If true out of 50 applicants the nerds at Ewood shortlisted those 4, god help us. I'm currently working away, but you have good record, so no reason to doubt what you say. My only reservation would be if Waggott is going which is strongly doing the rounds today, its strange he'd be in a position to offer the role? I'd also be dubious Farke turned down an interview after previously indicating to venkys advisors he'd be open to the discussion. Either way this news is most disappointing, roll on my holidays next week

At that time, he was working in the family business and getting ready for Uni, Obviously communication has continued since

So thats Mowbray, Venus, (park to follow gone). Timeline as suggested, I'm not sure if the Raos/Waggott discussion has occurred yet but believe that is 100% on the agenda. Their record when these chats occur, is 100% departure strike rate, although finding board members, new manager, new coaching staff, new DOF etc seems far too much to happen in one foul swoop. I still think 6th June is D'day is terms of who will be the new gaffer, and I'm still convinced it will be Farke barring him not liking whats said. The Pearce link, has gone cold somewhat, and I dont forsee that happening, given 3 foreign coaches are in the running. If it had/was a British manager then that door would potentially re-open, but the source who told me a couple of weeks ago, says "thats parked for now'. I must stress that link was uk based. If I hear anything else I will follow up on above but for now nothing to add

I found him very helpful in initially being the go between, between myself, Madam and Bala, expecially during the Shagnew days. He was instrumental in many truths reaching the owners prior to me getting direct contact, and hand delivered some very interesting things we shared including documents and recordings. He holds family values very high, and really gave me a greater understanding of their culture, family set up, whilst he wanted to understand my upbringing and asked many questions regarding my parents, wife and children. I do think people will take to him, although im not too sure that transition will be this coming season

I think he takes after the other side of the family, he is very pleasant and can talk for hours. Would certainly engage with supporter base if uk based.

The long term plan is for Jagdish to be involved although this year, im not too sure. Having spoken with him personally over the last few years, he has spent a lot of time learning the poultry business, including working out on the farms at ground level, whilst also doing his University. His path is very much to be involved in the family empire. first and foremost. He is quite a grounded young man, who wants to work for his future rather than have it handed to him on a plate. He watches all the games and is genuinely passionate about football.

Be nice, love Brad

Thought it be a a god time to post this, as previously mentioned they don't fart without the authorisation of the owners. Following the below fiasco, the lead is even more shorter Dear Shebby, I thought I would send yourself and the owners a summary of the Judge’s verdict on our application to remove the admission of liability to pay Henning Berg a salary calculation over 2 1/2 years. You will recall Derek Shaw and Brabners admitted liability for this sum without informing the owners. This can be evidenced by Derek Shaw’s conversation with Brabners which is on the file where it states “she will not like this but will have to do it and ease it into her”. Our Application on 16th April 2013 was to attempt to remove / withdraw the admission of liability and go to a trial to hear this matter in full. You will be aware from my previous notes that upon investigating this matter further and going through the witness statement with Derek Shaw that I did have deep reservations about this matter going to full trial as a result of feeling that Derek Shaw would not make a reliable witness as he seemed to be unsure of key events. In short, the Judge today has dismissed our Application to withdraw the admission. As such, the admission by Derek Shaw and Brabners will stand and a further sum of monies (approximately £50k) will have to be paid to Henning Berg on to of the monies already paid. The Judge found that: 1) He did not believe the evidence as submitted by Derek Shaw; 2) Derek Shaw had not told Henning Berg or his advisors that he did not have the authority to enter into that contract; 3) Derek Shaw removed the 12 month notification period from the contract and it was, he found, acceptable for Henning Berg and his advisors to rely upon Derek Shaw’s authority to bind the owners; 4) There was contradictory evidence before him (letters regarding the investigation viz a viz notification on the Club’s official website that their was no investigation); 5) The Club had neither suspended nor terminated Derek Shaw’s contract therefore: - he did not believe the admission should be withdrawn and Judgment should be entered against the Club. The situation the Club faces itself in is, in my opinion, wholly unfair and results from the removal of the twelve month notification period and the initial admission of liability. This factor is even more frustrating when you consider the point at calculation of the monies owed to Henning Berg under the contract is higher than the amount of money he would have earned if he had remained at the Club for the full duration. We must not forget that payment ought to have been made within a ridiculously short length of time of 28 days. This again is a mistake that had been made either by the MD or by Brabners Chaffe Street when drafting the contract. Next Step In my opinion the Club now have to consider the following: 1. The position of the MD; 2. Whether there are any legal grounds to pursue a claim for damages against Brabners; and 3. Protection for the owners at Boardroom level. I am happy to advise briefly (and in more detail if requested) as follows: a) The actions by the MD, either deliberately or by mistake which may constitute gross misconduct and as such suspension / termination are available by way of remedy to the Club immediately. In addition, contractually the Club has the right to pursue such damages against the MD. The owners must consider this matter. b) Potentially, as a result of the advice that has been given by Brabners, and in some cases not given, could lead to a potential action against Brabners for damages. We should consider this in detail; and c) Currently the owners do not appear to have any one of their representatives on the Board and as such, I am concerned that the owners are not protected at Boardroom level. Consideration should be given to (perhaps yourself) being appointed to the Board and therefore being in a position to carry out the owners’ wishes. In addition, the position of the MD could also be reviewed (please see my earlier point). I have to say that for this situation to arise at MD level of a Plc is quite extraordinary and in my view in football is unprecedented. I would strongly urge for an urgent review of the structure and corporate governance of the Club in order to avoid a repeat or confrontation between the Board and the owners, both of which would be highly damaging to the Club. Undoubtedly the Club has received over the last few days some bad publicity as a result of the Henning Berg situation and may do so in tomorrow’s press. I would therefore expect that the fans and the press will expect the owners to act decisively on this matter. I wish to reassure both yourselves and the owners from a legal point of view that everything that could be done was done. In addition, the Club will also be liable for not only its own legal costs but those of the advisors to Henning Berg. Should you wish to speak with me to discuss please do not hesitate to contact me on my mobile (07748 980 707) Kind regards Yours sincerely Chris Farnell Partner IPS Law LLP (dictated not read) David House 10-12 Cecil Road Hale Cheshire WA15 9PA DDT: +44 (0)161 830 4717 Fax: +44 (0)161 830 4711 Linked In: http://uk.linkedin.com/pub/chris-farnell/9/618/380 www.ipslaw.co.uk

Its the rovers way, After Kean went, Agnew had a list, Shaw had a list, Singh had a list, Venkys personal advisors had a list. They then interviewed everyone on those list like a game of top trumps, and none of them could agree with an appointment. Berg was then thrown in the mix as a compromise and was appointed only for the Venkys to go spare, as they had not authorised the appointment. Hence the big court case and massive settlements. 4 Weeks was the message, which by my calculations makes Monday 6th June 2022 as appointment day. Before then, we will get confirmation of more exits Venus etc, and a final decision on Waggotts future is likely to have been made too. Its not being played out publically and wheels are moving, but if they cock this up, its going to set us back years IMO

I've heard nothing to sway me from Farke being appointed, i'm going to stick with this, given where that info came from. I haven't heard from the same source Pearce is part of a double act, but was told by someone who is usually 95% correct that given his work with the national team and respect within the game, there is a possibility a discussion will be had on the DOF front. That was earlier this month, and there was certainly no inclination anywhere he was leaving west ham. So the news he has now left west ham, certainly adds fuel to that info. I will do some digging tomorrow

Was told the secret society had already held talks with both parties, and were on with convincing rovers its a goer 🕵️‍♂️ Pearce on the other hand, as reported on the 13th May on here, name has been cropping up with Rovers, Source is uk based, so certainly has some legs potentially.

Bit more realistic than David Dein and Arsene Wenger, choked on my curry when I heard that rumour

Pearce DOF, Farke Manager, sounds like a plan 😉

I've not even received my renewal pack. If I did not do social media, my renewal would pass me by as would the deadline. Has the club stopped posting renewals and is hopeful that everyone logs into their website or follows them on social media?

I agree, people will say what they was told, problem is people are told different things from different people or sometimes from the same person. Ewood is still jobs for the boys, every man/woman for themselves, with eyes only for their own pay cheque.

It was a gradual trying to put words in ones mouth, so at that point to prevent having to keep repeating myself he became the 2nd ignore of the day.

I dont believe transfer funds were asked for by the board. We needed money in january, we needed to push on for promotion, we needed that extra spice. Had we asked for it, im sure we'd have got it. If we then failed to go up, whose neck was in the noose? The manager leaving was always on the cards

Request for funds comes from the board, not the manager. You cant have whats not asked for

You are preaching to the converted, i long for the day they buggar off, and they have a million and one and some more faults. However those at Ewood are far from exempt in all this, and appear to have a done a great job in deflecting all the blame on the manager and owners

Where did I say he should of got a new contract? Sorry chaddy, you are going on ignore, because you take 3 words, juggle them in your head then spout poo out the other end. I have neither the time or patience to get pulled into a classroom chat with you

Was there an unsigned cheque, or lack of business case, or indeed desire from Cheston and Waggott? On this one an educated guess would of been the fact we was on the brink of failing the FFP, why the pitch had to be aborted

Its the one thing everyone at Ewood preaches at every opportunity when asked. Their funding at Rovers can never be questioned,

The raos