WATR (The Rovers Trust)

[jumpin']

13 hours ago, jumpin' said:

We are being run into the ground. We have an opportunity with JDT to move forward, but he doesn’t have the correct support.

To clarify, after the first goal conceded yesterday, a host of people around me in the Blackburn End gave JDT grief. Blaming ‘tippy tippy’ football, ‘go more direct’, ‘time to go’, etc. 

It got me thinking that if another manager came in, the present board would still hinder them. I want JDT to stay because I feel with the right structure he will succeed. However, with VH not budging, maybe a change at board level, with a more dynamic and positive approach, would mid term help.

I am a member of the Trust, and appreciate the time and effort that you put in.

[Mattyblue]

Whereas TM got nothing of the sort despite having some real piss poor seasons on a higher budget. And of course we never hear anything against Swag, Venky’s or anyone else.

They get away with murder. 
 

[RoversClitheroe]

As a trust member I think it's time to put the pressure on, now is the time to make change, the board need pressure and a public release is a good start in my opinion.

They're getting away with far too much and everytime people are having these secret meetings and nothing is happening or improving, why should it be on the Fans to takeover a match experience. We're being taken the piss of and doing employees jobs for them.

I want to see action and I'm sure many many more want to see a public press release asking for a change of the board at the very least.

[Mashed Potatoes]

3 minutes ago, RoversClitheroe said:

As a trust member I think it's time to put the pressure on, now is the time to make change, the board need pressure and a public release is a good start in my opinion.

They're getting away with far too much and everytime people are having these secret meetings and nothing is happening or improving, why should it be on the Fans to takeover a match experience. We're being taken the piss of and doing employees jobs for them.

I want to see action and I'm sure many many more want to see a public press release asking for a change of the board at the very least.

A change in the board will result in new members being appointed by the owners. Nothing would actually change.

[RoversClitheroe]

6 minutes ago, Mashed Potatoes said:

A change in the board will result in new members being appointed by the owners. Nothing would actually change.

And this is the problem with our fanbase - zero ambition.

Edited January 15 by RoversClitheroe

[Mattyblue]

Fundamentally nothing would change, quite right - but Swag’s race is run regardless.

He has been a complete disaster. Yes, he has targets to hit, we know that, but a new appointment could well look to reach said targets without seemingly going out of his/her way to antagonise and atrophy the fanbase.

It’s a sticking plaster, we know what the root cause is, but it still needs to happen - though with these owners calling for his head will probably lead to a new contract and pay rise.

Edited January 15 by Mattyblue

[chaddyrovers]

aren't We Are Rovers(Rovers trust) engaged with Steve Waggott over a range of issues including trying to gain contact with the owners? so surely it would be counter productive to call for Steve Waggott to go when you want a number of things from him? 

[Mattyblue]

Mike was saying the other week that they now want to go directly into India - what does that tell you about Swag?

[RoversClitheroe]

26 minutes ago, Mattyblue said:

Mike was saying the other week that they now want to go directly into India - what does that tell you about Swag?

Where's the press release to ask for change if that's the case then? 

[ABBEY]

3 hours ago, chaddyrovers said:

aren't We Are Rovers(Rovers trust) engaged with Steve Waggott over a range of issues including trying to gain contact with the owners? so surely it would be counter productive to call for Steve Waggott to go when you want a number of things from him? 

WUM post of the year so far goes to......

[chaddyrovers]

4 minutes ago, ABBEY said:

WUM post of the year so far goes to......

No Abbey, Its what the trust want to do as I read the comments from board members that their aim, so your post is just plain wrong

[ABBEY]

So you would rather lick satans arse than call him out for what he and the venkyscum are?

[wilsdenrover]

15 minutes ago, ABBEY said:

So you would rather lick satans arse than call him out for what he and the venkyscum are?

You have a marvellous way with words 😁

[chaddyrovers]

52 minutes ago, ABBEY said:

So you would rather lick satans arse than call him out for what he and the venkyscum are?

No Abbey, I would like new owners and new commercial driven CEO who can improve the club commercial, marketing, sponsorship wise as soon as possible, but I am also extremely cautious about new owner and what type of owner we get after these. Yes we might get a new owner who can be great and CEO who understand the fanbase, local area and what Rovers means to the fans, but it also be the other way. I can't predict who would be interest in the club if it was sale could you? 

[Upside Down]

Sorry to go on about this but Mike Graham's comments that the owners should be given credit for paying a tax bill late after the club had been threatened with a winding up order are unacceptable.

The Rovers Trust are supposed to act in the best interests of the club. For the chairman of that organisation to be making statements of that manner is absolutely not on. I expect these comments to be retracted.

I would expect an organisation that claims to have the best interests of the club at heart to be making a statement of no confidence in the people running the club on the ground at the bare minimum.

The Trust should be doing all it can to see the removal of the owners and their lackeys. That is the only way that this club will have any kind of future. If the Trust are not working towards the venkys removal then they do not have the best interests of the club at heart and that is an organisation that I want no part of.

Venkys have turned Blackburn Rovers from a source of pride into a source of embarrassment. They have taken the best run club in the country and run it completely into the ground.

 

[AllRoverAsia]

If the Trust want a direct line to the owners Waggott is not the way to go. Suhail maybe.

Personally I think there is close to zero chance.

Waggott's survival instincts will want the Trust at arm length.

 

[Mattyblue]

It’s obviously a difficult one for the Trust. Very unhelpful comments about ‘gratitude’ to the owners for paying the tax bill late after a winding up order threat aside (that was a public comment too, so what is being said behind closed doors?) The Watford game showed that they/the fans can make a difference. They are trying to improve the club in spite of the executives and ownership in many ways as we know they are unfit for purpose.

However, they also have a duty to try and ensure we have a thriving club for future generations and a time has to come surely where we just accept that this club cannot prosper under this regime and change has to be demanded - personally I am at that stage, brfcs.com is at the stage, a campaign to get them out? Sign me up today!

But unfortunately the wider fanbase isn’t even close to being where I am. Put to one side trying to build relationships with those running the club for a moment, it’s a tough line for The Trust to tread to even keep the fanbase onside as there is no anti-CEO/Venky groundswell from where I’m standing. We are going down the plughole and unfortunately most fans are happy to just stand and watch it happen.
 

Edited January 16 by Mattyblue

[OldEwoodBlue]

On 15/01/2024 at 09:01, RoversClitheroe said:

And this is the problem with our fanbase - zero ambition.

Oh dear.

What you should have typed is

 

And this is the problem with our owners - zero ambition.

[OldEwoodBlue]

Tear up the Memorandum of Understanding.

The Trust are shackled to Waggott by it.

Aka in his pocket.

 

[RoversClitheroe]

On 20/01/2024 at 09:10, OldEwoodBlue said:

Tear up the Memorandum of Understanding.

The Trust are shackled to Waggott by it.

Aka in his pocket.

 

I reckon so.

[oldjamfan1]

On 20/01/2024 at 09:10, OldEwoodBlue said:

Tear up the Memorandum of Understanding.

The Trust are shackled to Waggott by it.

Aka in his pocket.

 

Care to explain what you mean by this? The MoU is exactly what we will be bashing him around the head with. The club has clearly breached the agreement by not disclosing the financial situation.

Seems there are a handful of posters on here determined to constantly stick the boot in on the Trust for some reason. A couple of points:

1. The Trust is the wrong target and isn’t the enemy here, we all have the best interests of the club at heart.

2. The Trust is manned by volunteers, and certainly in my case I am massively out of pocket in the process.

I’ve always said it is very easy to snipe from the sidelines - anybody who thinks they can do better please put yourself forward and let’s share the burden.

 

Edited January 21 by oldjamfan1

[rigger]

21 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Care to explain what you mean by this? The MoU is exactly what we will be bashing him around the head with. The club has clearly breached the agreement by not disclosing the financial situation.

Seems there are a handful of posters on here determined to constantly stick the boot in on the Trust for some reason. A couple of points:

1. The Trust is the wrong target and isn’t the enemy here, we all have the best interests of the club at heart.

2. The Trust is manned by volunteers, and certainly in my case I am massively out of pocket in the process.

I’ve always said it is very easy to snipe from the sidelines - anybody who thinks they can do better please put yourself forward and let’s share the burden.

 

Are you saying that if someone doesn't want to do something, they are not allowed to criticise

[oldjamfan1]

10 minutes ago, rigger said:

Are you saying that if someone doesn't want to do something, they are not allowed to criticise

No, I’m asking what he or she means and offering him or her the chance to make a difference. In any case that isn’t a criticism, it’s an accusation - being ‘in someone’s pocket’ is a pretty strong statement.

How is the Trust in Waggott’s pocket because of the MoU? It makes no sense. If he/she is a Trust member he/she should be contacting the Trust with his/her representations, not posting on a messageboard. It’s a membership organisation at the end of the day and answerable to them, not some random person posting on a forum. 

Edited January 21 by oldjamfan1

[Mashed Potatoes]

33 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Care to explain what you mean by this? The MoU is exactly what we will be bashing him around the head with. The club has clearly breached the agreement by not disclosing the financial situation.

Seems there are a handful of posters on here determined to constantly stick the boot in on the Trust for some reason. A couple of points:

1. The Trust is the wrong target and isn’t the enemy here, we all have the best interests of the club at heart.

2. The Trust is manned by volunteers, and certainly in my case I am massively out of pocket in the process.

I’ve always said it is very easy to snipe from the sidelines - anybody who thinks they can do better please put yourself forward and let’s share the burden.

 

A very good post.

From memory wasn't it the Trust who ensured Ewood Park is deemed to an Asset of Community Value ?

Why some posters hide behind their keyboards denigrating the efforts of those who work on behalf of the Trust, and the Fans Forum as well, is beyond me.

[OldEwoodBlue]

1 hour ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Care to explain what you mean by this? The MoU is exactly what we will be bashing him around the head with. The club has clearly breached the agreement by not disclosing the financial situation.

Seems there are a handful of posters on here determined to constantly stick the boot in on the Trust for some reason. A couple of points:

1. The Trust is the wrong target and isn’t the enemy here, we all have the best interests of the club at heart.

2. The Trust is manned by volunteers, and certainly in my case I am massively out of pocket in the process.

I’ve always said it is very easy to snipe from the sidelines - anybody who thinks they can do better please put yourself forward and let’s share the burden.

 

What I mean is that the trust board now need to temper their citicism of the club and in particular Waggott. Otherwise, naturally, he will just stop engagement.

If we take the fans takeover as an example. On the face of it, it seems great. But the upshot is this is the trust board doing the clubs job for them... for free. And if the trust want to do more of these, they can't fall out with Waggott. They have to remain amicable business friends. Waggott knows this. It neutralises the trust as a critical voice, much the same as the LT submissively toe the party line so as not to lose access.

I did almost join the trust over Xmas until I thought about this. I like the energy of the new board. But I am firmly Venkys Out which is not the trust's public position. Otherwise they wouldn't be working closely with the club.

Don't take it as criticism. You guys are doing a good job, none more than yourself.

It is just my personal opinion that the MOU is hinderance to getting rid of the owners.