Well that's no bad thing, whenever i hear the term 'Super Agent' i always think of Samba being sold to a dodgy Russian club after the window closed. For a sum very similar to the amount Vs owed to Barclays at the time !

Which was the general feeling on here i think but the sole argument was the playing out from the back better. I'd always prefer the man who could best keep the ball out of the net. As usual it was twisted by the couldn't lie straight in his own bed Waggot that once a Prem club showed interest he'd obviously want to go and we couldn't stand in his way. True of course but as far as i could see their interest only gathered pace at that point because he'd been kept out of the side whilst we weren't doing that well and his dummy had been spat. Whilst i'm not saying he was forced out i'm certain a situation was created on purpose because we needed money and they saw him as saleable and Pears a cheaper option to plug the gap, so they ran with it. Player development and player sale over points and play offs !

I was thinking if the Indian govt really have it in for them they might try and sting them for the tax on 200 million they would have paid on that profit had it not been sent over here to a huge loss making British arm of their company. Venkys London ltd.

I think it was justified at first to say you can't just drop him because TK is fit because he was doing alright in the main. Once the wheels started coming off though - not his fault admittedly - the senior number 1 should have been brought back in no ifs or buts. However the argument then was he's better with his feet playing out from the back, suits the style better so should stay. Never made sense that and JDT was wrong but by then Luton had been alerted and his head was turned realising he was being gently pushed towards the door because we were desperate for cash. So it was too late really i think his head had probably gone.

There is also iv'e read some new govt legislation coming into force in the EU in regards clamping down on money laundering in football ? Something it is believed is still going on despite close monitoring because there are so many ways and so many loopholes to be exploited.

He'd actually been dropped here and replaced by a rookie in Raya and we'd been relegated if i recall correctly yet the right connections took him back to the North East.. For a fee.....

Aye but football is a strange beast he only needs to get a decent run of form and being English and youngish some better placed/financed club might fancy him as number 2 to challenge their number one. I'd lay my last fiver that had Mowbray been well and doing ok at Brum he'd have been interested.

We've just had the worse Championship season in 6 or 7 years and the complete nonsense off the pitch resembled a decade ago again. So i think we can assume the ticket offer is more of a preventative measure against further mass non renewal rather than some ambitious brain fart moment to boost gates.

We will as soon as he has a good run of form and someone takes an interest.

It's not directly out of their own pockets it comes via the VH group of companies so it's like a soak away of profits to prop up an English football club with nothing in return except a bit of advertising. There is something at the heart of all that serves them some sort of use and it's a hill i will die on. Not necessarily nefarious but maybe some loophole or other that their financial whizz kids can exploit, or could i should say. Impossible for anyone to prove without knowing how the accounts actually roll but the fact they ended up under investigation in the first place suggests suspicion stretches beyond the realms of BRFC.

A much dumbed down, cheaper model to run with top playing assets and fixed assets cashed in but an academy producing players going straight into a league one team and sustaining it would be cheaper and therefore easier to sell. What those who write all this 'relegation on purpose' stuff off as wild conspiracy fail to take into account is how business and finance people really look at things. Those drawing up future sale plans have zero empathy or attachment and purely look at facts and figures. Managed decline is a real concept and whilst relegation might not be an actual short term aim they'll also factor in the real risk of it running the current set up presents. Then it's a case of if/when that happens this is what we'll do to take advantage of the situation. If you wanted to get rid of a championship club that was costing 15 mill a season but would only fetch about double that in a sale you wouldn't keep pumping in 15 mill. No, you'd reduce costs, steamline it, cash in it's own assets and reduce the whole thing in size to minimise your losses and make it easier to have a quick sale. Rovers as it is or was didn't present a good investment to anyone who doesn't just want to waste 10s of millions on a plaything. However a club like Blackburn Rovers with a cheap wage bill, minimised losses, little to no external debt and an academy producing players, no big contracts on the books and the potential to rebuild it back up from league 1 all available for 25 mill suddenly becomes a very interesting proposition for investors.

Probably because those tasks with getting these people in the building are all on holiday, nobody gives a stuff in the 'directors' office down there, when has there ever been any urgency for anything ? Contracts will probably run from July 1st anyway so they'll be sorted the day before knowing that lot.

And his fee was less than Leos.

Of course we ran at a loss as did many other clubs they all needed backers even back then but the losses were manageable with the model they then ran. The reason the Trust wanted rid was post Jack they were cashing in their chips, streamlining their investments and squabbling/parting ways amongst themselves. Nobody was interested in running and funding Rovers so lets not start rewriting history on that to suit a current narrative. They stopped funding because the club was put up for sale, afterwards they sold the airline and some of them resigned various directorships the info is on companies house. It's likely the money from the club was shared out between senior family before they moved to Monaco en masse.

Does he make them regularly though or has he shown he can grow out of them and is he world class otherwise ? Difference with Pears is a lot of his are unforced and unexplainable and regular, in between hes had the odd good game but nothing you wouldn't expect of a pro keeper. It's years now since he threw it in the net away at Wigan but no one would bet against it happening again.

If they do sell him it adds weight to the theory it was another thing by Broughton they were highly unimpressed with. Telelavic will probably go as well at some point so that is all his development players off loaded within a year. Shocking stuff it's the Portugeezers all over again except on less wages.

If they can't fund a championship club any longer which appears to be the case then if they don't sell it it ceases to be an old wives tale and becomes reality. It's as simple as that.

A proper club would have had him out on loan first to get him some English game experience. He'll probably turn out decent in a few years but we just can't afford two dodgy development keepers if we want to stay up.

Almost like they've no use for us now they can't put 20 mill through the books !

Just wait for the meltdown when Leo is sold, Ruddy doesn't come and another is promoted to no 2 or a freebie 20 year old punt comes in as back up !

You are mistaking this club with a normal one but whilst we are at it someone like Ruddy can offer advice to Pears that Benson can't. Also what use are Pears and Benson working with another young keeper or Leo compared to someone like Ruddy ? Some aren't thinking this through properly but the evidence has been in plain sight for years going back to Keeley a former pro doing well with Steele initially and TK doing well with Pears. He'd have learned more working with Kaminski every day than with Benson and his coaching manual i'd wager. Steele, average to begin with went backwards pretty quick once Ruddy left, Benson did well with another inexperienced kid in Raya. Pears though i reckon has also suffered in perms of progress since TK left although obviously he benefited by getting the jersey. He hasn't improved at all though imo in the last year or so. Personally i'd get a decent number 1 even if it cost but that isn't happening here so i can see the logic in Eustace wanting Ruddy as a number 2 / coach for the medium term. I don't agree though with selling Wahlsted and using that money on a contract for Ruddy, i'd get rid of both Leo and Pears and start again even if we had to loan in a decent number 1.

They'll just let Waggot and the shadow MD continue the managed decline with all assets gone but running costs massively reduced. That'll make us a mid table league 1 club but will only cost them 5 or 6 million a year which the Indian govt may allow and the tax won't be much. Sadly i think that option is written in the stars at the min.

I said 3 points, that's like ONE game where the chances are he wouldn't have let in like Leo did and on the balance of probabilities that's nailed on.

If Broughton had signed him you'd be defending him at every turn 😉 Point i'm making is an 800k highly rated young raw Swedish keeper with an International cap was more flaky than him so no guarantees there'll be anything better any time soon. If Pears had stayed fit then despite his own contributions to the goals conceded column we'd probably have been 3 points better off going into the last games. Not really suicide is it, just not good enough to build a good team on but this season the style will begin a whole lot tighter than last so presumably more protection for him.

Yet at one point last season we were praying for him to be back in. I did also predict it was too soon for Leo when all the 'but we paid 800k so he's guaranteed number 1' was being banded about.