WATR (The Rovers Trust)

[matt83]

13 minutes ago, Ben-2000 said:

Well if anyone says keep protests away, just back the team etc then forget it. 

The 2 can go hand in hand

Back the team - oppose the regime 

The best way to support the players is to protest against the regime even if they’re too stupid to see it. 

[lraC]

21 minutes ago, Herbie6590 said:

Re the filming…that’s CCTV at the venue. One imagines disciplinary action will take place regarding the member of their staff that leaked it.

BRFCS was invited (at relatively short notice) & @J*B attended on our behalf. Josh has reiterated on X that the thread from @glen9mullan covers the main areas of discussion. 
 

@RoversTrust have also promised output following the meeting. As to who was invited & by whom I have no further information I can share. 

I think Duncan went and will no doubt post too. 

[Mattyblue]

On 05/02/2024 at 15:27, oldjamfan1 said:

At some point yes, and in fairness we probably aren't that far away from that point. One Board member last night did say "What actually needs to happen to make us properly go after this lot!?" (The clear inference being that they felt we were already at that point). 

Are we any closer?

[47er]

On 06/02/2024 at 00:28, Ben-2000 said:

as a non-member

join!

[Ben-2000]

4 minutes ago, 47er said:

join!

Waiting to see their intentions / stance on things first.

[We Are The Rovers]

Player Meeting - Statement

Representatives from We Are The Rovers joined other fan groups and individuals to meet with a delegation from the club, including 5 senior players on Wednesday 7th February. This was arranged with less than 24 hours notice.

This meeting was never intended to be secret, but the fact that a breech in GDPR led to immediate speculation amongst the wider fanbase meant issuing a collective and comprehensive review by attendees became difficult. We were still sat round the table when CCTV footage started circulating and speculation began.

We have a platform to put questions and suggestions to the club on a regular basis. Our next meeting with the Club on the basis of our Memorandum of Understanding is scheduled for next week. The discussions and outcomes will be comprehensively minuted and publicly available, we continue to seek input and questions to pose from our members.

Other groups/individuals in attendance do not have that mandate, and this meeting presented them with an opportunity to voice concerns that many of their members, followers and fellow supporters have been raising.

All supporters and players were given opportunities to speak, and there was a frank discussion around current form and morale in the squad. Nobody in the room was happy with current results and agreed they need to improve as a matter of urgency. The players were critical of their own performances.

There was naturally discussion about the atmosphere at the QPR fixture. It was made very clear that any booing and chanting was not simply a result of that performance, but a culmination of anger and frustration at current events at board and ownership level that have been prevalent for many years.

We Are The Rovers have repeatedly challenged the club to work with supporters on improving the match day experience and atmosphere. The players were in agreement with us that this should be addressed. Simply, a lively atmosphere is preferable to a lack of atmosphere, and a toxic atmosphere can be demoralising.

A more in depth review from other perspectives will be shared by the respective attendees, but some takeaway points from us:

- It was interesting to see players questioning Steve Waggott on ticket pricing. A drum we constantly bang.

- Players were as vocal, disappointed and angry as anyone round the table regarding the Duncan McGuire transfer saga.

- The players and the fans share the same opinion that current results have not been good enough, and a strong desire to see them improve

- There was no attempt to try to silence voices, quash criticism, or avoid issues from anyone involved. Everyone did however express a desire to come together and ensure the season does not end in relegation.

- There has been speculation about certain elements of the meeting not being shared with the wider fanbase. We were made aware that there would likely be upcoming media speculation, which occurred before we left the venue.

https://www.roverstrust.com/news/player-meeting-statement

 

[OJRovers]

Was it put to Waggot that the paperwork error was actually deliberate to avoid the fee?

I'm still struggling to believe that Silvester makes that mistake for the first time in 20 years, especially with the extra focus after last year.

[sparky12]

45 minutes ago, We Are The Rovers said:

Player Meeting - Statement

Representatives from We Are The Rovers joined other fan groups and individuals to meet with a delegation from the club, including 5 senior players on Wednesday 7th February. This was arranged with less than 24 hours notice.

This meeting was never intended to be secret, but the fact that a breech in GDPR led to immediate speculation amongst the wider fanbase meant issuing a collective and comprehensive review by attendees became difficult. We were still sat round the table when CCTV footage started circulating and speculation began.

We have a platform to put questions and suggestions to the club on a regular basis. Our next meeting with the Club on the basis of our Memorandum of Understanding is scheduled for next week. The discussions and outcomes will be comprehensively minuted and publicly available, we continue to seek input and questions to pose from our members.

Other groups/individuals in attendance do not have that mandate, and this meeting presented them with an opportunity to voice concerns that many of their members, followers and fellow supporters have been raising.

All supporters and players were given opportunities to speak, and there was a frank discussion around current form and morale in the squad. Nobody in the room was happy with current results and agreed they need to improve as a matter of urgency. The players were critical of their own performances.

There was naturally discussion about the atmosphere at the QPR fixture. It was made very clear that any booing and chanting was not simply a result of that performance, but a culmination of anger and frustration at current events at board and ownership level that have been prevalent for many years.

We Are The Rovers have repeatedly challenged the club to work with supporters on improving the match day experience and atmosphere. The players were in agreement with us that this should be addressed. Simply, a lively atmosphere is preferable to a lack of atmosphere, and a toxic atmosphere can be demoralising.

A more in depth review from other perspectives will be shared by the respective attendees, but some takeaway points from us:

- It was interesting to see players questioning Steve Waggott on ticket pricing. A drum we constantly bang.

- Players were as vocal, disappointed and angry as anyone round the table regarding the Duncan McGuire transfer saga.

- The players and the fans share the same opinion that current results have not been good enough, and a strong desire to see them improve

- There was no attempt to try to silence voices, quash criticism, or avoid issues from anyone involved. Everyone did however express a desire to come together and ensure the season does not end in relegation.

- There has been speculation about certain elements of the meeting not being shared with the wider fanbase. We were made aware that there would likely be upcoming media speculation, which occurred before we left the venue.

https://www.roverstrust.com/news/player-meeting-statement

 

Thanks, but what was actually said?

Have certain element been left out? You haven't actually quashed any speculation with this statement!

[wilsdenrover]

49 minutes ago, We Are The Rovers said:

Player Meeting - Statement

Representatives from We Are The Rovers joined other fan groups and individuals to meet with a delegation from the club, including 5 senior players on Wednesday 7th February. This was arranged with less than 24 hours notice.

This meeting was never intended to be secret, but the fact that a breech in GDPR led to immediate speculation amongst the wider fanbase meant issuing a collective and comprehensive review by attendees became difficult. We were still sat round the table when CCTV footage started circulating and speculation began.

We have a platform to put questions and suggestions to the club on a regular basis. Our next meeting with the Club on the basis of our Memorandum of Understanding is scheduled for next week. The discussions and outcomes will be comprehensively minuted and publicly available, we continue to seek input and questions to pose from our members.

Other groups/individuals in attendance do not have that mandate, and this meeting presented them with an opportunity to voice concerns that many of their members, followers and fellow supporters have been raising.

All supporters and players were given opportunities to speak, and there was a frank discussion around current form and morale in the squad. Nobody in the room was happy with current results and agreed they need to improve as a matter of urgency. The players were critical of their own performances.

There was naturally discussion about the atmosphere at the QPR fixture. It was made very clear that any booing and chanting was not simply a result of that performance, but a culmination of anger and frustration at current events at board and ownership level that have been prevalent for many years.

We Are The Rovers have repeatedly challenged the club to work with supporters on improving the match day experience and atmosphere. The players were in agreement with us that this should be addressed. Simply, a lively atmosphere is preferable to a lack of atmosphere, and a toxic atmosphere can be demoralising.

A more in depth review from other perspectives will be shared by the respective attendees, but some takeaway points from us:

- It was interesting to see players questioning Steve Waggott on ticket pricing. A drum we constantly bang.

- Players were as vocal, disappointed and angry as anyone round the table regarding the Duncan McGuire transfer saga.

- The players and the fans share the same opinion that current results have not been good enough, and a strong desire to see them improve

- There was no attempt to try to silence voices, quash criticism, or avoid issues from anyone involved. Everyone did however express a desire to come together and ensure the season does not end in relegation.

- There has been speculation about certain elements of the meeting not being shared with the wider fanbase. We were made aware that there would likely be upcoming media speculation, which occurred before we left the venue.

https://www.roverstrust.com/news/player-meeting-statement

 

Thank you for the update.

From that can we assume your request to bring forward the MoU meeting was declined?

If so, are you able to share their reason for doing so?

[Miller11]

23 minutes ago, sparky12 said:

Thanks, but what was actually said?

Have certain element been left out? You haven't actually quashed any speculation with this statement!

Are you talking about secrecy? If so then we were told to keep it to ourselves but there would be a lot of speculation and press noise coming out over the next day or so.

It took 20 minutes.

I don’t think the content of the Mail article was a surprise to anyone at the club. I’ve drawn my own conclusions from this, but I couldn’t state it as fact. Those conclusions were JDT is gone.

[Miller11]

32 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

Thank you for the update.

From that can we assume your request to bring forward the MoU meeting was declined?

If so, are you able to share their reason for doing so?

It has been provisionally agreed to bring it forward, but with the fallout from yesterdays meeting and the ongoing situation at the club we aren’t going to push it. Perhaps if things are a little calmer over the weekend we might bring it forward a day or two. It absolutely shouldn’t be the boards priority at this moment.

[Mike E]

32 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

It has been provisionally agreed to bring it forward, but with the fallout from yesterdays meeting and the ongoing situation at the club we aren’t going to push it. Perhaps if things are a little calmer over the weekend we might bring it forward a day or two. It absolutely shouldn’t be the boards priority at this moment.

Their priority ought to be to bugger off.

[wilsdenrover]

12 minutes ago, Mike E said:

Their priority ought to be to bugger off.

You’re far more polite than me.

[TugaysMarlboro]

I have a few questions that i'd hope the Trust would look to ask during their next meeting. It's a changing landscape at the moment, so some of these may be obsolete by the time the next meeting with the club comes round.

 

1. There is no clarity at the moment if GB remains in situ. What is his employment status with the football club?

2. (Dependent on if GB has left and hasn't been replaced) The club have continuously flip flopped between having a DoF/Sporting Director and going with a traditional 'Manager' approach since the Raos took over the club.

1. Are the club planning to replace GB with another DoF/Sporting Director?
2. For the sake of longevity and to provide an opportunity for succeeding, would it not be wise to advise the owners to keep a particular footballing structure in place for longer than they historically have?

3. (Also dependent on if GB has left and hasn't been replaced) - Which individual (or individuals) made the choice to hire the new manager/head coach?

4. (Also dependent on if GB has left and hasn't been replaced) - Who does the manager/head coach now directly report to?

 

 

[47er]

1 hour ago, TugaysMarlboro said:

I have a few questions that i'd hope the Trust would look to ask during their next meeting. It's a changing landscape at the moment, so some of these may be obsolete by the time the next meeting with the club comes round.

 

1. There is no clarity at the moment if GB remains in situ. What is his employment status with the football club?

2. (Dependent on if GB has left and hasn't been replaced) The club have continuously flip flopped between having a DoF/Sporting Director and going with a traditional 'Manager' approach since the Raos took over the club.

1. Are the club planning to replace GB with another DoF/Sporting Director?
2. For the sake of longevity and to provide an opportunity for succeeding, would it not be wise to advise the owners to keep a particular footballing structure in place for longer than they historically have?

3. (Also dependent on if GB has left and hasn't been replaced) - Which individual (or individuals) made the choice to hire the new manager/head coach?

4. (Also dependent on if GB has left and hasn't been replaced) - Who does the manager/head coach now directly report to?

 

 

 Eustace's appointment  will be announced today. I don't know who made the choice initially but I'm sure Venkys have approved it.

My only thought that we could have done much worse. In fact we have!

[arbitro]

Away from the circus we have become this might have slipped under the radar. I get heartened when I see and read things like this and it gives me a scintilla of hope that there are people who care. Where are the Rovers Executives and Board members on this picture though?

https://thefsa.org.uk/news/rovers-sas-launches-at-ewood-park/

[oldjamfan1]

39 minutes ago, arbitro said:

Away from the circus we have become this might have slipped under the radar. I get heartened when I see and read things like this and it gives me a scintilla of hope that there are people who care. Where are the Rovers Executives and Board members on this picture though?

https://thefsa.org.uk/news/rovers-sas-launches-at-ewood-park/

Zayd is a great guy Tony. The Trust has been working closely with SAS recently and indeed were in attendance the other day.

[arbitro]

14 minutes ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Zayd is a great guy Tony. The Trust has been working closely with SAS recently and indeed were in attendance the other day.

Great to hear Andy.

[matt83]

7 hours ago, oldjamfan1 said:

Zayd is a great guy Tony. The Trust has been working closely with SAS recently and indeed were in attendance the other day.

When I read the trust has been working with the sas I got exited. I pictured men in balaclavas rappelling off roofs ready to eliminate swag and the Venkys. I thought finally some action. 😂

[RoverDom]

13 hours ago, matt83 said:

When I read the trust has been working with the sas I got exited. I pictured men in balaclavas rappelling off roofs ready to eliminate swag and the Venkys. I thought finally some action. 😂

That's given me a great idea for a video game. You play as the SAS and the goal is to get to swag in the directors box at Ewood. Enroute you are faced with various obstacles such as a state of the art coach, a crowd of crying players etc. Weapons to be used by waggot to repel the attacks include wads of cash from Andy Coles signing on bonus, disposable admin girls.

When you finally reach the directors box you face the ultimate boss but he's got Broughton as a human shield and every now and then activates a power up - the pune invincibility - where you can't do any damage for 20 seconds and you just have to survive. 

[bazza]

On 07/02/2024 at 19:40, Ben-2000 said:

Well if anyone says keep protests away, just back the team etc then forget it. 

The 2 can go hand in hand

Back the team - oppose the regime 

Good wording for extra banners alongside "Venky's Out" and "Raos Out".

P.S. My predictive text changed Raos to Rats. That made me laugh. Even predictive text agrees with us.

[Upside Down]

It makes me laugh that they keep saying funding is guaranteed, from what I've seen, it isn't.

Venkys here for the long term. Hello National League North.

[arbitro]

9 hours ago, Upside Down said:

It makes me laugh that they keep saying funding is guaranteed, from what I've seen, it isn't.

Venkys here for the long term. Hello National League North.

That is something I can't grasp either. How can it be when an Indian judge could once again veto the transferring of money? The way I see it the immediate future of one of the greatest sporting institutions in this country is at the whim of some Indian who has probably never heard of us. And what if he does grant it this time. Do we go back to court in three months and go through the whole charade again?

 

[lraC]

I am still convinced there is more to this than meets the eye. Why are they being forced to put a bond up to the tune of the same amount, they are sending. There is very little trust there and if they are getting under the skin of the equivalent of HMRC in the UK there are serious issues there in my opinion. 

[47er]

Seems to me that they will refuse to sell no matter what and "funding is guaranteed".

Which means the inadequate funding will continue to drag us down and down till there's nowhere to go.
 

 What a prospect the diminishing band of our supporters face.

Absolutely no relief in sight.