Barnsley, who are supposed to be 'one of those teams' that will be as poor if not worse than Rovers this season and who we are hoping on finishing above to survive, are set to receive 15% of the John Stones to Man City fee. This should see them land in excess of £7.5 million. I wonder if 'little' Barnsley will moan about 'not being able to compete', having to 'cut their cloth' and 'adhere to FFP rules'. Or alternatively they will be delighted to receive such a financial boost and wisely reinvest the proceeds into improving their squad whilst we bobble along looking for some loans to fill the squad up.

When I read the letter the first thing that occurred to me was the possibility that I could go down to the club shop today, purchase a season ticket on the back row of the Riverside, then next week moan about the view and ask the club to relocate me at no extra cost. I would then ask for a corresponding seat in the Jack Walker Upper tier central area, which cost £120 more, and this letter appears to suggest the club would be prepared to do just that. Alternatively I could do the above and demand relocation to the JW lower and save myself £20. I've never sat at the very back of the Riverside, but it was blatantly obvious from the moment I heard there was a new gantry being installed that people's views were going to be affected. On a stand that old with a low roof it was always going to happen, its astonishing that the club have left it until Tuesday before the season starts to admit it. So that's now an increase in season ticket prices and poorer views for Riverside season ticket holders. What next? Removal of the roof? No toilets? Very hard to look past a complete closure of this stand in the next season or so, and Cheston is in the process of whittling down the number of season ticket holders in that stand to minimise the furore when it happens.

I honestly think they are/were naïve enough to think that signing 'fans favourite' Graham to a permanent deal would win over supporters this summer. I don't think they are completely clueless, they've probably been advised that they have to do something this summer to avoid a complete backlash/boycott from supporters, and seriously think that one player will achieve this. For them he's probably their 'new Rhodes'. They seemed happy to pay him big money whilst he banged in the goals and probably will do the same for Graham. They probably believed that pushing the boat out a bit more on his above average wages was worth it as it would dupe most fans into thinking all was well, meanwhile the systematic liquidation of our playing assets looks set to continue. The club will follow this up by making him central to promotional material and interviews. Whatever the value of Graham's contract, you can be sure that it has been comfortably covered in one swoop by the sale of Hanley to Newcastle.

Anyone have any news about the other changes that were supposedly going to be made at Ewood this summer? I heard there was a new jumbotron going between the Darwen End/Jack Walker stands and digital advertising boards around the pitch, but there's no sign of these from the photos taken recently.

Someone at the ground yesterday said that there was scaffolding up at 3 points along the Riverside doing the prep work in readiness for the gantry to be installed. So it seems congratulations are in order. Finally they've followed up their statements by actually doing something. In all seriousness looking at the numbers of season tickets sold in the Riverside this season it wouldn't surprise me to see that stand basically converted into a tv/camera structure closed to fans within the next 2-3 years, especially if we are relegated.

Any news on our Category 1 audit yet? The club must surely know if it has been retained by now. Numerous other clubs have announced they have passed the test. It also seems possible that Rovers Under 21s might yet be invited to join in the farcical 'EFL Trophy'. After inviting 16 clubs, some of whom performed worse than Rovers U21s last season, now Man City have turned down the invitation and United, Chelsea, Liverpool, Spurs and Arsenal are expected to follow them, meaning the 'EFL' will have to eventually get round to inviting Rovers to participate. The 'EFL' will be most disappointed if they have to let Rovers join in the fun rather than just the Premier League boys.

Thanks. I was thinking it would be slightly unfair if Rovers lost their Category One status due to not having facilities owing to planning difficulties in the Ribble Valley. I imagine that numerous other clubs with purpose built training facilities in the countryside will face similar problems. I don't know whether it has been answered yet but would Rovers' U21s be eligible to participate in the Football League Trophy next season? I know they only mentioned 16 clubs with Category One status competing when there are about 20 odd with Category One status, so presumably some are going to miss out. Will there be a qualification process or will they just allow the Premier League clubs to enter teams and not clubs like Rovers, Reading, Wolves, Norwich, Brighton, Fulham and Villa who have Category One status but aren't in the top flight. It seems unfair to me if Rovers' academy, along with the likes of Reading and Wolves are excluded from the competition just because the senior team is in the Championship when we all have equal status in terms of academy standard. Hardly fair on the young players in the Rovers and Reading academies that they will miss out on playing in that competition, especially when Rovers and Reading's Under 21 teams both performed quite well and better than a number of Premier League clubs last season.

I understand that the various clubs that currently hold 'Category A' academy status are in the process of being assessed to see whether they comply with the ever changing requirements. The criteria for Category A status has been enhanced making it more difficult for clubs to obtain and retain Category One status. Wolves have recently been audited and confirmed last week that they had been given Category One status once again and have been given a 3 year licence (the highest possible). http://www.wolves.co.uk/news/article/news-academy-retains-category-one-status-3144500.aspx Manchester United have also been audited recently and are expecting to retain their Category One status going forward (so they can play their reserves in the Football League Trophy). Presumably this means that Rovers have been audited or are being audited at the moment. Does anyone know when we will find out the outcome, or indeed whether Rovers already know the outcome? I was under the impression that some improvements would need to be made down at the academy at Brockhall, including erecting floodlights and a temporary stand for spectators. Have these been done? Also, the cost of maintaining a Category One academy is in excess of £2 million per year. Are Venkys going to continue to shovel that amount of money in or can we expect cost-cutting in this department like Bolton did last year?

Yep, the Ewood pitch is relaid every summer. This is essential work that cannot be ignored and is done every summer by every club in the league. The question is how much money is spent on doing it. If the £29,000 figure is correct, for comparison purposes Sheffield Wednesday spent £1 million last summer installing a new Desso Grassmaster pitch. So £29,000 is chicken feed, and probably one of the reasons why the pitch at Ewood appears to be getting worse every year in comparison to rivals when prior to Venkys it was one of the best pitches in the land. I've also heard that in the last few summers Accrington Stanley have invested more into their pitch than Rovers have at Ewood. It makes me laugh when Venkys expect credit for spending money on the pitch. Every club spends money on their pitches in the summer. Its part of maintaining the club's facilities, an obligation they signed up to when buying the club.

Some perspective here. At 'cash strapped' Wycombe Ainsworth has just presided over a 13th place (bottom half) finish in the 4th division after leading them to a failed play-off challenge the season before. This is the same League that John Coleman has just led Accy Stanley to 4th place and goal difference away from automatic promotion. If it were Exeter's Paul Tisdale or Yeovil's Darren Way linked it would be dismissed immediately by those with sense, yet because he's got a link to Blackburn its seen as a go-er.

Or Bournemouth have been given a lesser fine than the rules say they should get and therefore are willing to pay it off now to get it over and done with and to avoid any future tribunals or difficulties if they go down. QPR fought it once they were relegated, but as Bournemouth survived and will be awash with money next season I suppose £8 million now to put an end to it and move on might be a price worth paying.

Fine effort from our Under 21s last night in the play-off against Arsenal. Eventually lost 2-1 to a late winner, but important to point out that Arsenal put a side out containing Chambers, Rosicky, Cazorla and Gnabry. The future looks bright for the younger Rovers and their performances and progress have been one of the few positives in this wretched season.

Need to win the two home games against struggling sides and get a point at Wycombe which will be tough. 7 points will surely do the job now for Stanley.

Yes but whilst the numbers might be different, the theory is the same. Rovers have everything on their side just like West Ham do in their part of the world - the history, generations of fans, trophies, tradition. East Lancashire is Rovers territory, always has been, always will be, and Rovers will always be 'the' big club in the region, just like West Ham will always be 'the' club in the East End, regardless of how well the local minnows like Orient and Dagenham are doing. If some Rovers fans are looking for an excuse not to go to Ewood then there's something wrong. It might not be great at the moment but it could be a lot worse and it could be a lot more expensive too.

I refuse to consider Accrington as any sort of threat to Blackburn Rovers. If Rovers fans detest going to Ewood and watching Championship football for £200 a season so much they will change their habits to go and support Accy Stanley instead then that's their choice, but I won't be doing it. Ever. As Stanley climb the novelty will wear off. At the moment its 'proper football' because you can walk up to the ground, pick up a ticket on the turnstile, sit/stand where you want and everyone knows each other. If they have any intention of establishing themselves in League One or above they will need to radically change the Crown Ground and their ticketing arrangements, which will erode some of the novelty factor. I'm sure when West Ham were relegated to the Championship and Orient/Dagenham were in League One they didn't consider their little neighbours to be a threat.

Home games against Morecambe, York and Stevenage. All 3 struggling down at the wrong end of the table. York all but relegated already, the other two all but safe with nothing else to play for. Stanley should be getting 9 points on the board, which could be enough given the other teams fixtures. 3 wins and a couple of draws would put Stanley on 85 points, meaning Plymouth would have to win all 5 to overtake them, Bristol Rovers would need at least 13 more points from 15 to overtake them, as would Portsmouth, whilst assuming Oxford can get at least 9 from 15 to stay up there. The away games at Hartlepool and Wycombe are more difficult. Wycombe in with a chance of the play-offs and Hartlepool in very good form under Hignett although have nothing to play for. Plymouth go to Portsmouth on Saturday which is a tough one, a draw would be best as both sides are a threat. Plymouth also have to go to Orient and Cambridge who are decent sides both in with a chance of play-off qualification.

Venkys aren't putting a penny towards the new pitch. That is a Community Trust initiative that is funded mainly through grants and various other fundraising initiatives. All Venkys are doing (if anything) is agreeing to allow for it to be built on the club estate in place of the existing car park, although they probably don't even know that its happening.

I know Stanley do try very hard to get more people into the ground, but even this season they have been struggling massively for numbers. The Orient game was on Good Friday when Rovers and Burnley didn't have a game, and Orient took about 700, so there were probably about 700-800 more Stanley fans on than usual which is clearly very important for them but probably not normal. Then the game against Cambridge when they had just over 2000 on but that included a few hundred from Cambridge and then several hundred local football teams who were given tickets in the Coppice End for the game. Even having been in the top 7 all season Stanley's home gates have rarely got beyond 1300. It just shows what a brilliant job is being done there when they are up against the likes of Portsmouth and Plymouth who get 10,000+ every week.

One of the reasons it could work to our advantage with the likes of Villa and Newcastle coming down - they will have to adjust massively. They aren't prepared for the Championship, whilst Norwich/Watford etc. are.

The reason that would never be introduced is because it would eliminate the loopholes and prevent the likes of Middlesbrough and Derby from cheating. The current system is far more preferable, as it provides the League with the opportunity to sanction clubs at their discretion using some bizarre and convoluted process that 99% of people in football still don't understand. Confusion, speculation and questions rule the day, which is just how the people running it want it to be. They can pick and chose which clubs to punish as they want, with no strict policing or rule book to adhere to. Many supporters won't question it as they don't fully understand how it works so they keep quiet and assume it is all above board. I myself have read over the rules numerous times and still don't understand them myself. This way the most guilty parties in recent years, such as Middlesbrough and QPR, have been able to spend obscene amounts of money, handed down from their owners, and to date have faced no sanction other than a mysterious fine for QPR which is very suspect and for which there is extremely limited information in the public domain. Its now almost 2 years since Leicester were promoted and yet the investigation continues into their dealings with a suspect marketing company from Sheffield. How can it take so long to investigate? Anyone would think they are just ignoring it and hoping it goes away. In the end even if they find Leicester guilty the worst punishment they will get is a nominal fine, which their billionaire owner will be able to pay with the proceeds of their Champions League windfall. What does that achieve and where does the money go? The League would no doubt use the excuse that a wage cap would be either illegal or would cause massive damage to the quality of players on offer in the Championship. The whole thing is a complete sham. Take Cardiff City as an example. On 15th January 2016 the League suddenly announced that they had decided to put Cardiff under a transfer embargo for breaking the rules. Why this wasn't done in December ahead of the window opening nobody knows. I thought the whole point was that accounts were submitted in November for analysis so that a decision could be made in advance of the window. Cardiff then signed Kenneth Zohore from some Belgian club that coincidentally is owned by the same man who owns Cardiff. Yes presumably the League is satisfied that is all above board.

That's a very good article that you've found. It goes to show that the issues facing Rovers are similar to those facing most other clubs in this league which don't get parachute money. We are not unique or alone. Ever increasing debts, multi-million pound annual losses. Most people would have Ipswich down as a well run club compared to Rovers, yet they are heavily in debt and lose millions a year, often relying on the sale of better players to plug the gap. Both clubs reliant on hand outs or continued support of wealthy owners who don't communicate with supporters.

It's just a little bit galling for me when I see a smaller club than ourselves looking forward to a second Premier League season with untold riches that could change their club beyond recognition having been found guilty of breaking the rules in order to achieve it. We broke the rules and were punished, a punishment that directly caused the sales of top players and led to others (Rhodes) questioning the direction the club was taking, a punishment that directly impacted upon our season ticket and commercial income as sponsors and supporters knew last summer that decline was inevitable whilst under the embargo as we were unable to improve the squad in any meaningful form. I don't like the rules and don't think they should ever have been allowed to be brought in, I would like to see every club stick two fingers up at the thing and for it to collapse, but it upsets me quite a lot that some clubs have broken the rules yet get away scot free, whilst others, primarily ourselves and Nottingham Forest, have broken them and suffered massively on and off the pitch as a result. It annoys me that the likes of Newcastle and Villa will not only get huge parachute payments next season, enabling them to operate on a different financial level, but also get a window of adjustment to adapt to the Championship meaning they can basically have 2 seasons to try and get up with no regard for financial issues, whilst we made mistakes in our first season down and had no period after that to get our house in order. We were treated the same as Huddersfield Town despite coming down from the Premier League just 18 months earlier.

Interesting that twice in that statement there is reference to 'all' clubs agreeing to the implementation of the rules. I presume that's reference to a majority of Football League clubs agreeing to the proposals at the AGM. However it is misleading as I'm sure Rovers have never given any form of agreement to the rules, infact the rules were thought up whilst we were in the Premier League and we have had to conform without having any say or vote in the process. I'm sure we aren't alone either. So 'all clubs' haven't agreed. A majority of clubs 4/5 years ago agreed to it, several of whom, like Leicester and Bournemouth, have subsequently won promotion having spent fortunes thanks to the input of wealthy owners rather than their own generated funds.

http://www.theguardian.com/football/2016/apr/11/leicester-city-finances-football-league-financial-fair-play-investigation?CMP=share_btn_tw Interesting read. Them and Bournemouth are two modern day 'fairytales' yet it seems both could have cheated to get there.

Forest owner is clueless at running at football club but at least he goes to games, communicates with supporters and now appears to have realised the need for a CEO to 'drive the club forward'.