JHRover

Same old. Probably trying to persuade them to agree to a 'loan with an option to buy' trick with no intention of ever actually buying.

'No takers' for the job of CEO of Blackburn Rovers Football Club If that doesn't tell you something I don't think anything will.

The last time they relegated us, back in 2017, they used the January window not to deliver significant improvements to a weak squad or to get rid of the failing manager and give the new guy chance to rectify the mess, instead they offered a token gesture of parachuting in Paul Senior on a consultancy deal. You see this is how these owners and this regime operate. They know all too well that using the January window to address our issues (tick tock) requires solid cash commitment, as does firing a manager with a terrible record. So they'll do neither of those things, instead offering a few short term loans that other clubs don't want. It wouldn't surprise me to see a Paul Senior part II arrive if results don't pick up and quickly. Not a serious, long term appointment but a short term emergency window-dressing appointment of someone good with the media and fans, who can do the routine of walking around the corridors of Ewood before games and listen to concerns/promise milk and honey at an undefined point in the future and calm people down. Sadly plenty will fall for this stunt as they did the last time around but really all it is designed to do is pass time without them addressing the main issues and keeping the culprits protected in the background.

As a minimum I'd expect: Chairman/CEO Director of Football/Sporting Director Commercial Director Finance Director Secretary I'd probably also expect a non executive director or two perhaps to represent the distant owners. This is the industry standard. I'm not really interested in what setup Accy Stanley have, as whilst it probably puts ours to shame it isn't really relevant to an institution the size of Blackburn Rovers that *should* be aspiring to reach the Premier League and stay there. You don't do that with absentee landlords, faceless people, work experience guys and fossils like Silent Bob.

So has Rudy ditched the 'no loans' policy he was boasting about now he's realised the squad isn't up to it and there's no money left for permanents?

They've taken it off twitter but it is still on their Instagram reels from earlier, so I've saved it. Can't do anything right can they?

So a multi-million pound organisation has to drift along without anyone leading it for months and months and months because he has a notice period to serve? Ridiculous. Again, doesn't happen anywhere else. And even if that was a reason, why couldn't they have had a new one ready to start in October or November so they were ready to get to work ahead of the January transfer window. The answer Chaddy, as I suspect you know deep down, is that these owners have never wanted a CEO and don't believe we need one. That's why aside from Waggott we haven't had one for most of the last 15 years, and I would bet we don't appoint one at least until the summer. They only agreed to bring in Waggott after Mowbray persuaded them in India because they 'trusted' Mowbray. Like with every other element of their ownership they try to get away with the bare minimum and the club rots in the process.

Well the vast majority of clubs have them, so probably a good move, if you want to act like a proper club which we clearly don't. But on the topic of a CEO....now 8 months and counting since Slippery Steve sailed off into retirement. What's taking so long? This all comes back to my original point. They just don't take this seriously and never will. End of story.

I do ultimately blame them yes. Doesn't make the current lot any more acceptable or mean they should stay. The suggestion that we have a functioning board of directors is laughable and has been since they removed Williams, Finn and Goodman and never replaced any of them with competent and crucially empowered people. Please do explain to me who is on the 'board' and what these 'board' members do on a day to day basis for the betterment of Blackburn Rovers.

I'm convinced that one of the main reasons for Gestede getting the job he has is that he has sold himself to the Indians / goon in the shadows as someone who has extensive knowledge and contacts and that by avoiding the loan market we will develop assets on the cheap which will make them more money. Or alternatively that they have given him the job and instructed him to do this rather than the past approach of going to Brighton/Liverpool etc. and begging for players. All comes back to them trying to impress the higher ups and keep their jobs on the gravy train - Alebiosu working out well and Gudjohnsen too so a sale of one or both for a good profit keeps the money men happy

I don't care 'what type' of owner we get, as long as it isn't Venkys there's a very strong chance the club will benefit from it. 'Proper checks' - those being the same that allowed Venkys to get hold of this institution and destroy it in the first place and ever since has offered no protection whatsoever despite continued neglect and ruin? Checks such as allowing us to operate without a board of directors, without a Chief Executive, relying on silent Bob to provide a façade of normality, allowing shadowy characters to run the club from the background? Checks are a waste of time and guarantee nothing. This is a club with a serious and probably terminal illness. It needs urgent surgery/medication to remove the cause of that illness. That's the point we are at. Failure to address the illness will probably mean the death of BRFC. We can worry about what comes next when it actually arrives. And if the next lot are awful too then we'll deal with that issue when it comes. Would you turn down live saving surgery on the basis you weren't sure how you would feel afterwards? Because that's the equivalent here. Stick with Venkys and enjoy the ride to oblivion because you 'aren't sure' 'what sort' of owner 'might' replace them. There are two issues. Getting the club wreckers out asap, and then worrying about what comes next. The first part is non-negotiable as far as I and most sensible people are concerned - it has to happen and as soon as possible whilst there is still some semblance of a club left to recover. Part two is something that can only happen and be worried about once part one has happened.

Hughes is struggling to get Carlisle out of the National League. Leave him there. Mowbray I can see the logic in as an emergency short term measure but won't happen for a few reasons: 1) They aren't going to sack Ismael - that would involve paying up 2 years+ of his contract 2) Even if they did their pride/agendas would prevent them turning to Mowbray - going cap in hand to the bloke they got rid of - no way 3) There's no way he'd operate under Pasha and Gestede's nonsense having been here previously with his own cushy set up Yes Ismael would be gone at any other club. 2 home wins in 8 months = unacceptable, 1 win in 9 = unacceptable, performances are unacceptable, league position is unacceptable. The difference is other clubs are professional competitive football clubs that exist to win and respond to performances and results. Blackburn Rovers is no such things. It is a sham, a fake, a vehicle for non-footballing purposes. So he can sit tight and see what gifts Rudy has lined up to bolster his squad.

We either sell him in January and get some cash or he walks in June for nothing. There's no way this Regime allows the latter, and the impact on our league position / results is immaterial.

Becoming quite clear that like with Nixon someone in the Rovers hierarchy has a line to these influential people in the media to spread the lies and nonsense on their behalf. All hard luck stories about injuries, pitch, misfortune, good statistics. They've been given the script to read out.

Sad and embarrassing stuff. So, so glad that I turned down my dad's spare ticket and chose to stay at home. These clowns have the brass neck to charge £35 to sit on the Blackburn End to watch that. Sky Sports are well on board with the sob stories though, wailing about Rovers' injury list and the problems we've had with the pitch and drainage. No mention of the common denominator. Chuckle brothers in the commentary box almost commending Rovers for selling Hyam on deadline day because we'd been burned previously through players leaving for free. No mention of the common denominator. 'Desperate to try Tronstad to a new deal' - says who? There's no evidence we've been 'desperate' to keep anyone a minute longer than we've had to. In modern day fashion the Sky laptop clowns referring to an array of pointless statistics about how we are supposedly better than our results and league position suggest. Well I look at the good old fashioned results and league table and they tell me all I need to know. A word of congratulations to Pasha and Gestede though. Your excellent transfer dealings have left us in this state, a disgrace and yet another round to come as they strip away what's left and appease the ostriches with a few random loans and frees.

Preston lost £17.8 million in the last year. Strange, I thought that Rovers were an outlier and Venkys the only owners in the world willing/able to fund such losses.

So Nixon says 'substantial' six figure bid rejected for the Barnsley lad. I know he's partly employed to put a shine on all things Rovers under the rotten regime but is there such thing as a a 'substantial' six figure bid in modern day Championship terms? The most it could possibly be is £999,999 which would not be a substantial sum for a Championship football club, especially not one used to selling players for 10x that amount every transfer window.

Remember....without Venkys we'd 'Do a Derby'. Sounds good to me.

Who actually are the Rao offspring? There's Balaji's lad, who once came to a game and met with Mowbray afterwards, who I think was supposed to be attending an English university. Any others? I think the witch and her husband might have a daughter who is high up in the company these days who might once have turned up with them on the snowball day, but can't believe she would have any interest in this. I suppose there might be some logic to suggest that the extreme cutbacks of recent years have been a sign of the others withdrawing from this and basically telling Balaji and his mates that if they want to keep it then it needs to fund itself as far as it can, no more cash beyond the bare minimum sort of thing.

Celtic v Rangers on Saturday too. Wonder if Nancy will survive until then. 5 defeats from 7 at Celtic is sacking territory already.

I'm convinced it only ends when they're forced into it. That means financially or legally/logistically they can't carry on with it. I don't think they'll give it up otherwise. At least not as long as the wicked four continue to control the company. Maybe when control passes elsewhere someone with a brain will cut their losses and leave us alone.

Presumably the relatively popular 'pie and peas' or 'breakfast bap' options in Jacks Kitchen will have been ditched for this one to make way for a £150 sit down meal for the Category A fixture. Suspect there might be some backtracking on that one as the brains trust realise that on New Year's Day morning there won't be queues of people down Bolton Road wanting to watch Rovers v Wrexham and hand over best part of £200 for a ticket and something to eat. Especially not when they can stay at home and watch it for nothing on Sky. Still that extra £10-15 pocketed x 1500-2000 adults from Wrexham makes it all worthwhile whilst ensuring the home ends are empty. £35 to sit on the BBE. Total madness.

When was the last time we wore that green shirt? Feels like ages since. Just so unnecessary to have three kits let alone four. If we had any sense we would just have had a special home shirt maybe with the maltese cross and worn it all season and then an away shirt, maybe gold or with the coat of arms. Make them both really good and watch them fly out. But a home shirt that doesn't even get the halves right, a random green effort 'inspired' by the town coat of arms (but not using the town coat of arms) and this fiasco with the all white kit appearing randomly on New Years' Day almost 2 months after the anniversary fixture just slapdash as ever.

They're in good form and have a better squad than us. Amazing what investment can do. Fresh off the back of two very impressive wins against an upwardly mobile Sheffield United, coming from 3-1 down to win 5-3, and against hard to beat Preston, I can't see any more than 1 point at best for Rovers. The squad is in a shocking state and that's not down to a freak injury list but corner and cost cutting coming back to haunt us.

It shows a few things One - that the absence of any serious discussion or pressure on the manager - not even an 'Ismael sort it out' to be heard - shows that pretty much everyone knows that it is all pointless - pointless moaning about the manager, pointless trying to apply pressure or demand better or a change, pointless even going down the route of talking about change. Partly because even the Venky apologists know all too well that there isn't a functioning football club here where trivial matters like performances and results, league position, or any other metric by which the rest of the football world operates gets applied. Everyone knows this, deep down, which is why there is a stupefied fatigued silence on such things at games. No point expending energy thinking or wanting a change, even when results and performances are poor. That's a core component of following a football club gone - people have learned to just tolerate a poor product because it is pointless asking for better. Two - that those out there who think he is doing a good job in the 'circumstances' are actually in their position silently acknowledging there that the owners have ruined us with their approach - because to say he's doing a good job with a 31% win record having inherited a side in the top 6 less than a year ago and now have it staring at relegation would be frankly laughable at any other club. Here there is a genuine argument for it, not because clubs normally drop by 15-20 places in the space of six months, but because the conditions the owners have imposed us on - those that many apologists have defended - are what has ultimately caused this situation. The same people would never directly complain or criticise the owners, preferring to convince themselves that they are necessary, yet if we aren't blaming Ismael and his win record, who are we blaming?