Supporters Consultation Meeting

[JHRover]

Just now, Paul Mani said:

Who were acting on the orders of their bosses!? ???

No, Senior brought in as a troubleshooter, advises to get shut of Coyle and eventually they heed that advice and act after months of doing nothing.

[Bigdoggsteel]

Just now, JHRover said:

Yes but the point is clear. Venkys take no interest in results, performances or the fans. They'll only make a change when someone has the guts to recommend it to them and even then it takes an age to happen.

It takes too long alright  I mean that's why they appoint people though,to make those decisions. We would complain if they didn't. I don't think any of us think they are capable of making day to day decisions. 

Edited February 7, 2020 by Bigdoggsteel

[roversfan99]

2 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

It’s not a matter of fact. There was a lot more to his exit and It’s pretty well documented that he was forced out and the consequent statements and legal action corroborate that.
 

Do you honestly think Steve Kean would have walked away from the best job he ever had?

 

Just now, Bigdoggsteel said:

I asked earlier, why did he resign? @roversfan99

What's your take? 

Did he have the Liverpool or United job lined up? 

Obviously there will have been an element of duress, and obviously he was never going to get a better job, but speaking in facts, he did resign (even if it was tactical on his part for financial reasons, or whatever) and thus we will never know whether the club would have sacked him otherwise.

I am well aware of the legal action that followed etc but the fact of the matter is that Steve Kean resigned, Venkys never sacked him despite being consistently horrendous for such a long period of time.

[K-Hod]

39 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I would flip that and say some get caught in negativity, look at our league position. 

He makes a fair point, to be honest. 
It wouldn’t hurt for posterity, to check the write up from the last meeting and checked what was promised vs. what was actually delivered....

[roversfan99]

8 minutes ago, Paul Mani said:

The surcharges are absolute bullshit and the guy from the working men’s club wiped the floor with Waggot on that.

Waggots job security is based on the performance of all aspects of the club including the performance of the team. Are you seriously suggesting that he’d sacrifice himself for the manager? What foundation do you have of this seeing as its pretty obvious that the manager has done a decent enough job since he came to the club?

Agreed, they certainly are and his response doesnt inspire confidence that it will change. If it does, well done to him, if it doesnt then more fool him.

If the team went into a tailspin and say went down for example, Waggott would not be the first man with his head on the block, Mowbray would do the answering and I am not saying this with any certainty but I suspect that having Waggott in between to somewhat fight his corner may be of benefit to him.

5 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

His role is more than ticketing policies, to be fair. 

I read on here a lot that we don't have aims or ambitions,so it's good to read you say we have aimed to get into the play offs. 

That is one of the primary tangible aspects that we can judge him on and for me he has come up sadly lacking in that area. From his advertising campaigns and interviews he comes across as someone who is happy to try and remove himself of any responsibility, something which he was called out on in this meeting.

Mowbray has earnt respect based on what he has done, even though as I have previously surmised, he has done some bad things too. I am not saying that Waggott has anything other than good intentions but I am struggling to name much if anything that he has done to warrant much respect or trust. I do appreciate that there is far more to judge a manager on.

[Paul Mani]

4 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

He makes a fair point, to be honest. 
It wouldn’t hurt for posterity, to check the write up from the last meeting and checked what was promised vs. what was actually delivered....

If the last one was anything like this one then I can save you the job. Because they promised nothing. 

[roversfan99]

1 minute ago, K-Hod said:

He makes a fair point, to be honest. 
It wouldn’t hurt for posterity, to check the write up from the last meeting and checked what was promised vs. what was actually delivered....

That would be interesting.

To be fair, these sorts of events are all about gaining good PR arent they, basically showing your enthusiasm and getting the balance between saying everything the people in there want you to say to earn further leeway in the future whilst being as vague as possible and not making specific promises or statements that can come and bite you in the arse further down the line. The "defenders are coming" comment is a prime example of when Mowbray has tried to placate the fans and get them on side, which did work short term, but making such a strong and simplistic statement has then become a barometer for his future actions or inactions.

I think its important to try and stay impartial and solely judge on what actually happens, rather than start moulding and changing your opinion around what is said here.

[matt83]

4 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

Should these meetings be only consisting of ‘Rovers ra ra ra’ season ticket holders or a cross section of the fanbase that includes lapsed/disillusioned supporters?

Wouldn’t the later be more helpful to the club when it comes to engagement and future strategies to get folk back through the door?

They’ll look in to it. 

[Bigdoggsteel]

17 minutes ago, K-Hod said:

He makes a fair point, to be honest. 
It wouldn’t hurt for posterity, to check the write up from the last meeting and checked what was promised vs. what was actually delivered....

I'm sure someone can do that. Some of the stuff is very trivial, to be fair. 

Transfers in January the biggest issue and Mowbray put his hands up. Must do better. 

Edited February 7, 2020 by Bigdoggsteel

[roversfan99]

5 minutes ago, Bigdoggsteel said:

I'm sure someone can do that. Some of the stuff is very trivial, to be fair. 

Transfers in January the biggest issue and Mowbray put his hands up. Must do better. 

I suppose the problem is, it is all well and good putting your hands up but you look at the last 4 windows, twice when supposedly gearing up for a sustained play off push, we have allowed transfer windows to lapse without strengthening, and in the last 2 summer ones, the vast majority of our budget has spent on 2 players who have not improved us at all, and actions speak louder than words.

I dont doubt that some decent signings, Downing, Adarabioyo and Reed for example have been made during that time but they arent improving us long term. The only player that has improved us long term has been Armstrong and it is only really now that he is proving that on a sustained basis.

[Tyrone Shoelaces]

7 hours ago, Doogs said:

No

I'm frankly amazed by that. It would have been my first question.

[Riverside under the drip]

4 hours ago, Mattyblue said:

Should these meetings be only consisting of ‘Rovers ra ra ra’ season ticket holders or a cross section of the fanbase that includes lapsed/disillusioned supporters?

Wouldn’t the later be more helpful to the club when it comes to engagement and future strategies to get folk back through the door?

Can't speak for this one but, last year, I went as a member of the 1875 Club. At that meeting, at least one boycotter was there and asked for his opinions directly by Waggott.

The fact that nothing has been done subsequently is a separate issue but invitations are not confined to 'Rovers ra ra ra' (what even does that mean) fans.

[chaddyrovers]

10 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I suppose the problem is, it is all well and good putting your hands up but you look at the last 4 windows, twice when supposedly gearing up for a sustained play off push, we have allowed transfer windows to lapse without strengthening, and in the last 2 summer ones, the vast majority of our budget has spent on 2 players who have not improved us at all, and actions speak louder than words.

I dont doubt that some decent signings, Downing, Adarabioyo and Reed for example have been made during that time but they arent improving us long term. The only player that has improved us long term has been Armstrong and it is only really now that he is proving that on a sustained basis.

Yes January window wasn't what we expect if the players we want were expensive or agent telling Rovers that one player is available for x amount then when you ask the club about the player the fee is nothing like what you were told. Or Player agent demand far too much money for him or the player wages are too much for a loan. I remember watching a video with Wilder on deadline day and the chaos it is during a window or the Netflix series Sunderland till I die when Sunderland CEO Martin Bain and Manager Chris Coleman thought they had Chris Martin deal done after days of talks and then he went to Reading. 

It is incredible easy for us fans to say X , Y and Z without being a fly on the wall. 

I'm looking forward to now we got the European scouting network set up and Someone who is European running it. Hopefully he has lots of contacts over the Continent.

 

[chaddyrovers]

48 minutes ago, roversfan99 said:

I am not saying that Waggott has anything other than good intentions but I am struggling to name much if anything that he has done to warrant much respect or trust.

maybe you don't see it cos you and basically judging him on Ticket sales. 

I seen him in the Club on Friday Afternoon once asking staff about how they feeling, how busy they have been shop and online. 

Don't forget he has targets to meet from owners in terms of sales targets and meeting them, commercially, ticket targets, sponsorship. 

[Stuart]

4 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yes January window wasn't what we expect if the players we want were expensive or agent telling Rovers that one player is available for x amount then when you ask the club about the player the fee is nothing like what you were told. Or Player agent demand far too much money for him or the player wages are too much for a loan. I remember watching a video with Wilder on deadline day and the chaos it is during a window or the Netflix series Sunderland till I die when Sunderland CEO Martin Bain and Manager Chris Coleman thought they had Chris Martin deal done after days of talks and then he went to Reading. 

It is incredible easy for us fans to say X , Y and Z without being a fly on the wall. 

I'm looking forward to now we got the European scouting network set up and Someone who is European running it. Hopefully he has lots of contacts over the Continent.

I know right. If only we had people at the club who knew how the transfer windows worked.

By 2025/26 we might just have everything in place to challenge for promotion. Just hope it isn’t from L2 (or worse!).

[Mattyblue]

32 minutes ago, Riverside under the drip said:

Can't speak for this one but, last year, I went as a member of the 1875 Club. At that meeting, at least one boycotter was there and asked for his opinions directly by Waggott.

The fact that nothing has been done subsequently is a separate issue but invitations are not confined to 'Rovers ra ra ra' (what even does that mean) fans.

I know they aren't confined to ST holders, that’s the point I was making, such meetings need a cross-section and why Miller (a boycotter) had every right to be there.

Edited February 7, 2020 by Mattyblue

[chaddyrovers]

3 minutes ago, Stuart said:

I know right. If only we had people at the club who knew how the transfer windows worked.

By 2025/26 we might just have everything in place to challenge for promotion. Just hope it isn’t from L2 (or worse!).

very easy for people like yourself to criticise the manager, CEO and the recruitment department while the truth is you don't really know what on in January window. it would be great to be inside the club and see everything going on with the signing and recruitment department but we cant. I know that Leeds have been wanting a striker in and only just about did it. 

Edited February 7, 2020 by chaddyrovers

[Stuart]

1 minute ago, chaddyrovers said:

very easy for people like yourself to criticise the manager, CEO and the recruitment department while the truth is you don't really know what on in January window. 

I do know that we didn’t sign anyone. Considering we needed to, that means it was a failure.

These are experienced football people who didn’t do their homework, didn’t act early enough and we’re subsequently “shocked” by events. Meanwhile every other team managed to sign players.

Not good enough and rightly criticised.

[Bbrovers2288]

Appreciate the feedback from all who went but I can’t help feel I would’ve liked one at least who wasn’t so much a mowbray fan, and wasn’t afraid to speak up to question re transfers, brereton, players out of position esp gallagher, why it’s taken so long for nyambe to get that rb position over Bennett if he is so highly thought of, making same mistakes as last year, not pushing for promotion, horrible winless runs, the raya saga- selling without having a replacement, very amateurish. And other gripes which none seemed to really be addressed instead talking about recycling, fans seating and away kits. Don’t think we really care about this do we 

[roversfan99]

21 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

Yes January window wasn't what we expect if the players we want were expensive or agent telling Rovers that one player is available for x amount then when you ask the club about the player the fee is nothing like what you were told. Or Player agent demand far too much money for him or the player wages are too much for a loan. I remember watching a video with Wilder on deadline day and the chaos it is during a window or the Netflix series Sunderland till I die when Sunderland CEO Martin Bain and Manager Chris Coleman thought they had Chris Martin deal done after days of talks and then he went to Reading. 

It is incredible easy for us fans to say X , Y and Z without being a fly on the wall. 

I'm looking forward to now we got the European scouting network set up and Someone who is European running it. Hopefully he has lots of contacts over the Continent.

 

Whatever the reasons and excuses are, it was a failure of a window, no matter how you try to dress it up or distract. Ultimately, Mowbray and Waggott both admitted as much. We required reinforcements, the manager wanted reinforcements, and he was unable to bring them in. No matter why or how, it was an unsuccessful window and not the first unsuccessful one. I am not saying that it is easy or that there arent hurdles to overcome but ultimately the failure to improve a team in need of improvements is a bad window. You dont need to be a fly on any wall to make that judgement and it seems that no one shares that opinion more than the 2 members of staff that you are defending.

16 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

maybe you don't see it cos you and basically judging him on Ticket sales. 

I seen him in the Club on Friday Afternoon once asking staff about how they feeling, how busy they have been shop and online. 

Don't forget he has targets to meet from owners in terms of sales targets and meeting them, commercially, ticket targets, sponsorship. 

I am judging him based on tangible aspects of the club in which I can have an opinion on. There are various aspects to ticketing (and marketing) which I feel he has got wrong and which have helped lead to a repeated inability to hit various targets.

You (or anyone) havent really explained what he has done that is positive aside from suggesting that his heart is in the right place which I dont doubt.

I suppose ticketing failures are fairly unimportant though if he is kind enough to ask fellow employees how they are feeling! Like I said, I am sure he is a nice bloke but it is fairly irrelevant, just as it is with Mowbray.

[Hasta]

1 hour ago, Paul Mani said:

It’s not a matter of fact. There was a lot more to his exit and It’s pretty well documented that he was forced out and the consequent statements and legal action corroborate that.
 

Do you honestly think Steve Kean would have walked away from the best job he ever had?

That's like saying someone spiked his drink and consequent statements and legal action corroborates that.

Venkys had a full season of mediocrity to sack him and didn't. He probably had half the squad and most people based at Ewood hating his presence around the place at the end, with all his allies off site or in India. Also, Shebby was shooting his mouth off on Sky and radio slagging Kean off, which was a godsend for his lawyers to launch the 'forced out' legal action.

If Venkys wanted him gone because of his results, which was the original point', they would have simply sacked him. 

[Cherry Blue]

3 hours ago, Mercer said:

Been through this thread in its entirety and seems to me a number who went last night were seduced by Mowbray's persona just as many were in Blues Bar almost 12 months ago.  Compare what he said then and what has since happened, or rather not happened!

I didn't buy it then and even less likely to buy it now.  I think the man is a bullsh1tter and at best, a very, very average football manager.

As for Waggott, to talk about naming a training pitch after Tony Parkes, is, IMO, totally and utterly disdainful.  It is not as though the news of Parkes' illness was suddenly sprung upon him and he hadn't had time to think.  I think Waggott is intellectually challenged and way out of his depth as our CEO.

I think the sooner Mowbray and Waggott  are out of our club the better.

He's a football man but IMO has too many close friends in the team which is what he relies on to win matches. Having said that we are close to the playoffs and have to go with what we've got. Two chances: we make the top six or we don't.  

Got the feeling that TM was not feeling as upbeat as that night in the Blues Bar but why should he have been, two different audience. He was there as team manager and could have been given a rough night but the detail game-change exchange was never about his on-field performance. He's a man who will stick the boot in and was quick to take control over SW on the poor window. Felt he wanted to take control on the issue rather than listen to a non-footballing chap waffling round the edges. He admitted squad hasn't improved (sorry if this has been covered), foreign markets are cheaper and explained the "defenders are coming" theory. Having a £1.3m budget with the added bonus of top-ups from owners must have been difficult following the Brereton signing. 

Agree that naming a pitch after Tony Parkes is not what we want. Not defending SW but he only mentioned names could be added to training pitches and it would not have been the right forum to announce the renaming of the Riverside after Mr Blackburn Rovers. But the thought crossed my mind (and it only a thought) that since Andy Bayes had asked permission to announce Tony Parkes being at Ewood on Saturday (hand over mic as he went over to side table), has a decision already been made and is an announcement about to be made??  

 

[LDRover]

Gutted no-one asked who sorted out his bloody flag

[Miller11]

You’ve got a point @Bbrovers2288 as did @JoeH several pages back.

These meetings are a requirement set out by the EFL, and sanctions can be imposed if they don’t take place. This is the entirety of the regulation around them:

118.1 Clubs shall hold at least two meetings/fans forums per Season to which its supporters (or representatives) are to be invited in order to discuss significant issues relating to the Club. The framework for these meetings shall be documented in the Club’s customer charter, but are subject to the following minimum criteria:

118.1.1 Clubs must be represented by the Club’s majority owner, board director(s) or other senior executive(s);

118.1.2 where meetings are not open to all supporters wishing to attend, the supporter representatives must be elected, selected or invited in line with basic democratic principles; and

118.1.3 individuals cannot be excluded by the Club without good reason (the Club acting reasonably).

 

Again, I don’t feel they are fit for purpose. Our owners and their main man do not attend. The minute the words “we can’t speak for the owners” are uttered, and they are frequently, this becomes apparent.

There are always attendees there from Rovers Trust, Ewood WMC group, BRFCS, the Rovers Facebook Group, Ewood Blues, 100 Club. The usual people who represent the action group weren’t there last night, but they may still have been represented. New York Rovers did have an invite too. There are other groups too, not sure exactly who, but there are a lot of faces I recognise that aren’t from any of the above. The club ask that some of the attendees from each group stay the same from meeting to meeting.

Each group has its own ideas and priorities (I’m deliberately avoiding the word agenda). I go as part of a group that has for the last few meetings been responsible for most of the questions, both submitted prior and at the time. I’m sure this annoys a good proportion of the room. Most of what we want to discuss is regarding the owners and we have been vocal in criticising the fact that Mowbray is in attendance and Venky’s aren’t.

There are a lot of people who have never said a word in these meetings, that’s their prerogative completely. There are also plenty who seem to primarily want a chat with Mowbray at the end.

Personally I feel these need a rethink, and so does the fans forum - for me that is where issues like kits and catering need to be discussed. Consultation meetings ought to be about ownership, governance, finances and long term plans. I don’t know where transfers should fall. Maybe they shouldn’t be discussed, aside from overall strategy, I don’t know.

Sorry for another long post!

[Bbrovers2288]

4 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

You’ve got a point @Bbrovers2288 as did @JoeH several pages back.

These meetings are a requirement set out by the EFL, and sanctions can be imposed if they don’t take place. This is the entirety of the regulation around them:

118.1 Clubs shall hold at least two meetings/fans forums per Season to which its supporters (or representatives) are to be invited in order to discuss significant issues relating to the Club. The framework for these meetings shall be documented in the Club’s customer charter, but are subject to the following minimum criteria:

118.1.1 Clubs must be represented by the Club’s majority owner, board director(s) or other senior executive(s);

118.1.2 where meetings are not open to all supporters wishing to attend, the supporter representatives must be elected, selected or invited in line with basic democratic principles; and

118.1.3 individuals cannot be excluded by the Club without good reason (the Club acting reasonably).

 

Again, I don’t feel they are fit for purpose. Our owners and their main man do not attend. The minute the words “we can’t speak for the owners” are uttered, and they are frequently, this becomes apparent.

There are always attendees there from Rovers Trust, Ewood WMC group, BRFCS, the Rovers Facebook Group, Ewood Blues, 100 Club. The usual people who represent the action group weren’t there last night, but they may still have been represented. New York Rovers did have an invite too. There are other groups too, not sure exactly who, but there are a lot of faces I recognise that aren’t from any of the above. The club ask that some of the attendees from each group stay the same from meeting to meeting.

Each group has its own ideas and priorities (I’m deliberately avoiding the word agenda). I go as part of a group that has for the last few meetings been responsible for most of the questions, both submitted prior and at the time. I’m sure this annoys a good proportion of the room. Most of what we want to discuss is regarding the owners and we have been vocal in criticising the fact that Mowbray is in attendance and Venky’s aren’t.

There are a lot of people who have never said a word in these meetings, that’s their prerogative completely. There are also plenty who seem to primarily want a chat with Mowbray at the end.

Personally I feel these need a rethink, and so does the fans forum - for me that is where issues like kits and catering need to be discussed. Consultation meetings ought to be about ownership, governance, finances and long term plans. I don’t know where transfers should fall. Maybe they shouldn’t be discussed, aside from overall strategy, I don’t know.

Sorry for another long post!

Think your a good poster mate, certainly worthy of you seat, I was more just meaning somebody who didn’t quite have same opinion of you as I see your a mowbray backer, good to get a wide range of opinions and priorities. I’m not a mowbray fan so would’ve liked him getting a slightly sterner test with regards to transfers, progression, tactics