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.

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.

Spot on. Seems someone on here, doesn’t understand what the word impediment means.

Thats exactly what I recall him saying too, not to mention, saying Waggott’s no impediment to sending funds was correct. The accounts now confirm, there is an impediment.

Nonsense. You said the statement Waggott made about there being no impediment to funding was correct. Well as you see in the accounts there is an impediment. Are you denying saying that? He is changing his story it seems.

Hence the reason the former manager decided to do one. Fed up of the lies and false promises no doubt, but us fans are stuck with it, until the decide to move on and leave the car crash behind for us.

Nice work if you can get it.

Where would we be without him?

The no impediment to funding has been blown out of the water anyway, with the statement in the accounts, which says in no uncertain terms, that there is a rather larger impediment. Impediment (Noun) Hindrance or obstruction in doing something. Extracted form the accounts 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. Now, I don't know about other people, but that sounds very much like an impediment to me.

No wonder that he thinks the owners are wonderful humble people, who never fail to sign a cheque. Where would we be without them?

Perhaps, he is saving up, to pay Andy Cole back.

Interesting to see how Isaac, is doing, given his Dad's background. Is he one we can expect to see in the first team?

So the paragraph that starts the directors are pleased to confirm, that the ED issued a certificate of no object, tells us exactly what I have stated already today on another thread. Waggott has stated that there is no impediment to the owners funding, but here we have it in the accounts, that there is indeed, one hell of a big impediment.

I fully agree and as we have seen, since the ruling that they have to put up a bond if they want to send any funds, they have sent exactly zero. The line trotted out by Waggott that "There is no impediment to them funding" is a blatant lie, unless, I am miss understanding the word impediment.

Read my post again, as you seem to be arguing against yourself there. I have stated that they can’t send funds in the past, but have not said that in this post.

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.

What’s the sell on clause?

I have moved on from Eustace too and to be honest, I never really took to him and didn’t listen to a single pre or post match interview, in all the time, he was with us. I think it stemmed from how Waggott seemed to have him already lined up, prior to JDT leaving. To be fair despite failing to win a home game last season (Stoke can still be debated I guess) he did well this season, but for me, I had already decided he wasn’t for me. The big problem is, I am feeling the same way about the new guy and feel a bit sickened with his letter and how he has been rolled out, by the club so far. Its feeling to me, a bit like the manager, Suhail and Waggott, are all buffoons, taking the fans for a ride, along with the owners. I am hoping we can get some wins in the next 3 games and it turns me around, as I don’t think I have felt as bad about Rovers as I currently do, in the 52 years, I have been a fan.

Single points will not be enough for Eustace this season. He got away with it with us, last season, but only just, as we had enough points in the bag, when he arrived. Granted we got the unexpected wins at Leeds and Leicester, but unless you count the Stoke game as his, he never won a single home game. Derby 0 Rovers 0. but I hope, I am wrong and we attack them to death.

Lose you mean.

The Allez les Bleu letter apparently written by the new manager, quelled it completely. Most taken in with it and now we have someone who wants to be here, instead of someone who doesn’t, we are a shoe in for the play offs.

He might buy himself out, as he is minted.

You are right, it was tight, but on for me

It was onside

Clean sheets in Burnley. Whatever next?