As has been mentioned above, in light of such uncertainties concerning the financial situation, insolvent position and reliance on the going concern to continue trading, surrounding The Blackburn Rovers Football and Athletic Club. If I was one of the four directors, I would be seeking the professional advice of an Insolvency Practitioner as a matter of urgency to protect myself against future actions brought upon me personally. Especially so if I was concerned that I was being fed instructions as to how I should be performing my fiduciary directors duties and responsibilities, by say the Chief Operating Officer, who is not a director. Perhaps he is a 'shadow director'? Again I'd be seeking to clarify this situation. I have a feeling that part of any advice received would be to hold onto any funds.

I asked, in response by a fans forum member request to pose questions to be asked at the most recent Fans Forum, whether the position of Suhail Pasha might be enquired. Specifically whether a Director, better still SW the Chief Executive Officer, might comment as to whether they consider Pasha to be acting as a ‘Shadow Director’? Following on from this, how do they consider this to sit alongside their position as a director sitting on the Board of Directors and receiving instructions? I have read the minutes, but cannot see anything mentioned; was my question asked and responded to, or ignored? Thank you.

I’ve highlighted a serious concern. I would suggest that questions need to be asked as to exactly what is Suhail Pasha’s legal role at The Blackburn Rovers & Athletic Club Ltd? What instructions is he giving to the Board of Directors and on what authority. He’s clearly a shadow director, this point needs emphasising to ensure he’s on the hook and accountable. However many directors there may be remaining, should certainly consider their positions and whether without his accountability I’d be pushing back.

The spotlight should be shown onto the actual legal status of The Blackburn Rovers Football and Athletic Limited company, this is the legal entity out of which Rovers trades/operates. With specific attention to the officers, the Board of Director, placing pressure on them to consider their positions and whether it is wise for them to be continuing in the current climate. A reminder about who these officers presently are, as appearing on Companies House:- Steven Waggott – Chief Executive Officer Michael Anthony Cheston – Finance Director Reddy Gandhi Babu Robert Duckworth Coar – apparently described by some as a non-executive director, though this should not be confused with non-statutory directors, who are not appointed to the board of directors. A non-executive director is a full member of the board, who has the same official duties, responsibilities, and yes, liabilities that apply to a standard director! Sreenivasa Rao Mandava Then there is Ian David Sylester who is the company secretary. The Board of Directors have a set requirement, besides the management of the company’s business, they make strategic and operational decisions of the company and are responsible for ensuring that the company meets its statutory obligations. Act within powers, promote the success of the company, exercise independent judgement, avoid conflicts of interest, not accept benefits from third parties, declare interests in proposed or existing transactions or arrangements with the company. Duties and obligations on a director also state that a director owes under common law principles a duty of confidentiality; then an obligation relating to the health, safety and welfare at work of its workers; plus similarly obligations under environmental, competition and anti- corruption legislation. Now all of the above is fine and trouble free and works swimmingly in your standard profitable trading company. However when questions as to the company’s viability or going concern are raised then this should give cause for concern by your Board of Directors. Especially so when perhaps there might be the added risk of liquidation on the horizon; administration or an insolvent liquidation. When a company is in financial difficulties the directors should seek advice as soon as possible if they are to avoid potential personal liability under insolvency legislation. The general duties are also then modified to include an obligation to having regard to the interest of creditors. Then there is the issue of wrongful trading, which is an increased risk on the directors. Where they knew or ought to have concluded that there was no reasonable prospect of the company avoiding insolvent liquidation or administration, and they continue to allow the company to trade after they knew or ought to have concluded, and do not take every step they ought to from that time to minimise the potential loss to creditors. I could go on and mention fraudulent trading or misfeasance, though I am sure the above persons are not party to any such goings on. Now I do not know who all of the above are, other than the first two whose roles are specifically stated, along with Rob Coar (who it is said, is only on the board in a capacity to safeguard his FA position?), though they might all be now considering their positions in light of various specific announcements along with matters reported in local newspapers and other media outlets, if true. I have heard a name mentioned, Suhail Pasha, within the corridors of power at Rovers, he has a reported role as the owners’ advisor, is he one of the aforementioned names who is on the Board of Directors? Might this role be considered to be that of a Shadow Director and is he permissible to take up such a position? Once again if I was one of those five directors listed, I most certainly would be seeking clarification and obtaining evidence such as a corporate governing structure as to Suhail’s roles. Otherwise without him also being on the hook so to speak, I might not necessarily be taking instructions from him, over the fiduciary duties of being a director of Blackburn Rovers.

Duncan McGuire loan signing - sorry if this has been made clear elsewhere, or whether it might be speculative, in that only those actually involved in the negotiations will fully know, but... Did we go from an initial offer bid of circa £2m, which was positively responded to in Miami, but then perhaps went up to £2.5m following Sheff Wed creating an auction, which was reported as being acceptable by Orlando, for them to transfer their player to us. With in all probability following a medical yesterday morning after his arrival in the UK, he signs the transfer forms, lodged wherever, happy days, send the down payment and then any balance in dribs and drabs for next x years across the pond. To...a $700k loan fee until June 2024 with then an option to buy of $7m, plus potential $2.5m add ons? To me this seems like an expensive air flight ticket that someone at Ewood tried to save on Wednesday evening GMT. Besides the cost of a possible Revidge & Wilpshire ( Simon 😉) or equivalent airport taxi. Or perhaps great business if in fact Dunc has similar fitness and goal scoring attributes as Niall Ennis, costing us only $700k (though $700k is not chicken feed) and his salary for the next five months.

You've also missed out wages to Chester, who writes out the cheques, and Sylvester, in charge of the fax machine.

Yes, it's performance related!!

Hello, it’s Waggott who is ultimately to blame, he’s the chief exec. He chose to go down to St Andrews. He’s done bugger all in rectifying the balls up so it doesn’t happen again and again and finally he has reneged on the promise to explain to the supporters what occurred. Accountability and integrity, resign, drain the swamp Venkys and get yourselves a functioning board and operations department.

In my view, the buck should stop with the person at the top, Waggott, and it's him who I want to hear about the January '23 transfer deadline debacle. An explanation as to why he considered that it was a good idea for him to be at St Andrews, whilst his new DOF who admitted that he had limited experience in the English FA/EFL/PL transfer deadline process, was left to get those essential new players required to fill the obvious gaps. Alongside him he had the long standing club secretary Silvester (at Ewood or Brockhall?) who ultimately is responsible for generating and submitting the necessary paperwork, in accordance with the outline process, yet he might have a uninspiring previous track records in completing transfers to meet the deadlines. Waggott was at the fans forum meeting when the opportunity was there to drill down into what occurred and who might be responsible, yet from the minutes he was conspicuously silent on that topic. Leaving it to his fall guy Broughton, although we did glean which team he supported and why he chose to join Rovers, along with side tracking the discussion into asking the forum members questions. Waggott should go, if not for the above, but for all the poor performances outlined elsewhere, which have backed up a below average CV, yet he talks a good talk. I am anticipating a quiet announcement in the next few weeks that it will be someone else who will depart, with thanks for all the years service as club secretary of Blackburn Rovers, along with a tidy severance package. Undav, O'Brien and a promising youngster would had a major impact on where Rovers might finish the season, if a play off place is missed, I place full responsibility on Waggott.

Let's not be forgetting 1903 too, when they finished bottom of the league. Sorry one other minor technicality, Hartlepool were in fact Hartlepools until 1968, as Brian Clough would have said.

Who mentioned 1987? Have a trawl through the history books. Multiple times too!

Unlike Burnley, thankfully Rovers have never had to seek re-election. 😁

Proud of the entire players, manager and coaching staff, fantastic supporters, which on the whole was a good day for Rovers, a fabulous togetherness from one and all, no disgrace in any way. Plus after listening to the draw, who would want to be embarrassed playing in a Wembley FA Cup semi final and getting embarrassed by City conceding a handful? 😄 To a man the players did their utmost and without having to find any scapegoats, I will point out; how well Tyler did for winning the ball that led to our second goal, Gally never stopped running 10/10 for his effort and endeavours, fine margins by the manager in freshening up the team on 80 minutes. Just a pity we did not have Lewis O'Brien available to play, as I feel he might have made all the difference.

Where did I say that I didn’t like the fans forum? Likewise what was rude in my comment? Just read my comment back and still struggling to follow your response. A tadge sensitive K-Hod?

Well if many did feel strongly enough about this debacle and with the Fans Forum due next Monday the 13th, they might be inclined to lobby the fans forum members, which I understand there may be one or two who might have a peek on here now and again, to perhaps raise this above all other relative trivial matters next week? Not permitting them to waffle on about pies and player postcards in the club shop.