v Derby County (a) - 8/3/2025

[Crimpshrine]

1 hour ago, Forever Blue said:

 

I was saying it this time last year  shortly after permission was granted. You denied anything had changed until you spoke to your mate Pasha 6 months later and then did a u-turn and said they could send funds….basically agreeing with what I’d been saying fur 6 months prior. Quite funny when you think about it. 

What is the impediment? 

OK mate. Have it your way.

[Lecogsportif]

2 hours ago, Torgeir said:

Have to grab the bull by its horns in this one. Play the ones who have a point to prove to Eustace, and don't sit back and let them get into their groove.

Unfortunate to have Dennis out for this game.
This game is made for him.....damn

[lraC]

3 hours ago, Forever Blue said:

 

I was saying it this time last year  shortly after permission was granted. You denied anything had changed until you spoke to your mate Pasha 6 months later and then did a u-turn and said they could send funds….basically agreeing with what I’d been saying fur 6 months prior. Quite funny when you think about it. 

What is the impediment? 

Incredible that you don’t know, or don’t understand.

The fact that they need to get a no objection certificate for starters is an impediment, but also read the accounts, as it states very clearly in there that:

”This permission is subject to certain conditions, which have been met already, or that will be met, prior or subsequent to the remittance being made”. 
This is a big impediment and given that it is written in the accounts, it is 100% admitting, there is an impediment.

Just for clarity the definition of the word impediment, as per the Oxford English Dictionary is:

Noun A hinderance or obstruction in doing something. 

So there you have it in black and white confirming exactly what I said, that Waggott’s statement, that there is no impediment to them sending funds, is a total and utter lie.

[lraC]

9 hours ago, Forever Blue said:

You were wrong in the past. Today’s accounts back up exactly what I was saying last summer….i.e. something changed this time last year. You and a few others told me I was wrong then. Today you have the proof I wasn’t. 

I know this sounds rude, so apologies, but I don’t actually think you quite grasp what the accounts are actually saying.

Please read my post prior to this one, as the very fact that you need to ask what the impediment is, makes it very clear, that you aren’t getting this. 

[Forever Blue]

4 hours ago, lraC said:

I know this sounds rude, so apologies, but I don’t actually think you quite grasp what the accounts are actually saying.

Please read my post prior to this one, as the very fact that you need to ask what the impediment is, makes it very clear, that you aren’t getting this. 

Deary me.

I know what an impediment is, and what you keep quoting is literally telling you that  the conditions for any remittance have been met or will be met in future. Thats the bit YOU don’t get. There is no impediment because the conditions are the bond. They can choose to pay the bond. They are billionaires. A choice is not a legal impediment. 

There is literally ‘no objection’ to them sending money. They’ve got a certificate and everything. A precedent has now been set.

When the club released the ‘no impediment’ statement it was just after the NOC was granted. At the time I said something had changed for them to release that statement. You and the experts continued to state they couldn’t send money and the club statement was just ‘cleverly worded’ and that nothing had changed. You were wrong as the accounts have now proved. 

So like you and your fellow experts were told 12 months ago, Venkys can fund but won’t. Their business model couldn’t be clearer - sell players to keep the lights on. 

So, and please don’t take this the wrong way, if you’re going to be patronising at least have a better grasp on the things you’re being patronising about. 

Edited Wednesday at 05:51 by Forever Blue

[lraC]

1 hour ago, Forever Blue said:

Deary me.

I know what an impediment is, and what you keep quoting is literally telling you that  the conditions for any remittance have been met or will be met in future. Thats the bit YOU don’t get. There is no impediment because the conditions are the bond. They can choose to pay the bond. They are billionaires. A choice is not a legal impediment. 

There is literally ‘no objection’ to them sending money. They’ve got a certificate and everything. A precedent has now been set.

When the club released the ‘no impediment’ statement it was just after the NOC was granted. At the time I said something had changed for them to release that statement. You and the experts continued to state they couldn’t send money and the club statement was just ‘cleverly worded’ and that nothing had changed. You were wrong as the accounts have now proved. 

So like you and your fellow experts were told 12 months ago, Venkys can fund but won’t. Their business model couldn’t be clearer - sell players to keep the lights on. 

So, and please don’t take this the wrong way, if you’re going to be patronising at least have a better grasp on the things you’re being patronising about. 

So you know what the impediment is, yet you asked what the impediment is and I simply answered your question. If you know what it is, then why did you ask that question?

I, along with several other posters stated that they could not fund and at the time this was stated (Pre April 2024) that was correct. After they agreed that funding could be made, but only with a no objection certificate again myself and other people then called Waggott out, as he had then stated that they could fund with no, imediment. You yourself still don't seem to get that. The bond itself is an impediment, as is the no objection certificate and the added statement now in the accounts (This permission is subject to certain conditions which that have been met already, or that will be met prior and subsequent to the remitance being made) If this simply means the bond as you state, then why go the the trouble of putting those extra words in the accounts, surely a simple statement explaining that, a bond is required to the equivalent amount, would do.

Personally, I am not convinced at this point that a no objection certificate and a bond, means that they can then send funds, but if you are, then fine, we simply have a difference of opinion. 

I note you consider me to have been patronising, which I never intended, so please accept my apologies, if I came across that way. 

 

[...]

[Trinidad Rover]

Concerned the players might not go into this one all guns blazing.

A number of them have been very vocal about how much they loved JE, hoping they don’t try and help him out, even unconsciously. 

That said we can put a strong team out. Wouldn’t play Dolan, feel Cantwell might be better off the right with Ohashi’s energy through the middle.

 

Pears

Brittain Hyam Carter Ribeiro

Trav Tronstad

Cantwell Ohashi Kargbo

Makkers

 

 

 

[Lancaster Rover]

Well, I reckon I'll know by 5.15 on Saturday whether I can book a holiday for May half term or need to be looking at London hotels!

[MarkBRFC]

5 minutes ago, Lancaster Rover said:

Well, I reckon I'll know by 5.15 on Saturday whether I can book a holiday for May half term or need to be looking at London hotels!

Book the holiday.

[Mercer]

27 minutes ago, Lancaster Rover said:

Well, I reckon I'll know by 5.15 on Saturday whether I can book a holiday for May half term or need to be looking at London hotels!

You can do both!

Final Sat 24 May, holiday Sun 25 May to Sun 1 Jun.

[Lancaster Rover]

Yeah to be fair, I'd not noticed they were at the start of the school holidays, I had it in my head the old fashioned dates of the Champ final being on Bank holiday monday

[Nuttall is lost]

You just know this will be Eustace's first win

[ABRAM ROVER]

21 minutes ago, Nuttall is lost said:

You just know this will be Eustace's first win

Hopefully not but this would be the most Rovers thing to do. 

[G Somerset Rover]

If we get one, it could be a comfortable afternoon as their heads will drop big time with the drop looking inevitable.

If they get their noses in front though it’ll be time to pack up and head home.

[superniko]

I posted in the playoff thread, but worth it's own post here.

These are our most recent results in away matches to promoted L1 sides.

We have LOST all of our last 10 matches and we have to go back to the 2020/21 season before we even got a single point from a promoted L1 side away from home.

2021/22, 2022/23, 2023/24 and 2024/25 we've scored only 4 goals excluding the Ipswich match.

This is peak Blackburn Rovers in the Venky's era. Chalk up the 1-0 Derby win, release our seethe on here and move on to next season, if we can still stomach it.

 

2024: Oxford (A) - Lost 1-0

2023: Plymouth (A) - Lost 3-0

2023: Ipswich (A) - Lost 4-3

2023: Sheffield Wed (A) - Lost 3-1

2022: Wigan (A) - Lost 1-0

2022: Rotherham (A) - Lost 4-0 - christ this was a low point

2022: Sunderland (A) - Lost 2-1

2021: Hull (A) - Lost 2-0

2021: Peterborough (A) - Lost 2-1

2021: Blackpool (A) - Lost 2-1

2020: Coventry (A) - Won 4-0 (!) October 2020

2020: Wycombe (A) - Lost 1-0

2020: Rotherham (A) - Drew 1-1

Edited Wednesday at 11:11 by superniko

[chaddyrovers]

On 04/03/2025 at 04:30, lraC said:

The owners have not funded the club now, for 18 months. Several posters on here, have suggested that the Waggott line “There is no impediment to them funding the club” to mean that they will send funds as required, but I have my doubts. 
If the contracts of the players are not renewed, extended, this summer, I think we are in big trouble. We have seen this before, where players have been let go for free and we cannot keep doing that.

We have had an element of luck, with the sales of Wharton, Szmodics and the sell on fee for Raya and we may well get some more from the sell on fee for Adam Wharton, but this will eventually end in disaster.

The owners need to make a proper statement of intent, surely the fans deserve that, whether you do or do not believe what is being peddled by other people. They cannot keep on remaining silent, the fans deserve better. 

I said a few months ago that the owners won't put money in due to what we have receive in sales and that money will be used to fund the losses and with the accounts coming out yesterday we see that this is case. 

Rovers have said that the owners can send money over but have to meet certain requirements to do so. Whether this true, I honestly don't know at this stage. 

The fans of course deserve a statement from the owners and what their intent is in the short, medium and long term. Hopefully the Rovers fan forum @K-Hod plus the @We Are The Rovers @Miller11 @Mike Graham can ask these questions and puts the points you made very well to the Rovers management of Waggott and Suhail Pasha in the next meetings

[chaddyrovers]

21 hours ago, K-Hod said:

We'd probs be better off if the fans en masse put the same amount of effort into getting at Venky's as they are to getting at a manager who was only here for about a year.

I'm sure they will be backing the team on Saturday, of course they might be a few chants against Eustace but they were against Plymouth cos people feel let down by him leaving Rovers for Derby. I was talking to people pre match about Eustace leaving and how they are still shock he took that job and why leave us. 

Lets hope this is Ismael's first win as Rovers head coach

[lraC]

12 minutes ago, chaddyrovers said:

I said a few months ago that the owners won't put money in due to what we have receive in sales and that money will be used to fund the losses and with the accounts coming out yesterday we see that this is case. 

Rovers have said that the owners can send money over but have to meet certain requirements to do so. Whether this true, I honestly don't know at this stage. 

The fans of course deserve a statement from the owners and what their intent is in the short, medium and long term. Hopefully the Rovers fan forum @K-Hod plus the @We Are The Rovers @Miller11 @Mike Graham can ask these questions and puts the points you made very well to the Rovers management of Waggott and Suhail Pasha in the next meetings

There is a statement in the accounts, posted in here yesterday, about the owners being able to send money, if they meet certain requirements and I have pasted that below. It is taken directly from the accounts, so not my words, but given the source, it must be true.

The directors are pleased to confirm that the ED issues a no objection certificate date 12 March 2024, which confirmed that VHPL has been granted permission to make a remittance of £15 million, to its wholly owned subsidiary, namely Venky's London Limited, the immediate parent company of BRFC. This permission, is subject to certain conditions, which have been met already, or that will be met prior and subsequent to the remittance being made.

Worrying times really, as I believe that Pasha is reporting back to the owners and suggesting that there is no need for them to send funds, as losses are being covered, by sales, as you have stated, but this cannot go on indefinitely in my opinion, without a significant drop in our league status. 

[Neal]

2 hours ago, Trinidad Rover said:

Concerned the players might not go into this one all guns blazing.

A number of them have been very vocal about how much they loved JE, hoping they don’t try and help him out, even unconsciously. 

That said we can put a strong team out. Wouldn’t play Dolan, feel Cantwell might be better off the right with Ohashi’s energy through the middle.

 

Pears

Brittain Hyam Carter Ribeiro

Trav Tronstad

Cantwell Ohashi Kargbo

Makkers

 

 

 

Well Eustace couldn't get ours going all guns blazing for Burnley after forever asking to fill the stadium and then bottled it... 

 

That aside, a lot of pressure on both teams for this game and a must win for both. A loss for us and results go against us and I'd pretty much write us off for playoffs. Sounds harsh but just how I feel. 

 

Going to be very spicy this one. 

 

Already nervous. 

[...]

But it's a potential banana skin this one

Potential. Banana. Skin. 🍌 

[chaddyrovers]

5 minutes ago, lraC said:

I believe that Pasha is reporting back to the owners and suggesting that there is no need for them to send funds, as losses are being covered, by sales, as you have stated, but this cannot go on indefinitely in my opinion, without a significant drop in our league status. 

I think the owners have decided not to put their own money given what the club have received in the last 18 months. let Wharton, Szmodics, Gallagher and Raya money cover itself well we reinvest only a small amount back into cash signings. 

[Mattyblue]

‘In shock’ that two managers in a year have walked.

Real mystery, ain’t it…

[Exiled_Rover]

31 minutes ago, Neal said:

Well Eustace couldn't get ours going all guns blazing for Burnley after forever asking to fill the stadium and then bottled it... 

 

That aside, a lot of pressure on both teams for this game and a must win for both. A loss for us and results go against us and I'd pretty much write us off for playoffs. Sounds harsh but just how I feel. 

 

Going to be very spicy this one. 

 

Already nervous. 

Did we bottle it, or did they score with pretty much their only shot on target and the referee allowed them to kick us off the pitch?

[Hasta]

37 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

Did we bottle it, or did they score with pretty much their only shot on target and the referee allowed them to kick us off the pitch?

I was going to quote but you beat me to it, we ultimately competed well but couldn't break down what is an exceptional resolute defence. And they managed to take the one chance that came along. It's hardly bottling it. Similar story last time we played them at Ewood.

JDT bottled the Turf game.

Edited Wednesday at 13:07 by Hasta