Bradford City: Thompson keen to draw a line under recent results (From Bradford Telegraph and Argus)

The fans and players talk about games in hand on the last play-off spot. There are teams above us who are closer to the play-offs who also have a game in hand on Exeter.

I feel that the current scrutiny about Parky's management is merely down to the way we set-up.

We have improved on last season which ordinarily is all you can ask. However we also have better players and spent more money. The info that we have an automatic spot (in theory) budget also brings its own pressure and expectations.

Parky has brought in some better quality players as i say and he has also garnered a team spirit which should not be under-estimated considering the way Taylor ' the crap-one' had left the side. My gripe is that these better quality players are been somewhat stifiled by the system adopted. Why buy a jaguar and travel at 25 mile an hour?

My view isn't a reaction to the current plight but was pointed out early on e.g. we don't have many scoring options. When the system works its fine but you live by the results. Parkinso had alot of last season to prepare for this. Indeed he took over only 6 games in and i think we should have got more points than we did in that.

However this season Parky as adopted many of the things i was wanting from the club and previous managers e.g. smaller squad, no/less loans, and a simplified 442 syatem including wide players. He doesn't however play the system i would like which is a more attacking philosophy. That is my gripe. Two defensive midfielders no matter what the opposition, wide-men who receive the ball too deep and are wary of setting off without the ball, no over-lapping or interchange with the full backs, no creative central midfielder etc etc.

He's built a strong team which i feel should be demonstrating this over the weaker teams not fearing or hiding behind a safety net.

Thus all in all its an improvement and credit to Parky for this but we should be higher in the league all things considered thus Parky, somewhat like Taylor, is going to live or die by the system he is employing and the squad he's asembled to play his style/philosophy of football. When results don't meet expectations or resources then he must accept the criticism, scrutiny and questioning that comes his way.

Create, create create......

Attack, attack attack.......

Yaaaaaaaaawn!

Parkinson and Taylor, two very similar managers. Taylor has had five promotions, but people want to forget that.

if im honest i think we need to start wining games now although a draw is good i now think we have to start wining them , i also think games we should have one but havent have cost us to we have the team that should be in the play offs lets hope at the end of the season we are not looking back thinking how did we blow this one i still think there is time but must start getting results and quick come on city

dannbradfc wrote:
I feel that the current scrutiny about Parky's management is merely down to the way we set-up. We have improved on last season which ordinarily is all you can ask. However we also have better players and spent more money. The info that we have an automatic spot (in theory) budget also brings its own pressure and expectations. Parky has brought in some better quality players as i say and he has also garnered a team spirit which should not be under-estimated considering the way Taylor ' the crap-one' had left the side. My gripe is that these better quality players are been somewhat stifiled by the system adopted. Why buy a jaguar and travel at 25 mile an hour? My view isn't a reaction to the current plight but was pointed out early on e.g. we don't have many scoring options. When the system works its fine but you live by the results. Parkinso had alot of last season to prepare for this. Indeed he took over only 6 games in and i think we should have got more points than we did in that. However this season Parky as adopted many of the things i was wanting from the club and previous managers e.g. smaller squad, no/less loans, and a simplified 442 syatem including wide players. He doesn't however play the system i would like which is a more attacking philosophy. That is my gripe. Two defensive midfielders no matter what the opposition, wide-men who receive the ball too deep and are wary of setting off without the ball, no over-lapping or interchange with the full backs, no creative central midfielder etc etc. He's built a strong team which i feel should be demonstrating this over the weaker teams not fearing or hiding behind a safety net. Thus all in all its an improvement and credit to Parky for this but we should be higher in the league all things considered thus Parky, somewhat like Taylor, is going to live or die by the system he is employing and the squad he's asembled to play his style/philosophy of football. When results don't meet expectations or resources then he must accept the criticism, scrutiny and questioning that comes his way. Create, create create...... Attack, attack attack.......

4-4-2 not always suitable e.g. Wembley. Then, if he changes it there are twerps saying he plays defensive football. The other 91 teams in the league play defensive football according to these people. Another reason why Parkinson was right to criticise his critics. They deserve it. No question.

dannbradfc is absolutely spot on in his assessment of the club's position. A very fair and accurate appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses under the Parkinson regime.

Lots of improvements to professional attitudes, excellent organisation and discipline, a brilliant team spirit, which carried the club through to Wembley and an eye for a classy defender on several occasions when injuries have forced the club to take action to cover.

But, overall, the 'easy on the eye football' in mid-field tends to obscure the lack of end product. Possession is only significant if there is an end result. The statistics tell the tale - too many draws and 1.5 goals per game in the league this season.

If we do have a more talented squad than most, then it is a fair question to ask why we can't play in the first 20 minutes like we do in the last (when on too many occasions we're chasing a point).

The main issue is that of a coaching philosophy. Danny Blanchflower once said that the art of football was equalising before the other side had scored - a brilliant Irish conundrum that exemplifies one view of the game.

We do have the quality to play a different system to 4-4-2, especially when the wide men are being ineffective and/or double marked and the mid-fielders and full backs rarely reach the opposition's box in open play. If we had a prolific striker who was going to guarantee 25+ goals per season, the current set up might be justified, but we don't, so 14 or 15 goals from mid-field, with the defenders weghing in with a few becomes a necessary strategy.

All in all, lots of progress made from where we were with the Taylor regime, but no cigar if promotion was the goal this season.

Hi Gents

Agree Fully with the above.


allannicho says...
9:29am Fri 15 Mar 13
Yaaaaaaaaawn!

Like i have said before

Read and Think before you write
You are the type of Fan we dont need ,,

Yours

Gentlemanbob

cormon wrote:
dannbradfc is absolutely spot on in his assessment of the club's position. A very fair and accurate appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses under the Parkinson regime. Lots of improvements to professional attitudes, excellent organisation and discipline, a brilliant team spirit, which carried the club through to Wembley and an eye for a classy defender on several occasions when injuries have forced the club to take action to cover. But, overall, the 'easy on the eye football' in mid-field tends to obscure the lack of end product. Possession is only significant if there is an end result. The statistics tell the tale - too many draws and 1.5 goals per game in the league this season. If we do have a more talented squad than most, then it is a fair question to ask why we can't play in the first 20 minutes like we do in the last (when on too many occasions we're chasing a point). The main issue is that of a coaching philosophy. Danny Blanchflower once said that the art of football was equalising before the other side had scored - a brilliant Irish conundrum that exemplifies one view of the game. We do have the quality to play a different system to 4-4-2, especially when the wide men are being ineffective and/or double marked and the mid-fielders and full backs rarely reach the opposition's box in open play. If we had a prolific striker who was going to guarantee 25+ goals per season, the current set up might be justified, but we don't, so 14 or 15 goals from mid-field, with the defenders weghing in with a few becomes a necessary strategy. All in all, lots of progress made from where we were with the Taylor regime, but no cigar if promotion was the goal this season.

We are only a good winger and centre forward away from being a very good team IMO. If I was being greedy, a goal scoring midfield player as well.

Peter300 wrote:

dannbradfc wrote: I feel that the current scrutiny about Parky's management is merely down to the way we set-up. We have improved on last season which ordinarily is all you can ask. However we also have better players and spent more money. The info that we have an automatic spot (in theory) budget also brings its own pressure and expectations. Parky has brought in some better quality players as i say and he has also garnered a team spirit which should not be under-estimated considering the way Taylor ' the crap-one' had left the side. My gripe is that these better quality players are been somewhat stifiled by the system adopted. Why buy a jaguar and travel at 25 mile an hour? My view isn't a reaction to the current plight but was pointed out early on e.g. we don't have many scoring options. When the system works its fine but you live by the results. Parkinso had alot of last season to prepare for this. Indeed he took over only 6 games in and i think we should have got more points than we did in that. However this season Parky as adopted many of the things i was wanting from the club and previous managers e.g. smaller squad, no/less loans, and a simplified 442 syatem including wide players. He doesn't however play the system i would like which is a more attacking philosophy. That is my gripe. Two defensive midfielders no matter what the opposition, wide-men who receive the ball too deep and are wary of setting off without the ball, no over-lapping or interchange with the full backs, no creative central midfielder etc etc. He's built a strong team which i feel should be demonstrating this over the weaker teams not fearing or hiding behind a safety net. Thus all in all its an improvement and credit to Parky for this but we should be higher in the league all things considered thus Parky, somewhat like Taylor, is going to live or die by the system he is employing and the squad he's asembled to play his style/philosophy of football. When results don't meet expectations or resources then he must accept the criticism, scrutiny and questioning that comes his way. Create, create create...... Attack, attack attack.......

4-4-2 not always suitable e.g. Wembley. Then, if he changes it there are twerps saying he plays defensive football. The other 91 teams in the league play defensive football according to these people. Another reason why Parkinson was right to criticise his critics. They deserve it. No question.

442 would have worked better with wingers who look to beat their full back and then eithr corss, win a corner or a free kick. this would have at least given us a fighting chance. but i agree its horses for courses.

looking back over the season, how many times have we been the better team yet not won. this will be our downfall this year. For me this comes to down to belief. there are two ways to take this however.

we have had serious injuries throughout the side, extensive extra curricular activities through the cups, extra times, replays, penalties. also, iv noticed our added time seems ridiculous, several 95+ minutes in games. we must be close to setting a record for most games played in a season?!

I think ulitmately, worst case is we will fall jusst short, but consider our nearest attempt previously under mccall, and the capitulation towards end of the season, the financial burdens, no squad as such but rather a team of individuals we are in a much better position going into next than we have been in my recent memory, regardless of the league.

We as fans need to bear the bigger picture and think over next 2-3 years what our possibilities may be.

back to back promotions arent the stuff of dreams any more as witnessed by the likes of southampton, norwhich, possibly swindon amongst others.

good times for bradford are imminent.

Victor Clayton wrote:

cormon wrote: dannbradfc is absolutely spot on in his assessment of the club's position. A very fair and accurate appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses under the Parkinson regime. Lots of improvements to professional attitudes, excellent organisation and discipline, a brilliant team spirit, which carried the club through to Wembley and an eye for a classy defender on several occasions when injuries have forced the club to take action to cover. But, overall, the 'easy on the eye football' in mid-field tends to obscure the lack of end product. Possession is only significant if there is an end result. The statistics tell the tale - too many draws and 1.5 goals per game in the league this season. If we do have a more talented squad than most, then it is a fair question to ask why we can't play in the first 20 minutes like we do in the last (when on too many occasions we're chasing a point). The main issue is that of a coaching philosophy. Danny Blanchflower once said that the art of football was equalising before the other side had scored - a brilliant Irish conundrum that exemplifies one view of the game. We do have the quality to play a different system to 4-4-2, especially when the wide men are being ineffective and/or double marked and the mid-fielders and full backs rarely reach the opposition's box in open play. If we had a prolific striker who was going to guarantee 25+ goals per season, the current set up might be justified, but we don't, so 14 or 15 goals from mid-field, with the defenders weghing in with a few becomes a necessary strategy. All in all, lots of progress made from where we were with the Taylor regime, but no cigar if promotion was the goal this season.

We are only a good winger and centre forward away from being a very good team IMO. If I was being greedy, a goal scoring midfield player as well.

You are not being greedy as this would take the pressure off the forwards to get the goals. I'm sure if we would have had that type of player in the side then we would have seen Hanson scoring alot more. Him and Wells have had all the burden of getting goals most the season (yes they are strikers and that's what they get paid for) but you can't expect them to score in every single game.Unfortunately Parkinson had the opportunity to rectify this in January but for reasons only he knows didn't follow this up. If Gray was the answer then he totally misjudged it.

A few points

I am a big fan of andy gray and would love to see him knock in a few goals but even i'll admit hes very lackluster and doesnt seem to be working at all

And i dont think we will get a play off finish, too many 'it wasnt our day' 'nothing fell for us' 'the lads put a shift in it was a good performance but the result didnt come for us'

out of three "must win" games we have three draws, and with 10 games left (i think?) we have to win about 9? for playoffs..i just dont know anymore

numerouno2 wrote:

Victor Clayton wrote:

cormon wrote: dannbradfc is absolutely spot on in his assessment of the club's position. A very fair and accurate appraisal of the strengths and weaknesses under the Parkinson regime. Lots of improvements to professional attitudes, excellent organisation and discipline, a brilliant team spirit, which carried the club through to Wembley and an eye for a classy defender on several occasions when injuries have forced the club to take action to cover. But, overall, the 'easy on the eye football' in mid-field tends to obscure the lack of end product. Possession is only significant if there is an end result. The statistics tell the tale - too many draws and 1.5 goals per game in the league this season. If we do have a more talented squad than most, then it is a fair question to ask why we can't play in the first 20 minutes like we do in the last (when on too many occasions we're chasing a point). The main issue is that of a coaching philosophy. Danny Blanchflower once said that the art of football was equalising before the other side had scored - a brilliant Irish conundrum that exemplifies one view of the game. We do have the quality to play a different system to 4-4-2, especially when the wide men are being ineffective and/or double marked and the mid-fielders and full backs rarely reach the opposition's box in open play. If we had a prolific striker who was going to guarantee 25+ goals per season, the current set up might be justified, but we don't, so 14 or 15 goals from mid-field, with the defenders weghing in with a few becomes a necessary strategy. All in all, lots of progress made from where we were with the Taylor regime, but no cigar if promotion was the goal this season.

We are only a good winger and centre forward away from being a very good team IMO. If I was being greedy, a goal scoring midfield player as well.

You are not being greedy as this would take the pressure off the forwards to get the goals. I'm sure if we would have had that type of player in the side then we would have seen Hanson scoring alot more. Him and Wells have had all the burden of getting goals most the season (yes they are strikers and that's what they get paid for) but you can't expect them to score in every single game.Unfortunately Parkinson had the opportunity to rectify this in January but for reasons only he knows didn't follow this up. If Gray was the answer then he totally misjudged it.

Sorry, I don’t agree. we had Syers in the side for the 2 previous seasons and don’t think he was prolific. it used to be – if we had good wingers Hanson would get a hat full. The truth is, he has failed to convert a decent amount of very good chances. For me he just doesn’t have enough in his armoury to be No1 striker. Having said that I think it’s probably his best season.

Thompson still thinks we can do it unfortunately no we can't - end of.
Get to close season and SPEND the money from the cup run on what we needed in January an attacking midfielder and decent forward. I just hope as said previously the money doesn't DISAPPEAR !