Hate being right sometimes.

And that's that.

Can't imagine we get our first strong ref of the season at the Den in a critical game with the scummiest fans in the country in his back.

Millwall are up for this. That pissy passy shit at the back won't wash, we'll get caught out doing that, it's gonna be a battle and a grind.

I've not noticed a massive upsurge in interest in us due to the 30 year anniversary, but then again I don't really watch (or have) the sports channels etc. I expect them to pick games based mostly on expected viewing figures as you say, and I guess they've had enough data from the sheer amount of games of ours they've shown to have some confidence that showing us means viewing figures. I could understand the notion that us returning to the Prem in the 30th anniversary season could have some romanticism for a handful of neutrals, but I do struggle to think that's enough to explain it. Absolutely we're one of the biggest clubs in this division, certainly in the way I regard size (a combination of overall history, trophies, recent credentials, current footballing and financial power, and fanbase), although in the money-oriented Sky era many only look at crowds (poor for us) and current standing (good relative to our league, but still some clubs who have been higher than us through the season, especially 2nd half of it). Absolutely, anyone who thinks we are lucky to be in this league can go and suck a legion of poisoned dicks.

Our relegation around that time may be a factor in that. But yes, for 'best', read 'strongest'.

I didn't say it didn't have foreign players, I said it had nowhere near the amount of foreign players it does now, and that if it had, many of the Prem players of then would be in the second tier. The Prem was at best second, but more likely the third best league in Europe at the time. Probably around 98 or 99 was when it could start to claim to be the best, and the 00s was when it became widely acknowledged to be the best.

Well nobody else was saying that. Serie A was considered the top league at the time. Probably followed by La Liga and then the Prem. You need to remember, this was before the Prem had all the top foreign players in and most teams were composed 90% of British players. Some of the teams in the Prem at the time would struggle to get out of the Championship now. Because probably most of their players would be in the Championship now, as there isn't room for many British players anymore. From memory, it was probably the late 90s when the Prem started being considered the best league by some.

It's so weird that we've been picked more than anyone else. We're getting the Leeds treatment from a few years ago, but we don't have a huge fanbase and we've never been media darlings. Yes we were 2nd for quite a while, but for quite a while since we've just been one of the top 6 and they've kept selecting us. Moreover, we play badly nearly every time we're on Sky, so what's with their insistence on continually picking us? If I didn't know better, I'd think they keep picking us because they know we have a terrible record in front of the cameras and don't want us to go up. I do know better, don't get me wrong, but it's very odd. The only plus side of this is hopefully it's put a decent bit in the coffers for next year, but we won't be talking crazy sums.

I feel this not televising games at 3pm business seems a bit overrated. I always assumed it's to maximise viewership from footy watching nuts...people who might watch a game before attending their own team's game (or maybe watching SSN updates) and then go watch another game on tv after? If that's the case, that can't be too big a market and we are so oversaturated with tv games now that they might as well just show some games at 3pm too and only move one each to 12.30 or 5.30. Neutral viewers will still have an absolute glut of games to watch, and the match-going fans don't get their times pissed around with. I feel like I must be missing something here and that someone will explain for me, but it doesn't seem to make sense anymore.

Let him change his mind without being mocked, or he'll do it even less often.

They wanted more money, not more coverage

And of course my post above didn't even go into the lost income from more televised/streamed games and kickoffs being shunted around.

Even if all of this money was for Championship clubs (it isn't) that would only amount to 7.79 million per club per season. If it's a 50% increase as claimed, then it's an increase of about 2.5 million per club. And again, I'm exaggerating because a chunk of the money will go to Leagues One and Two. We lose about £20 million a season. It will barely touch the sides. In exchange, it says there will be 4 times as many games broadcasted (although that doesn't stack with other figures in the article, which says there are currently 138 games televised and there will be 1,059 games broadcast now...I think it may be something to do with the distinctions between televised, streamed and broadcasted). Sounds like a fairly shit deal to me tbh.

I had a very similar thought when I read it..

3-0 now, bit embarrassing for the young lads. Doesn't sound from the LT's report that it's a fair score at this stage, we seem to have had more attacks, but says some of the defending has been really poor. Litherland seems to be a CB, so I'm guessing he's no Ash Phillips...

Looked like an inexperienced team. I've not even heard of Litherland yet, anybody know anything about him?

This sort of claim keeps popping up and I'm yet to see an interview where he said anything about 'nice food' or 'a restaurant' (another claim). I did however watch an interview where he merely mentioned they made sure the player had some food, which is not the same thing as is being made out. There is enough to criticise from the window fiasco that there's no need to start making up or exaggerating details. If someone has a link to an interview where he actually talked about some kind of wining and dining than fair enough, until then I'm considering it some sort of weird Mandela Effect.

That sounds like a dream career. I'd have my own yacht by now if that was a profession. Then again, I'd have tough competition from Millwall fans.

He could have used the last 5 months for that, but has done no such thing. His head and heart are both in Spain now. I expect he will start anyway.

Semi final isn't it? It's tomorrow morning. https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/sport/23499096.blackburn-rovers-turn-attention-cup-success-securing-safety/

It's making me wonder if he trained so hard he was knackered in the matches! Whilst I appreciate the importance of a good training work ethic, JDT seems to imply (could be misreading between the lines) it's more important than what you do on matchday, and it simply isn't. 100% of points are won on matchday, training etc is simply preparation for that. It's possible to over prepare, and whilst my statement about Morton was glib, it's possible to train too hard (especially when the manager is picking you based primarily on training) and your body not be fully at the races on matchday as a result. That's one reason teams generally leave a rest day between training and matches, or only have a light training session.

Someone save that last part for next time we're told we can't have an opinion.

And it would mean our fans spending half as much on travel. Playing on a pitch you're used to playing on, and less travel time for your players, is always going to be an advantage, whether big or not. A neutral venue is the only fair way to do it.

Wow, I struggle to think of a more pointless 'news' article that I've read, ever. Football games are shown in the background on quite a few movies and shows, I've certainly never heard of a mainstream news publication running an article on who was playing in them. Bizarre!