Or for only £37 extra supporters can watch and actually support their team, live in the stadium for £15/game. Bit of a no brainer for me. Where's the joy in sitting on a sofa being told what one's watching by commentators incapable of forming a full sentence or using meaningful language? It's quite beyond me why anyone who can get to Ewood sees Sky as a better alternative. Still each to their own. Not aimed at you blueboy

And you're paying through the nose for it. Do you think it's right that the only way to watch major sport is through Amazon, Sky and BT? If one can't pay the subscription one can't watch.

Dozens of good ideas and opinions on here but read the above post and especially: "Sky makes it too easy to follow my club without giving up my spare time and I suppose money" I would, but I'm not going to, take issue with the spare time sentiment. The point is this "Sky makes it too easy" I've been banging this drum for 20 years - Sky has killed the game. English football hardly exists. Rovers can put every incentive you can imagine in front of fans and it won't make a jot of difference. The only way this will change is when Sky leaves. If you want to influence this then do not watch Sky - anywhere. cesus had an ST for 22 years and no longer has to give up anything to follow Rovers. Hammer Waggott and the club all you want but you can't beat this.

@Mike E congratulations. I was at a wedding yesterday, a couple in their early 30s. Go for a first dance to something you love, not what tradition dictates. I've no idea what the first dance was yesterday but it was loud, fast and got the whole room up in a moment. And don't forget the older generation in the playlist. But back on topic - Roy Harper "Grown Ups Are Just Silly Children" amongst many other wonderful ditties.

You may well be right o2g. From time to time it passes through my mind just how easy it is to smuggle anything in to a football ground. If I'm going to be caught up in a terrorist attack I've always felt a football stadium is the place I'm the most vulnerable. The searches are pointless. I've been in queues when people had to dump water bottles. Stick the bottle in a back pocket and the stewards miss it. Same applies to bag searches.

@JHRover has this exactly right. I too know it's a condition of entering the ground. However I'm 64, retired, usually have a disabled supporter with me, ST holder for 34 years, no criminal record and I have never previously been searched at Ewood. The ex DE fans arrive in the JWL and we now get searched because there are complete idiots who might bring flares etc. into the ground. I object to being searched. If someone is caught hopefully it's a lifetime ban for endangering other supporters. If the search is seconds it shows how cursory and therefore pointless it is.

I didn't arrive till four minutes in to the game so I don't know about this. However this is away fans, different section, different turnstiles. While having a fundamental objection to being searched at away games I understand why it is. The fault lays with a very small minority and thousands have to submit to the consequences. Stewards should be able to look at supporters in their early 60s and make a sensible judgement.

Yes it does. I'm very keen not to point a finger but fans have been moved from the DE to the JWL. I have seen flares amongst home fans on the DE in previous seasons.

Correct and pretty much the only reason we lost. A quiet performance from Dack, who for the first time this season wasn't double marked, and we failed to put United under any real pressure.

We usually access the ground via the disabled entrance between the DE and JWL. Last night, first time this season, we used turnstile L and had to submit to a body search. I'm not sure who I'm more angry with; the idiots who think it necessary to bring flares etc. in to the ground or the club for thinking it necessary to search a 64 year old man. I hadn't expected this as a consequence of closing the DE. Never been searched at Ewood in 35+ years as an ST holders.

In this case it's electrification of the line which I think is on it's third overrun from the projected completion date. The weekend closures are due to end on November 4th. All of us who use the line are sick of it but one also needs to keep in mind it's not just electrification but also bridge replacement, new platforms and platform extensions.

I said WHEN.........

Correct but it's taken far too many fans a very long time to recognise this. My gut feeling is every away game could run exactly the same thread for the season. See the Bolton tickets discussion. There is nothing to be done for away fans and in our case probably very little will be done for home support. As I've said before anyone who wants to make an impact should switch off the TV, tape over the red button, cancel Say, not go to the pub and tell the TV and pub why. Hitting advertising revenue is the solution but it won't happen, fans are peeing in the wind. Only when the armchair audience declines will we see change.

Ultimately getting kids in doesn't have a great impact. It fills seats now but doesn't result in adults in the future. Of all the young people I know, whose parents benefitted from free or cheap STs in the '90s, only five still go. Two of them are mine!! They're all still Rovers but only five are still live close enough to get to Ewood other than at Christmas or other holiday times when/if they are home. A deal for young people to age 23 is needed as well. £15-20 for adults is the mark and then give something significant to those who buy an ST. As I said before, free parking, free away tickets, park and ride. It must be a tangible benefit - food, programmes etc. are not a real incentive.

I want to see Ewood full as much as anyone and completely agree a full seat at £10 is better than an empty one. The issue though revolves around ST holders. I think I'm correct that the cheapest ST on early bird was £349, £15/game - to drop below this risks alienating ST holders as it's impossible to establish how many ST holders would view the extra £5 they pay as value for the ST benefits. Personally I have a good seats I want to keep and I don't want the hassle of buying a ticket 23 times a year. Would I effectively pay a premium for this? Yes and I'd cough up the extra £5 but would not be happy. Two possible benefits which could be given to ST holders to compensate for a £10 walk on are free or discounted parking and free away tickets. Darwen End parking is £200 which in previous seasons we've needed, this year we don't. If the parking was discounted in recognition of a £10 walk on I'd be happy. I would be even happier if ST holders got priority over away coaches for exiting the car parks - I'd happily pay for that benefit. Waiting up to half an hour to leave really winds me up. We live six miles from Ewood and often don't get home in less than an hour. "Free" away tickets to local games or a number to a total value equal to the difference over the season between walk on and ST price. That would probably mean the club giving an ST holder five away tickets per season. I don't know the point at which £10 tickets are viable but my gut feeling is crowds would need to double and that won't happen. John Williams used to say match day takings were around £1.20 per fan. For every person who buys a beer or coffee you have at least one like me who probably spends less than £20 per season. I don't think the "bar" argument stands up to scrutiny.

Very true. The major difference being we have a choice with Amazon et al which we don't at Rovers - there is nowhere else to support our team and other than boycotting individuals can have little or no impact.

Irrelevant though Matty. All that's relevant is what Rovers find viable.

I love this idea, it's one of very few imaginative suggestions I've read in years. How it would work in practice or if it's financially viable for the club is up for discussion but it's a great thought.

I'm only picking out your posts because they include what I feel are common misconceptions which regularly pop up here. You're right some of us are fortunate enough for £3 not to make a financial difference. However in an area like Blackburn I'd suggest £3 is irrelevant. This is a low wage town with many facing financial hardships. Its not a question of £27 or £30 but can one afford it or not - for many households that £27/30 represents a significant chunk of income, even £10 is a big number. As for the surcharge I agree it's irritating but is now part of life. Your cinema/theatre examples are selective. From my experience London theatre sells cheaper tickets on the day but prices are already far higher than watching Rovers. Most cinemas have offers at quiet periods not peak times. I don't think we've ever had a cheap offer from The Lowry, Octagon or Exchange theatres to consider some local quality ones. Trains, planes, hotels, virtually all ticket agencies apply surcharges, theatres and cinenas do so online, car parks are cheaper booked in advance. It's how the market economy works these days and is primarily about getting people to commit early and upfront to attending. The longer the potential customer wants to make a decision on purchase the less likely they are to do so. Yesterday I took part in a charity cycle event, entry was £15 online or £20 on the day. Last May we joined a local charity walk £7.50 in advance, £15 on the day. Even charities act this way To suggest Rovers are disuadding walk ons through this surcharge ignores what happens in most other retail sectors. The real issue surrounding attendances is affordability for the local fans and the harsh reality is for many local people £27/30 is out of reach surcharged or not. While I remain to be convinced £10 tickets are the answer, either commercially or in terms of attracting people, I think this is the level at which many need it to be pitched to be seen as within reach for many families.

I understand what you say and your posts about being away, retirement etc. but you always seem to have a reason not to go. With the exception of ticket prices all you describe above for the Sharks is logistically impossible to achieve at Ewood. I'm not being personal but it seems to me there are a large group of fans for whom no incentive works. To my mind this is primarily because they've moved on and aren't really interested any longer. That's OK but the club shouldn't be blamed for this. As for no incentive? It's a perfect day for football. We are level with Forest, could go top six and that's not enough incentive? Frankly I don't get it.

Yes, you're right. It isn't iconic any longer but I have to try and ramp up the emotion!! ?

You've missed my point entirely which is football clubs, in general, no longer give a damn about the fans. If £30 can be charged a club will. This is very easily traced through the modern game back to TV money. I'm not asking you to give up anything, you don't seem to have complained about price, but I suggest anyone unhappy about prices, KO times, away fixture scheduling might think twice before going to the pub to watch the game. Football fans embrace Sky until the cost or KO time doesn't suit. It's too late, the horse has bolted. What your post demonstrates very clearly, thank you, is the total control the major sports bodies have given to the broadcasters in exchange for their gold. And what have those bodies done with that money which benefits fans and grassroots? Nothing. Every aspect of English football has been sold to the highest bidder. In two weeks time it looks very likely Wembley Stadium will be sold to Sahid Khan, Fulham's owner, so he can move his American football team there!!!!! Wembley, arguably the world's most iconic stadium, is being sold by the English FA. Wembley cost £757m to rebuild. It's under offer for £600m. Do I hear a word of protest? No. Not only is the stadium likely to be sold, it will be sold at a loss. The ills fans complain about result from football's greed yet so many support this through Sky, Amazon etc. subscriptions. We can't have it both ways.

As a general point saturation or not nothing will be done. It's very hard to see what will give or when. I've railed against Sky and it's impact on the game for a couple of decades now. My objections are the impact on what is laughingly described as "English" football, Murdoch and the impact on the country through this media control. None of this will stop. My wife is a huge tennis fan, to watch professional tennis one is forced to subscribe to Amazon - a detestable company which exploits its workforce paying minimal UK taxes while generating massive profits from its UK operations. Football fans have by and large lapped up Sky without question. It does not stack up to express outrage at ticket prices and watch the game in the pub! Anyone who truly cares about this should cancel Sky subscriptions, stop watching broadcast football and let Sky and the publican know why. Football lapped up Sky, greed destroyed the English game. It's a bit rich, and too late, to complain about the price of Bolton tickets. It's all self-inflicted reflecting very badly on all involved in administering the game. The exploitation and control of many aspects of our lives by Amazon, Sky, Fox, Walmart etc. continues largely unchallenged by those who buy their products.

Yes. I said top ten before the season started but after seeing the first few games revised that to playoffs. We are as good as any I've seen. Nothing to fear.

The Hoghton Arms is a very average pub. The two don't compare in my view - the food and beer at The Royal Oak are far, far superior.