Looking forward to a good scrap before 90 mins is up

now he should be off

Not a red.. just

50 minutes ago, Exiled_Rover said:

There's part of me that's hoping Broughton convinced them to pursue the appeal. 

That crossed my mind as well. Kept internal then it's one person's word against another and its a he said she said type scenario. We've now got a timeline of events documented by lawyers and laid out in public. 

I want to beleive that because I just don't want it to be true that as a club we thought that silvestre being in a different place to the player, or the CEO being at a football match, is something that the EFL is at fault for and should give leniency on. 

1 hour ago, arbitro said:

That's daft mate - you are implying that our lot know how to operate an oven.

😃😃

Good point since Mrs Mowbray stopped making her lemon drizzle the oven hasn't been touched. 

19 minutes ago, den said:

What were rovers reasons for submitting the straight forward deal for the Rochdale lad late?

Probably something ridiculous like the admin team having a lasagne in the oven that took longer than expected to cook. 

7 minutes ago, RoverCanada said:

Hell, I may still be drinking GB's kool-aid, but, whatever you may think of him, at the very least it would be very worrying if GB (and JDT...) leave in the offseason, while the likes of Waggot and Sylvester are still in place.

Agreed. The club is riddled with cancer, but it's not GB or JDT

2 minutes ago, jim mk2 said:

The other parties can easily prove loss. That much is obvious. Not sure where you’re going with this but if you’re trying to portray Rovers as the innocent party that isn’t at fault or won’t be taking a financial hit I think you’re deluded 

Morally and legally are two different concepts though. We fucked up and morally we're probably mostly at fault for the whole situation. Legally I can't see how we owe them anything. 

Ludicrous to think LOB will be due compensation from us. We fucked up yes and that may damage our reputation when dealing with future transfers but I can't see how we owe him or forest compensation. The way I see it there are three parties at fault for LOB not playing and having his career on hold

1. Rovers for not completing paperwork on time and to a good standard

2. Forest for buying 1000 players and not having room in the squad for him

3. LOB for waiting until 11 hours before the deadline to decide that he actually would entertain the idea of coming here. 

Transfers breakdown all the time, he's still being paid and has the option of going to the MLS. From a legal point of view I can't see any reason why either the player or the club could claim compensation from us. The contracts couldn't be completed 

He's missing out on appearance and goal bonuses (first world problems right?) But he's probably got more of a case against forest for those as they've made him ineligible to play. 

21 minutes ago, Roverthechimp said:

Does Broughton actually have that remit or can he only suggest changes to the very people that cocked up?

I don't know to be honest. I was going off the fact he said the buck stops with him and that he would look at the process. However the company secretary and team have a lot to answer for which I wouldn't think is within the remit of DoF. 

I can't tell where the blame lies, it's a transfer failing so you'd immediately think it was Broughton and team but it also feels like we were into the legalities and admin side of things. 

Have to say I'm very disappointed with the reasoning put forward in the appeal. The fact we took it as far as we did made me think there was something in it but all we did was try and argue a pedantic point about the deadline and then give a sob story about staff being in the  wrong place. I felt embarrassed reading the appeal and can't beleive we wasted the legal fees on it. 

Would have preferred Broughton came out admitted the cock up and made changes to make sure it doesn't happen again. 

I don't get what takes so long. Surely the facts of the case are very straight forward. When the paperwork was submitted and what was queried (and when) is easy to establish so surely all it requires is someone independent to compare what happened to the rulebook and say "you're right and you're wrong". 

It shouldn't be rolling on a month later. 

6 minutes?!?!

Has someone slowed that clock down? 

2 hours ago, Tyrone Shoelaces said:

We’re confused “ Quick “ with “ Fast “. Quick is over 10 or 15 yards, Fast is over 30 to 40 plus yards.

I used to go watching my rugby league team doing sprint training and you’d get the little scrum half or hooker types like Dolan in physique leaving the big forwards for dead over 15-20 yards but by 50 yards the forwards were passing them. Of course the plan is for the little quick guys to make the breaks then hand the ball over to the forwards.

It’s not quite the same in football but you need to get the little quick guys in possession nearer to the goals and not in our half.

Was about to say something similar. Players like Dolan can go from a standing start to their top speed in a flash but their top speed isnt very high. It's good in close quarters when you can leave your full back for dead but useless if you're going for a ball over the top and you have to sprint from the halfway line. I'm sure I saw something about 8-10 years ago of all the top speeds in PL and there were quite a lot of centre backs high up that last. 

I also remember seeing a video ages ago, it was Ronaldo vs a 100m sprinter and they did various challenges. Ronaldo left the sprinter for dead in the ones that involved twisting and turning but couldn't keep up with a straight line sprint. Think they had to do a slalom round a load of cones and Ronaldo had much quicker feet (as you'd expect). 

21 hours ago, Roverthechimp said:

The only question is why BB hasn’t signed the Villarreal deal

Maybe waiting to see if we go up or not? Then he gets PL experience and PL wages

7 minutes ago, AllRoverAsia said:

I had got a bit confused previously but the article I just read, not from the most reputable of sources, was quoting Nixon and specifically relegation to League 1, which makes it more confusing.

Yes, wait for the detail is the way to go.

The only way I can make it work is if the buy option  was so vaguely worded like "in the event rovers exit the division" but that's just so unfeasible even for us 

Next week - how to tie your shoelaces

7 hours ago, Mercer said:

How many transfers do the EFL handle over the course of a season - I'm guessing at 750+

True - but the flip side of that is that even if their processes are 99.9% accurate then they've messed up atleast a small handful of transfers over the years and yet an appeal has never won. I've never seen a process that is 100% flawless, maybe they do exist but I doubt its within football governance. 

It's the hope that kills you isn't it🤣

11 hours ago, Mercer said:

If anyone on this MB applies for a passport, driving licence etc and fails to complete an application form correctly then the application is rejected.  It's that simple and, IMO, Rovers have no one else to blame other than themselves.

And that's fine if Rovers messed up a crucial part of the transfer I agree there's no one else to blame. But there's a version of events pushed by nixon (or atleast an interpretation)  that the EFL asked for clarification on something that didn't need clarified - it would be like the passport office ringing me up and asking my favourite pizza topping.

Crucially no one knows though so we're owed an explanation of what went on not least because we've all sacrificed 17 days of work to transfer deadline day

3 minutes ago, Atko's Engine said:

I think it doubtful that GB is personally at fault for the failures, but takes that responsibility publicly as the figurehead of the transfer side of operations. He has a right to expect the club will employ competent admin staff and legal advisors. If we don't, that's more on SW than GB imo.

This bit is spot on imo

What happens if O'brien gets bored of waiting, goes to the MLS and then miraculously our appeal gets upheld. Is he legally our player? Whether her stays at MLS or comes to Rovers there will surely be one hell of a compo claim from the club that have missed out. 

If its going in our favour the EFL might be minded to close it out sooner or later. 

I just cant read this at all. If it was going to go in our favour, the EFL are making it much worse from themselves by dragging it out. On the flip side if it wasn't going in our favour we surely would have heard by now.