January Transfer Window.

[roverandout]

4 hours ago, RevidgeBlue said:

What a load of absolute and utter bollux.

"Takes full responsibility" - but doesn't walk I notice.

"What went wrong" - "I can't tell you"

"What do you think the chances of winning an appeal are?" "Not very good" (but we're doing it anyway because we're the good guys in this scenario)

FUCK OFF!!!!  Christ they're even trying to take the moral high ground and extract some credit out of the entire debacle. The most hollow of hollow apologies after the furore caused by the original Club Statement was so great that it must have dawned on even those knobheads that they had to try and do something. There wasn't a hint of contrition before everyone kicked off!

Absolutely clear listening to that that no heads whatsoever will roll unless there's a very token sacrifice much lower down the food chain. They're collectively trying to save their arses and highly paid jobs.  I wouldn't mind betting that they've drawn straws over who's going to front it upand  he's been assured his job won't be in jeopardy if he goes out and pretends to take responsibility. They're obviously hoping that by coming out with this late apology of sorts the whole thing will quickly blow over and then it'll be back to business as "normal". (For us)

Funny how this "process" he keeps referring  to, and hinting was at fault, and which by his own admission has been in place ten years, has never let us down previously on transfer deadline day isn't it? And an outward transaction also went through without a hitch on the same evening. Funny that!

Having listened to that I'm more convinced than ever that Broughton needs extracting from the Club as urgently as Waggott.

100 percent 

[RoversTilliDie]

5 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

'Blackburn’s bid to sign Rochdale striker Ethan Brierley failed because the youngster did not tick boxes saying he was British and white.'

They should listen to more Michael Jackson. Then they'd know 'it don't matter if you're black or white'.

If it were a £50,000,000 registration for a money bags manchester club, Michael Jacksons song would come into play with the fa (f--king a-eholes) it don't matter if your black or white.

[Cherry Blue]

Purely guess work by Nixon how would he have this info?? Ok he's a journalist but he might have realised, as GB stated, "external" & "internal" issues/factors that may never be released.  

[Gamst]

34 minutes ago, goozburger said:

It's like an air crash investigation. There appear to have been multiple faults and events. It starts with doing a deal on deadline day, which is leaving it until the last minute in anyone's book, to proof-reading the paperwork before it is submitted.

Having the medicals done in Manchester is yet another thing - a detour, and by the sounds of it, a dining distraction. Why can't the medicals be done at Brockhall or nearby? If you take just one of the many elements in play on the day - preparation, complacency, logistics, checking papers, etc. - then we would be sat here talking about a decent window instead of a poor one and, worse, amateurs in positions of responsibility.

The old Swiss cheese model 

[BigBar]

1 hour ago, briansol said:

I liked that he looked nervous and edgy, good to see that the situation has affected him and the rest. There was also a little bit of anger shining through, as it seems obvious there has been a fuckup from the admin/legal team that he has to take responsibility for. 

The only good thing coming from this is a man scorned like that will take action to avoid it happen again. You should never waste a good disaster as JDT would have said. 

That's a lesson though that he shouldn't really need to be learning. Not good enough to say I'll do better in future. Too avoidable for me to see any silver lining.

[Gavrover]

2 minutes ago, Cherry Blue said:

Purely guess work by Nixon how would he have this info?? Ok he's a journalist but he might have realised, as GB stated, "external" & "internal" issues/factors that may never be released.  

I mean that’s some odd guess

[BigBar]

1 hour ago, renrag said:

I don’t think he came across as being nervous, on the contrary I think there was plenty of anger in his voice and demeanour. As I posted earlier (unless the regulation have changed since the 1970’s), the only person  recognised by the authorities to complete transfers is the club secretary

Yeah there was an element of anger and I would imagine he is angry but also embarrassed. Lots of looking to the floor and looking away, voice was shaky. 

[roverandout]

1 hour ago, Torgeir said:

I support GB. It’s his responsibility but he’s faced the music and after the final decision is made, it’s time to move forward. 

No it isn't. Heads must role. This is exactly the kind of attitude that has gotten us nowhere the last 10 years. 'Aaahh let's sweep it under the carpet and move on'. There has to be accountability otherwise we're going round in circles 

[Mercer]

An interesting day to put it mildly.

Can't recall when I've spoken to so many people wanting to discuss Rovers - sadly for all the wrong reasons.  Finding even the remaining diehard Blues, who think Rovers can do no wrong, are struggling with this debacle.  Even @chaddyrovershas been struck dumb!

I understand Rovers have been swamped by emails of complaint and I personally know of half a dozen who have written in.

Though Broughton showed some balls, it was, IMO, a classic line in smooth bullsh1t - seen it too often and don't buy it.

I think Nicko is absolutely on the ball with this.  His revelations are incredulous and startling.  I think it shows us as being so amateurish - for feck's sake if you can't complete forms properly you shouldn't be in any type of employment let alone involved in £multi million business transactions.

Live on Sky TV, those going on Monday night have a terrific opportunity to vent their anger and make the wider football world realise just what, IMO, is an absolute sh1t show of a club.

 

[Bethnal]

This is a total rollercoaster and I’m giving up trying to figure out what happens next. Who in their right mind asks “what happens if they get relegated?” without catching themselves and saying, “ah yes, the exact same thing that happens if they don’t get relegated and don’t get promoted.“ Talk about beyond your sodding remit.

[bluebruce]

35 minutes ago, Hasta said:

Although basically saying “we don’t expect to win the appeal’ wasn’t very clever either. Came across to me as saying to the fans and the other parties “this is not going to happen” whilst making sure they can say “we’ve done all we can”.

Yeh and as I said earlier, saying things like he takes full responsibility implies we are at least partially to blame, which wouldn't help the appeal either. He probably actually said a little bit too much, but people (understandably) want him to have said more.

[AllRoverAsia]

The errors on forms points more and more in the direction of Sylvester SEM, who, presumably, signed them off.

[Inferi]

If what Nixon is saying is true, surely there should be a chance for the O'Brien deal to go through? Imagine if we were required to pay a fee to Nottingham if O'Brien scores 5 league goals. Would the EFL send it back and ask for clarification about what would happen if he scores 5 own goals in the league?

[Tugayisgod]

20 minutes ago, Fraserkirky said:

If that’s the reasons then we win an appeal with a half competent lawyer. What a farce.

It's a kangaroo court. Doesn't matter how reasonable our arguments are, it's a done deal I'm afraid

[arbitro]

After the O'Brien situation which has understandably become the big talking point is our dealings and if you analyse them they are pitiful. Broughton just talked about players we were interested in, how we chased them but ultimately nothing doing. It's the same patter just coming out of a different mouth. We've heard it all before and it's really wearing a bit thin now. He has failed miserably in his first real challenge to improve us.

Tomasson said don't waste a window. Well we have.

[Bethnal]

1 minute ago, Inferi said:

If what Nixon is saying is true, surely there should be a chance for the O'Brien deal to go through? Imagine if we were required to pay a fee to Nottingham if O'Brien scores 5 league goals. Would the EFL send it back and ask for clarification about what would happen if he scores 5 own goals in the league?

I think they actually have more of a case asking that than what they asked.

[roverandout]

17 minutes ago, bluebruce said:

'Blackburn’s bid to sign Rochdale striker Ethan Brierley failed because the youngster did not tick boxes saying he was British and white.'

They should listen to more Michael Jackson. Then they'd know 'it don't matter if you're black or white'.

I wouldn’t sign a box saying I'm 'British and white' I'm English and white 

[jim mk2]

1 minute ago, AllRoverAsia said:

The errors on forms points more and more in the direction of Sylvester SEM, who, presumably, signed them off.

 I agree, but blocking the deal and making a player potentially sit on the sidelines for 6 months because of an "e" missing (or not) seems harsh

The relegation clause is silly and can easily be challenged. 

[Herbie6590]

1 hour ago, TugaysMarlboro said:

This in no way absolves anyone at Ewood of blame.

But you have to wonder why there isn't a web portal for player transfers these days. Half of the issues around missing info and 'did it come in on time?' would be stopped quite easily.

🤷‍♂️

[glen9mullan]

Smells of strategically trying to influence a change of opinion within the supporter base.

They know his article will come on here.

They also know many of us use twitter and will tweet this out to followers, which will get retweeted, then suddenly its the EFL's pettyness at fault.

Fair play, with the video today and these leaks, its certainly having an affect.

However i aint buying it, and maintain we need to remove all responsible including broughton. At £160k a year, an important window, a circa 200 million jackpot if we go up. He should of personally overseen the operation. Its 2 days a year he needs to be there ensuring its slick. No he was at the match, leaving others to do it.

His statement of "i was there at the medical, is devious, to plant a seed he was in the thick of it. Truth is he may have been at the medical but chose to go and watch the match.

[bluebruce]

11 minutes ago, Miller11 said:

I don’t see any chance with the O’Brien. We made errors. Where do you draw the line with leniency?

Brierley should be a very different matter though. That looks like an equality monitoring question and there’d be an easily winnable argument and an infinite amount of precedent to suggest that ticking that box cannot be mandatory.

I don't entirely agree about O'Brien, from what's out there so far. The relegation clause is just silly, so that's one error...an extra 'e' at the end of a name. Whilst it is an error and does need clarifying, it needing clarifying before the 11pm deadline (if that's the one we missed) is just pedantry.

I thought the same with Brierley. Somebody said it was for identification purposes, but I've been thinking like you that you don't have to answer your ethnicity by law I think. However, there's usually a box for not wanting to answer, which probably should be ticked. On the other hand, if you can say you don't want to answer, it can't be needed for identification purposes.

[Gamst]

IF what Nicko says is true and they are the only snags then Rovers should sue the EFL and a good lawyer would be scrutinising all previous deals ratified by the EFL to look for similar minute errors (there will be some). I’m guessing we only know part of the story. Another option would be to ask the agent chap to change his name to Sharpe by deed poll! 

[glen9mullan]

1 minute ago, Gamst said:

IF what Nicko says is true and they are the only snags then Rovers should sue the EFL and a good lawyer would be scrutinising all previous deals ratified by the EFL to look for similar minute errors (there will be some). I’m guessing we only know part of the story. Another option would be to ask the agent chap to change his name to Sharpe by deed poll! 

Leak partial truths, whilst burying the whole truth, rovers PR machine at its best i suspect.

No way is this the only reason, it may be one of 20 reasons, but very manipulative

[Miller11]

2 minutes ago, glen9mullan said:

Smells of strategically trying to influence a change of opinion within the supporter base.

They know his article will come on here.

They also know many of us use twitter and will tweet this out to followers, which will get retweeted, then suddenly its the EFL's pettyness at fault.

Fair play, with the video today and these leaks, its certainly having an affect.

However i aint buying it, and maintain we need to remove all responsible including broughton. At £160k a year, an important window, a circa 200 million jackpot if we go up. He should of personally overseen the operation. Its 2 days a year he needs to be there ensuring its slick. No he was at the match, leaving others to do it.

His statement of "i was there at the medical, is devious, to plant a seed he was in the thick of it. Truth is he may have been at the medical but chose to go and watch the match.

They are playing a propaganda masterclass today in fairness.

[bluebruce]

36 minutes ago, wilsdenrover said:

If no one has ever succeeded with an appeal (no idea if Broughton is right on this) the why have an appeal process at all?

oh and good luck…

To make out like it's a fair process. I believe we'd be able to take it to a court (or maybe the Court of Arbitration for Sport if I'm remembering that right), and if there hadn't been an appeal process allowed I think that would stand against the EFL. You have a right to appeal most decisions against you these days. And thanks!

Edit - probably also worth mentioning, taking it to an external body after the appeal is rejected would probably drag on for months, so it wouldn't enable the loan in good time. Probably be more likely to be about damages at that point.

Edited February 3, 2023 by bluebruce