The Summer Transfer Window (Press Submit)

[Old Codger]

11 hours ago, OssyLad said:

I’d love this to be true 🙏🏼🙏🏼

If it looks like horse shit, smells like horse shit... it's probably horse shit.

[Forever Blue]

Nixon has 2 stories on Rovers tomorrow. Someone asked him if they were positive. He basically laughed! 

Edited Saturday at 07:39 by Forever Blue

[Old Codger]

13 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

Nixon has 2 stories on Rovers tomorrow. Someone asked him if they were positive. He basically laughed! 

To be fair, he probably just farted the same old guff that normally emanates from his inane chops..

Nixon spouts, nobody with an ounce of self respect gives a monkeys

Edited Saturday at 07:51 by Old Codger
Fat, Round, Old and Curmudgeonly. Those are my best qualities

[Forever Blue]

2 minutes ago, Old Codger said:

To be fair, he probably just farted the same old guff that normally emanates from his inane chops..

Nixon spouts, nobody with an ounce of self respect gives a monkeys

I like his stories. They even turn out to be true on occasion. But I can see why he rubs people up the wrong way. 

[rigger]

31 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

Your opinion is irrelevant. The discussion was about who said what, not whether what was said was impactful. 
 

Try to actually engage with what is going on instead of always playing the contrarian. 

In my simple world, the most important point would be. Is what is said true, not who said it. 

[tomphil]

'Procedural issues'

Well what could that possibly be ?

I think the clue is in the title, yes you can proceed as normal with the funding or no you can't you still need approval or a bond. 

[Ossydave]

It wouldn't be a Sunday without an anti rovers special by Nixon, it's just standard.

1 will be the Wharton/Raya cash will be swallowed up to keep the lights on and no funds are available.

2 will be there's interest in Szmodics.

Both of which are plausible. It's easy to write stories about us when there's precious little positive news coming out of the club.

At some point he's going to dangle the carrot about Waggot retiring though, watch this space.......

[Exiled_Rover]

1 hour ago, Forever Blue said:

This tweeter has been right on a few things. What this tweet doesn’t explain is why the court date in August is so important in relation to Venkys ownership of Rovers. 
 

Again, BRFC said the court date in August had nothing to do with Rovers. So what is the bigger picture here? Would losing the court case have ramifications for Venky’s ability to send any money overseas for any reason, not just to Rovers. 
 

Sadly the tweet lacks any detail. 

How does the court case have nothing to do with Rovers?

They've not been able to send any money overseas since this court case began.

[roversfan99]

Does any other journalist tell everyone days in advance that he has a story on a certain team to the point that he has a cult following asking him for hints and more often than not it ends up being something really minor or baseless.

[KentExile]

On 28/06/2024 at 06:37, KentExile said:

The most worrying thing for me is that despite the club stating on 18th May, over a month ago, that contracts have been offered to numerous youngsters, not one of them has yet been confirmed as having signed. 

"Isaac Whitehall, Jalil Saadi and Alex Baker have all been offered new deals with the club, whilst the following scholars have been offered their first professional contracts: Lewis Bell, Rhys Doherty, Solomon Honor, Adam Khan, Matty Litherland, Paul Murphy-Worrell, Junior Nsangou, Brandon Powell and Zack Stritch."

And the club have not even announced the youth intake for this season, which in the past had normally been done in May

2023 Youth intake - 15th May

2022 Youth Intake - 23rd May

Does this mean that Rovers  are not even offering terms which are acceptable to players wanting their first ever pro contracts or even scholarship terms?  Or just that communication from the club to the fans has sunk to new levels?  Either way, its not good.

Edit - A further possibility is that contracts have been "agreed in principle" but the funds are not (or at least not yet) available to legally complete and fund these deals, which is again very worrying when we are talking about scholars and 1st pro deals which are generally no more than a few hundred pounds a week.

https://www.rovers.co.uk/news/2024/june/29/adam-reflects-on-international-experience/

Based on quotes in this interview, it appears like one of the first senior contracts I mentioned in a previous post (Kahn) has agreed a contract, And as mentioned by another posted, Whitehall is training with the first team squad, so can safely be assumed to have also signed a new contract

So we can hope its a case of the club being terrible with communication (again) rather than being unable to agree these contracts..  

Edited Saturday at 09:04 by KentExile

[Upside Down]

19 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

How does the court case have nothing to do with Rovers?

They've not been able to send any money overseas since this court case began.

More spin and flexing of the facts.

The investigation isn't looking into the financial goings on of the club itself, most likely due to the fact they don't have jurisdiction and they would struggle to get the required permission to conduct an investigation like that in the UK as the UK is one of the world's money laundering centres.

So yes they aren't directly investigating the club but the people who own the club are being investigated.

[lraC]

1 hour ago, Forever Blue said:

This tweeter has been right on a few things. What this tweet doesn’t explain is why the court date in August is so important in relation to Venkys ownership of Rovers. 
 

Again, BRFC said the court date in August had nothing to do with Rovers. So what is the bigger picture here? Would losing the court case have ramifications for Venky’s ability to send any money overseas for any reason, not just to Rovers. 
 

Sadly the tweet lacks any detail. 

Again this is very cleverly worded. The court date in August has nothing to do with Rovers, as probably quite correct, as it is the owners being investigated not Rovers. The outcome of the court case however, is highly likely to affect us, as if it go against them and they can no longer send funds overseas, it’s bound to have an impact.

Things are very obscure, but until some funds are sent, I will carry on assuming the worst/best, depending on perspective. 

[Forever Blue]

27 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

How does the court case have nothing to do with Rovers?

They've not been able to send any money overseas since this court case began.

Ask Rovers, they said it. 

[MarkBRFC]

They have sent no funds since November.

That's all I need to know as to whether they are allowed to or not.

[RoversTilliDie]

1 hour ago, Forever Blue said:

Nixon has 2 stories on Rovers tomorrow. Someone asked him if they were positive. He basically laughed! 

Let's hope he's not laughing when the new season starts.

[Forever Blue]

4 minutes ago, MarkBRFC said:

They have sent no funds since November.

That's all I need to know as to whether they are allowed to or not.

I think Waggott said a month ago funds had been requested. Pasha was off discussing budgets a week or so ago. 

Unfortunately the club aren’t held to account. They can say what they want. 
 

Without a Supporters organisation asking the right questions we are at the mercy of people who have already proved themselves untrustworthy.

Edited Saturday at 09:13 by Forever Blue

[Mike E]

2 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

Unfortunately the club aren’t held to account. They can say what they want.

Without a Supporters organisation asking the right questions we are at the mercy of people who have already proved themselves untrustworthy.

To what extent are @RoversTrust asking questions about this court case?

Are we asking Rovers to clarify the statement made weeks ago, as the implications of that statement appear untrue.

[lraC]

1 hour ago, davulsukur said:

Although I don't know who would actually do anything but if the club isn't being funded by the owners due to their illegal activity, isn't their anyway someone can step in and do something about this?

I mean, they can't possibly be deemed fit and proper by the EFL if they can't fund the club as they are under investigation for fraud?

(I know the EFL are a complete and utter joke)

We have been forced to sell Wharton, our now record fee, in order to keep the lights on, all because the owners are (potentially) criminals, doesn't feel right.

I think the fit and proper test, only relates to a potential purchaser. The key could be the statement in the accounts each year, as the owners funding is the only reason the club remain solvent. The statement made, is one whereby the owners commit to funding the shortfall and without that, I don’t think the accounts can be signed off and I don’t think the club will be able to make their annual promise to the league about their ability to see the season though. That could relate to the 25/26 season now though.

The accountants will be fully aware of the court case and are no doubt keeping a close eye on it, as should the EFL. 

[arbitro]

2 minutes ago, Forever Blue said:

I think Waggott said a month ago funds had been requested. Pasha was off discussing budgets a week or so ago. 

Unfortunately the club aren’t held to account. They can say what they want. 
 

Without a Supporters organisation asking the right questions we are at the mercy of people who have already proved themselves untrustworthy.

Before Pasha went to India Waggott said that budgets were sorted for next season. If he was being truthful (I personally don't believe much of what he says - call me a sceptic) then why would Pasha have to go to India to secure funds.

Once again things don't stack up and we are the usual mushrooms.

[Forever Blue]

1 minute ago, Mike E said:

To what extent are @RoversTrust asking questions about this court case?

Are we asking Rovers to clarify the statement made weeks ago, as the implications of that statement appear untrue.

From watching that stream of the AGM the biggest issue affecting the club (funding) was not even mentioned. Which is astonishing really. (I may have missed it though so apologies if so, but I don’t think I did)

The only thing asked was about transfer budgets, which Gestede dismissed as it wasn’t a the right time to discuss it. 

[Forever Blue]

2 minutes ago, arbitro said:

Before Pasha went to India Waggott said that budgets were sorted for next season. If he was being truthful (I personally don't believe much of what he says - call me a sceptic) then why would Pasha have to go to India to secure funds.

Once again things don't stack up and we are the usual mushrooms.

Exactly. 

[ABBEY]

12 hours ago, OssyLad said:

I’d love this to be true 🙏🏼🙏🏼

if only

im moist

Edited Saturday at 09:24 by ABBEY

[Old Codger]

5 minutes ago, arbitro said:

Before Pasha went to India Waggott said that budgets were sorted for next season. If he was being truthful (I personally don't believe much of what he says - call me a sceptic) then why would Pasha have to go to India to secure funds.

Once again things don't stack up and we are the usual mushrooms.

Budgets are one thing. Funds to spend according to budget are quite another. If the Chicken Chokers become prohibited from spending their pocket money on their overseas chattels, we can safely presume the club would be considered to be not a going concern under its current financial profile.

Talk is cheap. Actions always speak louder than words. I've asked a few times what has actually happened to the income generated by recent player sales, but nobody really knows, other than those who handle the club's income, draw up the contracts and administer the funds once deposited.

Football finances have always been a messy minefield. Rovers is just a bit messier than most, though somewhat obscured by Mr Lugubrious himself at the helm, and a complete lack of transparency in any of the formal reporting mechanisms available for public scrutiny.

We will never have the inside track, and perhaps we never should. But we do have the right to be treated as significant stakeholders in the affairs of Blackburn Rovers Football Club, something we have been robbed of by the shameless and shameful approach adopted by the weirdos from Pune, whose handling of matters from their first approach to this very second has been nothing short of disgraceful - by any normal standards, even in the shithole that is football finance.

 

[philipl]

So nothing 

[Crimpshrine]

13 hours ago, OssyLad said:

I’d love this to be true 🙏🏼🙏🏼

As various posters on here having been stating since March. 

The club statements are deliberately misleading. Jackson from the LET has fallen for it.

The club was on the edge in January before Wharton was sold. It will be in the same position in August - unless the case gets heard and goes in Venky's favour.