I doubt it very much, and then you'd still have the extra hurdle of Venkys giving a shit about what the fans think, which they don't.

That would be a pathetic price to receive for guaranteed relegation.

Which keeper is this? Depending on their profile they might not be intended to be one of our main two keepers.

Jesus christ, the colour pink is 'Woke' now too? 🤔 Yawn...I don't like pink football shirts but they've been around since what, the 90s? Nothing to do with being woke.

Having an effect on play has nothing to do with the rules. If someone gets punched off the ball for instance, it's a free kick and a red. It not being part of the play has no relevance.

No, we're lucky because we didn't have to play them, or any team stronger than the Netherlands, until the final. You seem to be struggling with this so I'm just gonna leave you be.

What are you talking about? France didn't proceed as expected, so we didn't have to play them. As we weren't in control of that beyond winning our mediocre group, how is that not lucky? I'm not the one getting things confused here. Reality matters, not potential permutations that didn't happen, of which there are a great many. Feels like you're just stubbornly sticking to what you've said rather than accept what is really very basic and obvious logic.

That late overhead kick didn't feel mediocre.

I'm not getting muddled at all. The 'original' draw is irrelevant. We didn't both proceed as expected, got lucky and once knockouts began had no chance of facing them until the finals.

That must have been a shock to all the teams they played on the other side of the draw.

Jesus christ @Brfcrule1, that's the biggest multipost I've ever seen! Glad you didn't do all of those separately!

Who are? Please tell me you're not talking about Waggott or Venkys.

Did they? Has this been confirmed somewhere? I never heard a thing about the bond until after the first or second (think it was the second) case postponement. I got the impression it was a temporary option granted for Venkys to be able, if they were committed enough, send funds, at risk, until the case could be held. Presumably due to an assertion from Venkys that the business could be crippled or go under without their support. If there's some proof that the bond applied to the funds sent way back in November, I'd like to see.

When in our history would it have been the type of signing we needed?

In the last WC at the last 16 we did get a favourable tie and beat Senegal 3-0. In the quarter finals we 2-1 to France, who lost the final on penalties.

But is that because England are rarely any good?

That's one of the strangest things I've ever read in my life 🤣 I can only assume you were either being sarcastic, or you were first introduced to football about a week ago!

Tbf that one didn't seem to be the board's fault, the player just decided to stay and fight for his place at Brighton.

Tbf that's more likely his editor's notes. The editing at the LT is even worse than the journalism so no surprise.

Sadly there's every chance it's the future as well as the past, so, hard to forget!

Tbf he probably doesn't. A few weeks ago he was calling it a competitive budget or something like that.

This hasn't changed... Fleck.

'Blackburn Rovers send strong message with Academy announcements' Pathetic fluff piece headline from the LT. The article goes on to mention how Finneran has rejected us from the scholar intake, and so has Nsangou from the professional intake. Tyjon signing a scholarship is good news (though I suspect he will be off next summer on the cheap, but hopefully not), but it's definitely a mixed bag. Of all the scholars they mention signing pro terms, the only two I've heard of are Adam Khan and Litherland. Surprised Nsangou rejected us tbh, there's no major hype around him, but he's more established than the rest of the scholars turning pro batch. I fail to see how offering what will be very cheap contracts in the scheme of things to youth players is a strong statement, and two of the better players have rejected them anyway. Really shows the LT have no intention of rocking the boat and will be presenting things in a positive light even though it's gonna be a shit show.

He hasn't signed it yet. If there had been mention of all the lads who have signed scholar deals 5 days ago, it wouldn't have mentioned Tyjon either. It does seem he will be off but it's not set in stone yet.

I thought the same of Tyjon until a couple of days ago. I don't see why a rovers.co.uk article on Tyjon would make any mention of Finneran. That's more worrying, as although I've mentioned Newcastle's interest before, and that article is just saying the same stuff really, it's from just 6 hours ago so there may have been movement. Strange it's taken so long for Newcastle to tie it up tbh, but I also think Finneran is being very badly advised to go to Newcastle's academy at this stage. It would only be a scholarship he'd have to sign with us, so he could still have moved for very little at the end of next season after very likely getting some senior football experience and being able to ask for a better wage. Some might mention the money but aren't scholarship deals a bit limited in that regard? And at that age you're better thinking about your career path than money.