to engage in debate ... given your views on football you probably lack the intelligence to do ... So basically, you've been making things up ... You really, really, really are stupid ... When I call someone stupid, I don't just do it for no reason ... a quick query shows that I've called other posters idiotic around 10-11 times in five years on this board ... And you, lecturing someone else on forum popularity. I'll leave you to consider how idiotic that is ... you're just a bit thick when it comes to football ... You do talk so much rubbish don't you? ... Just you getting things all wrong ... All you're doing is showing how little you know ... Embarassing ... For any football fan who knows a bit about the game (you know, the type of fan that backs successful managers ... And once more, your lack of logic comes to the fore ... What have you provided that's benefited mankind? Bigotry and ignorance don't count ... What a surprise, you're talking more rubbish ... displaying a total lack of insight ...

Just to confirm - that's only 10 days worth. But the most offensive crap we have to read from Doctor Gale is the insinuation of mental illness whenever an argument is being lost - as here ...

Well theno, if your Alzheimer's didn't rob you of your ability to use a computer, then you'd be able to use the search function too

The fall back option on to mental illness has been used several times. I'm not wasting my time finding the previous examples.

This reply will appear in the wrong thread due to the quote which has caused it, but I will copy and paste into Ask Admin. One idiot cannot be allowed to devalue an otherwise excellent discussion forum.

[RevidgeBlue]

Walker Trust: 10 years of Premier league stabilty.

Hardly "stability". The record books show that we weren't relegated during that time and that the owners were the Walker Trust and John Williams remained Chairman/Chief Executive.

That apart we were nearly relegated under Souness, needed Freddy Shepherd to take him off our hands when our Board refused to act, found an absolute gem in Hughes then drove him away through lack of support, made an abysmal appointment with Ince (I was guilty of wanting him as well) and as a consequence narrowly avoided relegation under Sam which all credit to him was an achievement in itself given the position we were in.

It's a bit like us hopefully staying up and claiming - "We've had one season of stability under the Rao's" The record books will still show we're in the Premiership and the owners will still be the same but the reality behind those bare headlines is somewhat different.

[Silencio]

Hardly "stability". The record books show that we weren't relegated during that time and that the owners were the Walker Trust and John Williams remained Chairman/Chief Executive.

That apart we were nearly relegated under Souness, needed Freddy Shepherd to take him off our hands when our Board refused to act, found an absolute gem in Hughes then drove him away through lack of support, made an abysmal appointment with Ince (I was guilty of wanting him as well) and as a consequence narrowly avoided relegation under Sam which all credit to him was an achievement in itself given the position we were in.

It's a bit like us hopefully staying up and claiming - "We've had one season of stability under the Rao's" The record books will still show we're in the Premiership and the owners will still be the same but the reality behind those bare headlines is somewhat different.

So you'd be unhappy with another 10 years of what we've just had? I guess so because you often used to go on about how if we were to get new owners you'd want them to be buying 15 million pound players etc.

A bit more spending from the old board would have been nice but you would have moaned about them whatever they did.

[Parsonblue]

Hardly "stability". The record books show that we weren't relegated during that time and that the owners were the Walker Trust and John Williams remained Chairman/Chief Executive.

That apart we were nearly relegated under Souness, needed Freddy Shepherd to take him off our hands when our Board refused to act, found an absolute gem in Hughes then drove him away through lack of support, made an abysmal appointment with Ince (I was guilty of wanting him as well) and as a consequence narrowly avoided relegation under Sam which all credit to him was an achievement in itself given the position we were in.

It's a bit like us hopefully staying up and claiming - "We've had one season of stability under the Rao's" The record books will still show we're in the Premiership and the owners will still be the same but the reality behind those bare headlines is somewhat different.

I think ten continuous seasons in the top flight might be described as "stability". After all it's the first time it has happened since 1936 so I think John Williams and the Trust must have been doing something right!

Nearly being relegated counts for nothing. History will record that the Walker Trust and John Williams provided ten years of continuous top flight football at Ewood Park. The challenge for the Venky group is to do the same.

Mrs Desai has already stated that they don't have the spending power of Liverpool or Chelsea. Therefore they don't have the spending power of United, City, Arsenal or Tottenham. With the top five or six places ruled out they are looking to finish as high as possible outside of that top group. A top ten finish is a realistic goal, which is exaclty what the Trust set out to do. However, as with the Trust, Premier League survival will remain the major goal - let's hope that it is one they can achieve this season.

[A cup of beans]

I think ten continuous seasons in the top flight might be described as "stability". After all it's the first time it has happened since 1936 so I think John Williams and the Trust must have been doing something right!

im my opinion. rovers surviving in the premier league had very little to do with the trust. sure they provided funds etc.. but were miserly with them. at one stage... rovers were about 7 in line to get money from the trust (that was in charles lamberts book about jack walker).

surviving for 10 years was more down to screwed management decisions on the pitch and off it!

(particularly by JW)in choosing the right football managers at the right time.

souness, MH and big sam (though i wouldve sacked sam after he saved us.. but lets not go there in this thread!)

[den]

surviving for 10 years was more down to screwed management decisions on the pitch and off it!

(particularly by JW)in choosing the right football managers at the right time.

JW was an employee of the trust. If we had the right people now choosing the manager, we wouldn't be in this position.

Is that hard to see?

[A cup of beans]

JW was an employee of the trust. If we had the right people now choosing the manager, we wouldn't be in this position.

Is that hard to see?

JW was running the club on behalf of the trust! CHRIST I KNOW THAT!

i stand by my points.. THEY WERE IN REFERENCE TO THE 10 YEARS OF PREM FOOTBALL ETC...

so you do you think the trust did more for rovers than JW and the managers he chose ?

[den]

JW was running the club on behalf of the trust! CHRIST I KNOW THAT!

i stand by my points.. THEY WERE IN REFERENCE TO THE 10 YEARS OF PREM FOOTBALL ETC...

so you do you think the trust did more for rovers than JW and the managers he chose ?

The trust were every bit as responsible for our continued PL existence as JW, or anyone else. They employed JW and stuck with him, because they realised the good work he was doing. I didn't think it was difficult to understand, but it obviously is.

[A cup of beans]

The trust were every bit as responsible for our continued PL existence as JW, or anyone else. They employed JW and stuck with him, because they realised the good work he was doing. I didn't think it was difficult to understand, but it obviously is.

not difficult to understand.. ijust disagree with you! thats all!

after all i did say IN MY OPINION IN MY 1ST POST!

read charles lamberts book about jack walker and the parts on the trust. you'll find it interesting.

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Club-That-Jack-Built-Blackburn/dp/1903854032

[Parsonblue]

im my opinion. rovers surviving in the premier league had very little to do with the trust. sure they provided funds etc.. but were miserly with them. at one stage... rovers were about 7 in line to get money from the trust (that was in charles lamberts book about jack walker).

surviving for 10 years was more down to screwed management decisions on the pitch and off it!

(particularly by JW)in choosing the right football managers at the right time.

souness, MH and big sam (though i wouldve sacked sam after he saved us.. but lets not go there in this thread!)

It was the Trust who employed JW. It was the Trust who provided the funds - no matter how limited. The bottom line is that without the Trust the club wouldn't have survived one season in the Premier League. Clearly the Trust were correct to give more power to JW with regard to the daily running of the club. A pity our present owners believe that they can run it better from Pune than JW did at Ewood. You are correct in your assessment that JW was a shrewd judge of a manager. Somehow, if he was still responsible for the appointment of managers I suspect our present occupant of that position might well not be there.

[BuckyRover]

It was the Trust who employed JW. It was the Trust who provided the funds - no matter how limited. The bottom line is that without the Trust the club wouldn't have survived one season in the Premier League. Clearly the Trust were correct to give more power to JW with regard to the daily running of the club. A pity our present owners believe that they can run it better from Pune than JW did at Ewood. You are correct in your assessment that JW was a shrewd judge of a manager. Somehow, if he was still responsible for the appointment of managers I suspect our present occupant of that position might well not be there.

I agree. JW was completely infallible.

Appointing Ince over Sam when Hughes left was completely the correct decision.

[Mattyblue]

I agree. JW was completely infallible.

Who said he was?

[Parsonblue]

I agree. JW was completely infallible.

Appointing Ince over Sam when Hughes left was completely the correct decision.

Nobody said he was perfect but he did appoint some good managers. Our present owners seem to think that Steve Kean is a good manager - one win in the best part of three and half months shows how good their decision making is. Still, if you are happy with that, fair enough. We obviously have the perfect owners and the perfect manager. A marriage made in heaven.

[RevidgeBlue]

Our present owners seem to think that Steve Kean is a good manager - one win in the best part of three and half months shows how good their decision making is. Still, if you are happy with that, fair enough. We obviously have the perfect owners and the perfect manager. A marriage made in heaven.

What a silly post. We don't now know that the owners think Kean is a good manager at all.

What we do know is that they decided not to sack him before the end of the season and as the players have really given it their all in the last three games that seems with the benefit of hindsight that seems to be the correct decision.

No-one is saying they are the perfect owners either but they are the only ones we've got so we have to go with them for the time being.

[BuckyRover]

Nobody said he was perfect but he did appoint some good managers. Our present owners seem to think that Steve Kean is a good manager - one win in the best part of three and half months shows how good their decision making is. Still, if you are happy with that, fair enough. We obviously have the perfect owners and the perfect manager. A marriage made in heaven.

Yeah that's exactly what I'm saying. Everything is perfect and can be viewed in black and white.

More realistically what I'm subscribing to is that things weren't perfect then and aren't perfect now.

Did you expect any novice to come in and not make any mistakes? Because if you did you were always going to be disappointed whatever happened. I'm clinging on to the belief that the new owners are learning all the time and won't be as rash in the future. If they can learn this lesson without us being relegated then I am happy with the outcome.

[LeChuck]

I agree. JW was completely infallible.

Appointing Ince over Sam when Hughes left was completely the correct decision.

JW knew when he'd made a mistake though, and was humble enough to admit it immediately.