Andrew Davies’ calf problem ‘nothing too serious’ believes Bantams boss Phil Parkinson

Bradford Telegraph and Argus: A glum-faced Phil Parkinson  looks on as Andrew Davies limps off against Stevenage A glum-faced Phil Parkinson looks on as Andrew Davies limps off against Stevenage

Phil Parkinson is hopeful Andrew Davies can shrug off his latest injury blow and play his part in City’s pivotal month.

Davies sees a specialist today about the tight calf that flared up during Saturday’s loss to Stevenage.

It represents more frustration for the key defender, who recently missed nearly four months following knee surgery.

It is thought to be similar to a problem that troubled Davies towards the end of last season and Parkinson is confident the hospital tests will confirm nothing more serious.

With a hectic run of games coming up, the City chief is keeping his fingers crossed that any further spell on the sidelines will be kept to a minimum.

Parkinson said: “It’s a nerve problem from his back. It’s not the muscle; the issue is with the nerve when his calf tightens up.

“It’s nothing too serious and something I feel we can resolve. We’ll probably know more today.

“It’s one that comes and goes for him. He had it last year around the same time.

“It just tightened up in the warm-up at Chesterfield last season and he couldn’t play. We thought we had got over that but it’s something we’ve sorted out before and I don’t think it’s a major problem.”

The absence of Davies would further stretch City’s defensive resources at a time when they are wary of being dragged into a survival fight at the wrong end of League One.

Their record as a team without him in the heart of the back four is poor.

City won just once and kept one clean sheet in the 17 games Davies missed from the start of October. On his return, three of his first five appearances featured shut-outs, including the wins over Port Vale and MK Dons.

Parkinson is expected to chase up a left back on loan this week because one of the two central defenders who have reluctantly job-shared in James Meredith’s absence – Matthew Bates and Carl McHugh – will be required back in the middle.

Matt Taylor, like Meredith, is still wearing a protective boot after his foot injury so he remains out of the equation.

With Tuesday night games in three of the next four weeks, City can ill afford to lose any more from the squad.

Parkinson added: “We are going to need everybody but unfortunately Matty Taylor’s still not right.

“He’s two or three weeks off being fit which is frustrating for him and for us.

“We let Luke Oliver go because we had Matty and wanted to give him a chance. He hasn’t really had that since he’s been here.

“But he got injured almost the same week Luke went. It leaves us short, so we’ve got to make sure Andrew Davies is right.”

Meanwhile Valley Parade season-tickets for next term are now on sale for the same prices. The current deal will run until Saturday, May 31.

Comments (13)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:41am Tue 4 Mar 14

realcitygent says...

another massive cockup letting oliver go imo a lot better player than bates mcardle mchugh ,as for taylor even when he was fit parky never gave him a chance ,even when we had 2 deffenders away on international duty he choose to bring in a sunday league player in bates ,would of been great to see oliver been given a run in team to see if he was still upto it after his injury ,imo i think parky is set in his ways ie hoofit football even though everyonecan see its not working,its the same withplayers he seems to have a downer on players connell was treated like **** never given a chance,it is now yeates who i think is very skillfull player but parky wontplay him then when he gets on for last 5mins city fans slag him fornot doing enough ,i really do believe we need to stick with parky till end of season then get rid as i dont think he can cut it in this div to many football teams not enough hoofit teams ,all city fans need to do is make a list of his signing and try pick 3/4 who are good enough for this league ,
another massive cockup letting oliver go imo a lot better player than bates mcardle mchugh ,as for taylor even when he was fit parky never gave him a chance ,even when we had 2 deffenders away on international duty he choose to bring in a sunday league player in bates ,would of been great to see oliver been given a run in team to see if he was still upto it after his injury ,imo i think parky is set in his ways ie hoofit football even though everyonecan see its not working,its the same withplayers he seems to have a downer on players connell was treated like **** never given a chance,it is now yeates who i think is very skillfull player but parky wontplay him then when he gets on for last 5mins city fans slag him fornot doing enough ,i really do believe we need to stick with parky till end of season then get rid as i dont think he can cut it in this div to many football teams not enough hoofit teams ,all city fans need to do is make a list of his signing and try pick 3/4 who are good enough for this league , realcitygent
  • Score: -12

1:25pm Tue 4 Mar 14

Waynus1971 says...

realcitygent wrote:
another massive cockup letting oliver go imo a lot better player than bates mcardle mchugh ,as for taylor even when he was fit parky never gave him a chance ,even when we had 2 deffenders away on international duty he choose to bring in a sunday league player in bates ,would of been great to see oliver been given a run in team to see if he was still upto it after his injury ,imo i think parky is set in his ways ie hoofit football even though everyonecan see its not working,its the same withplayers he seems to have a downer on players connell was treated like **** never given a chance,it is now yeates who i think is very skillfull player but parky wontplay him then when he gets on for last 5mins city fans slag him fornot doing enough ,i really do believe we need to stick with parky till end of season then get rid as i dont think he can cut it in this div to many football teams not enough hoofit teams ,all city fans need to do is make a list of his signing and try pick 3/4 who are good enough for this league ,
Three or four? Well, without even trying, Darby, Davies & Meredith are good enough and all signed by PP. Then you claim Yeates is good enough, so there's four without even trying!!

PP signed players to get us out of the basement- job done. He then gave those players the chance to play in L1, afterall they did well against Premier League sides last season. Sadly, for some, it just hasn't worked out, but it isn't as bad as you are making out.

Thommo hasn't been as good, Jones' form has been up and down & some have a real downer on Doyle. McArdle & McHugh are both good enough at this level, although at times haven't shown this.

PP built this team and due to contracts, will need to rebuild again in the summer. Personally, I feel he deserves the chance to try to finish the job he has started and that commences with the rebuild job.
[quote][p][bold]realcitygent[/bold] wrote: another massive cockup letting oliver go imo a lot better player than bates mcardle mchugh ,as for taylor even when he was fit parky never gave him a chance ,even when we had 2 deffenders away on international duty he choose to bring in a sunday league player in bates ,would of been great to see oliver been given a run in team to see if he was still upto it after his injury ,imo i think parky is set in his ways ie hoofit football even though everyonecan see its not working,its the same withplayers he seems to have a downer on players connell was treated like **** never given a chance,it is now yeates who i think is very skillfull player but parky wontplay him then when he gets on for last 5mins city fans slag him fornot doing enough ,i really do believe we need to stick with parky till end of season then get rid as i dont think he can cut it in this div to many football teams not enough hoofit teams ,all city fans need to do is make a list of his signing and try pick 3/4 who are good enough for this league ,[/p][/quote]Three or four? Well, without even trying, Darby, Davies & Meredith are good enough and all signed by PP. Then you claim Yeates is good enough, so there's four without even trying!! PP signed players to get us out of the basement- job done. He then gave those players the chance to play in L1, afterall they did well against Premier League sides last season. Sadly, for some, it just hasn't worked out, but it isn't as bad as you are making out. Thommo hasn't been as good, Jones' form has been up and down & some have a real downer on Doyle. McArdle & McHugh are both good enough at this level, although at times haven't shown this. PP built this team and due to contracts, will need to rebuild again in the summer. Personally, I feel he deserves the chance to try to finish the job he has started and that commences with the rebuild job. Waynus1971
  • Score: 20

1:32pm Tue 4 Mar 14

TheCoach says...

realcitygent wrote:
another massive cockup letting oliver go imo a lot better player than bates mcardle mchugh ,as for taylor even when he was fit parky never gave him a chance ,even when we had 2 deffenders away on international duty he choose to bring in a sunday league player in bates ,would of been great to see oliver been given a run in team to see if he was still upto it after his injury ,imo i think parky is set in his ways ie hoofit football even though everyonecan see its not working,its the same withplayers he seems to have a downer on players connell was treated like **** never given a chance,it is now yeates who i think is very skillfull player but parky wontplay him then when he gets on for last 5mins city fans slag him fornot doing enough ,i really do believe we need to stick with parky till end of season then get rid as i dont think he can cut it in this div to many football teams not enough hoofit teams ,all city fans need to do is make a list of his signing and try pick 3/4 who are good enough for this league ,
Reid, Meredith, Davies, Darby, Jones, Doyle. To name a couple, but I have to agree we really do just play long ball rubbish football. Unfortunately Oliver was chief 'Hoofer', he also lacked pace so I'm not sure he was upto it in all fairness.

Steven Pressley made quite a good point after the Coventry game, we do play pre-historic football and maybe the managers tactic doesn't bring the best out of the likes of Yeates who un doubtedly is a decent player.

I don't particularly want to see a change of manager. PP is honest, hardworking and has a solid management team around him who have brought a good amount of success to the 'long suffering' faithful and we have to remember that. I'd just like to see him try to improve himself and his ideas. There's more there to give Parky, let's see it!!
[quote][p][bold]realcitygent[/bold] wrote: another massive cockup letting oliver go imo a lot better player than bates mcardle mchugh ,as for taylor even when he was fit parky never gave him a chance ,even when we had 2 deffenders away on international duty he choose to bring in a sunday league player in bates ,would of been great to see oliver been given a run in team to see if he was still upto it after his injury ,imo i think parky is set in his ways ie hoofit football even though everyonecan see its not working,its the same withplayers he seems to have a downer on players connell was treated like **** never given a chance,it is now yeates who i think is very skillfull player but parky wontplay him then when he gets on for last 5mins city fans slag him fornot doing enough ,i really do believe we need to stick with parky till end of season then get rid as i dont think he can cut it in this div to many football teams not enough hoofit teams ,all city fans need to do is make a list of his signing and try pick 3/4 who are good enough for this league ,[/p][/quote]Reid, Meredith, Davies, Darby, Jones, Doyle. To name a couple, but I have to agree we really do just play long ball rubbish football. Unfortunately Oliver was chief 'Hoofer', he also lacked pace so I'm not sure he was upto it in all fairness. Steven Pressley made quite a good point after the Coventry game, we do play pre-historic football and maybe the managers tactic doesn't bring the best out of the likes of Yeates who un doubtedly is a decent player. I don't particularly want to see a change of manager. PP is honest, hardworking and has a solid management team around him who have brought a good amount of success to the 'long suffering' faithful and we have to remember that. I'd just like to see him try to improve himself and his ideas. There's more there to give Parky, let's see it!! TheCoach
  • Score: 6

1:40pm Tue 4 Mar 14

Bantam sthn Ellatha says...

Trying to sign a left back this week??
A little bit of 'after the horse has bolted' me thinks.
Anyway, I thought that there wasn't any left backs available as "it's a specialist position"?
Trying to sign a left back this week?? A little bit of 'after the horse has bolted' me thinks. Anyway, I thought that there wasn't any left backs available as "it's a specialist position"? Bantam sthn Ellatha
  • Score: -2

5:26pm Tue 4 Mar 14

pokertee says...

Just heard that we are 99% in for Luke Garbutt for 28 days from Everton this week. we will wait and see but hes a very highly rated young lad. And originally from Harrogate. Watch this space...
Just heard that we are 99% in for Luke Garbutt for 28 days from Everton this week. we will wait and see but hes a very highly rated young lad. And originally from Harrogate. Watch this space... pokertee
  • Score: 3

7:28pm Tue 4 Mar 14

bcfc1903 says...

What is all this absolute tosh about the long balll. We're Bradford City fc not Barcelona. With teams packing the midfield at Valley Parade it would be very difficult to play through midfield on the ground for a big percentage of any game. I certainly don't want our defenders messing about trying to play pretty pretty football, it would cost the club a fortune to get ball playing defenders.

Maybe we should resurrect Franz Beckenbauer's career.
What is all this absolute tosh about the long balll. We're Bradford City fc not Barcelona. With teams packing the midfield at Valley Parade it would be very difficult to play through midfield on the ground for a big percentage of any game. I certainly don't want our defenders messing about trying to play pretty pretty football, it would cost the club a fortune to get ball playing defenders. Maybe we should resurrect Franz Beckenbauer's career. bcfc1903
  • Score: 6

10:38pm Tue 4 Mar 14

moanmoanwhingewhinge says...

Bantam sthn Ellatha wrote:
Trying to sign a left back this week??
A little bit of 'after the horse has bolted' me thinks.
Anyway, I thought that there wasn't any left backs available as "it's a specialist position"?
Oh.okay, let's not bother then
[quote][p][bold]Bantam sthn Ellatha[/bold] wrote: Trying to sign a left back this week?? A little bit of 'after the horse has bolted' me thinks. Anyway, I thought that there wasn't any left backs available as "it's a specialist position"?[/p][/quote]Oh.okay, let's not bother then moanmoanwhingewhinge
  • Score: 4

1:27pm Wed 5 Mar 14

Michael Clayton says...

Waynus1971 and bcfc1903 have nailed this one.

At the time of promotion, nobody could have argued with any decision Parkinson made to 'keep faith' with the majority of League Two squad.

However, I think it was contract terms that dictated that, in any case, we would be seeing the bulk of the squad again in 2013/4.

Either and/or both way(s), a fait-accompli.

Unfortunately, Parkinson has been faced with a triple-edged sword:
(1) From fans who set their levels of expectation to high; and
(2) The legacy of the previous season; and
(3) Having reduced opportunity to re-build a squad in time for this season(for the reasons explained above).

With this in mind, I would suggest that the majority of those making critical comments made on here fail to acknowldege the many mitigating circumstances.

Leave it to the experts.
Waynus1971 and bcfc1903 have nailed this one. At the time of promotion, nobody could have argued with any decision Parkinson made to 'keep faith' with the majority of League Two squad. However, I think it was contract terms that dictated that, in any case, we would be seeing the bulk of the squad again in 2013/4. Either and/or both way(s), a fait-accompli. Unfortunately, Parkinson has been faced with a triple-edged sword: (1) From fans who set their levels of expectation to high; and (2) The legacy of the previous season; and (3) Having reduced opportunity to re-build a squad in time for this season(for the reasons explained above). With this in mind, I would suggest that the majority of those making critical comments made on here fail to acknowldege the many mitigating circumstances. Leave it to the experts. Michael Clayton
  • Score: 3

12:36pm Thu 6 Mar 14

Victor Clayton says...

bcfc1903 wrote:
What is all this absolute tosh about the long balll. We're Bradford City fc not Barcelona. With teams packing the midfield at Valley Parade it would be very difficult to play through midfield on the ground for a big percentage of any game. I certainly don't want our defenders messing about trying to play pretty pretty football, it would cost the club a fortune to get ball playing defenders. Maybe we should resurrect Franz Beckenbauer's career.
so do we play a different style away from home?
playing the long ball is all well and good when you have midfield player running beyond the target man. We do not. we have a 30 year old who must be wondering what the F*ck he has let himself in for!
[quote][p][bold]bcfc1903[/bold] wrote: What is all this absolute tosh about the long balll. We're Bradford City fc not Barcelona. With teams packing the midfield at Valley Parade it would be very difficult to play through midfield on the ground for a big percentage of any game. I certainly don't want our defenders messing about trying to play pretty pretty football, it would cost the club a fortune to get ball playing defenders. Maybe we should resurrect Franz Beckenbauer's career.[/p][/quote]so do we play a different style away from home? playing the long ball is all well and good when you have midfield player running beyond the target man. We do not. we have a 30 year old who must be wondering what the F*ck he has let himself in for! Victor Clayton
  • Score: 0

1:10pm Thu 6 Mar 14

Victor Clayton says...

Michael Clayton wrote:
Waynus1971 and bcfc1903 have nailed this one. At the time of promotion, nobody could have argued with any decision Parkinson made to 'keep faith' with the majority of League Two squad. However, I think it was contract terms that dictated that, in any case, we would be seeing the bulk of the squad again in 2013/4. Either and/or both way(s), a fait-accompli. Unfortunately, Parkinson has been faced with a triple-edged sword: (1) From fans who set their levels of expectation to high; and (2) The legacy of the previous season; and (3) Having reduced opportunity to re-build a squad in time for this season(for the reasons explained above). With this in mind, I would suggest that the majority of those making critical comments made on here fail to acknowldege the many mitigating circumstances. Leave it to the experts.
I wouldn’t think any fan has problem giving last year’s team a chance and IMO we didn’t need to sign many player. We needed a winger, a striker and a central midfield player, but they all needed to better than what we had. I can not see any forethought or planning in what PP does. For example, he had a good idea that Wells would leave but IMO has handled it badly. As a club we may live week to week, and so it is not his fault. Who knows!
[quote][p][bold]Michael Clayton[/bold] wrote: Waynus1971 and bcfc1903 have nailed this one. At the time of promotion, nobody could have argued with any decision Parkinson made to 'keep faith' with the majority of League Two squad. However, I think it was contract terms that dictated that, in any case, we would be seeing the bulk of the squad again in 2013/4. Either and/or both way(s), a fait-accompli. Unfortunately, Parkinson has been faced with a triple-edged sword: (1) From fans who set their levels of expectation to high; and (2) The legacy of the previous season; and (3) Having reduced opportunity to re-build a squad in time for this season(for the reasons explained above). With this in mind, I would suggest that the majority of those making critical comments made on here fail to acknowldege the many mitigating circumstances. Leave it to the experts.[/p][/quote]I wouldn’t think any fan has problem giving last year’s team a chance and IMO we didn’t need to sign many player. We needed a winger, a striker and a central midfield player, but they all needed to better than what we had. I can not see any forethought or planning in what PP does. For example, he had a good idea that Wells would leave but IMO has handled it badly. As a club we may live week to week, and so it is not his fault. Who knows! Victor Clayton
  • Score: 0

1:49pm Thu 6 Mar 14

Michael Clayton says...

Victor Clayton wrote:
Michael Clayton wrote: Waynus1971 and bcfc1903 have nailed this one. At the time of promotion, nobody could have argued with any decision Parkinson made to 'keep faith' with the majority of League Two squad. However, I think it was contract terms that dictated that, in any case, we would be seeing the bulk of the squad again in 2013/4. Either and/or both way(s), a fait-accompli. Unfortunately, Parkinson has been faced with a triple-edged sword: (1) From fans who set their levels of expectation to high; and (2) The legacy of the previous season; and (3) Having reduced opportunity to re-build a squad in time for this season(for the reasons explained above). With this in mind, I would suggest that the majority of those making critical comments made on here fail to acknowldege the many mitigating circumstances. Leave it to the experts.
I wouldn’t think any fan has problem giving last year’s team a chance and IMO we didn’t need to sign many player. We needed a winger, a striker and a central midfield player, but they all needed to better than what we had. I can not see any forethought or planning in what PP does. For example, he had a good idea that Wells would leave but IMO has handled it badly. As a club we may live week to week, and so it is not his fault. Who knows!
The word "fault" seems to be applied both frequently and sub-consciously. 'Fault' for what is exactly?

I would suggest that any 'fault' shold be with those supporters who expected too much from this group of players.
[quote][p][bold]Victor Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Michael Clayton[/bold] wrote: Waynus1971 and bcfc1903 have nailed this one. At the time of promotion, nobody could have argued with any decision Parkinson made to 'keep faith' with the majority of League Two squad. However, I think it was contract terms that dictated that, in any case, we would be seeing the bulk of the squad again in 2013/4. Either and/or both way(s), a fait-accompli. Unfortunately, Parkinson has been faced with a triple-edged sword: (1) From fans who set their levels of expectation to high; and (2) The legacy of the previous season; and (3) Having reduced opportunity to re-build a squad in time for this season(for the reasons explained above). With this in mind, I would suggest that the majority of those making critical comments made on here fail to acknowldege the many mitigating circumstances. Leave it to the experts.[/p][/quote]I wouldn’t think any fan has problem giving last year’s team a chance and IMO we didn’t need to sign many player. We needed a winger, a striker and a central midfield player, but they all needed to better than what we had. I can not see any forethought or planning in what PP does. For example, he had a good idea that Wells would leave but IMO has handled it badly. As a club we may live week to week, and so it is not his fault. Who knows![/p][/quote]The word "fault" seems to be applied both frequently and sub-consciously. 'Fault' for what is exactly? I would suggest that any 'fault' shold be with those supporters who expected too much from this group of players. Michael Clayton
  • Score: 0

1:58pm Thu 6 Mar 14

Victor Clayton says...

Michael Clayton wrote:
Victor Clayton wrote:
Michael Clayton wrote: Waynus1971 and bcfc1903 have nailed this one. At the time of promotion, nobody could have argued with any decision Parkinson made to 'keep faith' with the majority of League Two squad. However, I think it was contract terms that dictated that, in any case, we would be seeing the bulk of the squad again in 2013/4. Either and/or both way(s), a fait-accompli. Unfortunately, Parkinson has been faced with a triple-edged sword: (1) From fans who set their levels of expectation to high; and (2) The legacy of the previous season; and (3) Having reduced opportunity to re-build a squad in time for this season(for the reasons explained above). With this in mind, I would suggest that the majority of those making critical comments made on here fail to acknowldege the many mitigating circumstances. Leave it to the experts.
I wouldn’t think any fan has problem giving last year’s team a chance and IMO we didn’t need to sign many player. We needed a winger, a striker and a central midfield player, but they all needed to better than what we had. I can not see any forethought or planning in what PP does. For example, he had a good idea that Wells would leave but IMO has handled it badly. As a club we may live week to week, and so it is not his fault. Who knows!
The word "fault" seems to be applied both frequently and sub-consciously. 'Fault' for what is exactly? I would suggest that any 'fault' shold be with those supporters who expected too much from this group of players.
Fault for having no (apparent) coherent recruitment policy.
[quote][p][bold]Michael Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Victor Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Michael Clayton[/bold] wrote: Waynus1971 and bcfc1903 have nailed this one. At the time of promotion, nobody could have argued with any decision Parkinson made to 'keep faith' with the majority of League Two squad. However, I think it was contract terms that dictated that, in any case, we would be seeing the bulk of the squad again in 2013/4. Either and/or both way(s), a fait-accompli. Unfortunately, Parkinson has been faced with a triple-edged sword: (1) From fans who set their levels of expectation to high; and (2) The legacy of the previous season; and (3) Having reduced opportunity to re-build a squad in time for this season(for the reasons explained above). With this in mind, I would suggest that the majority of those making critical comments made on here fail to acknowldege the many mitigating circumstances. Leave it to the experts.[/p][/quote]I wouldn’t think any fan has problem giving last year’s team a chance and IMO we didn’t need to sign many player. We needed a winger, a striker and a central midfield player, but they all needed to better than what we had. I can not see any forethought or planning in what PP does. For example, he had a good idea that Wells would leave but IMO has handled it badly. As a club we may live week to week, and so it is not his fault. Who knows![/p][/quote]The word "fault" seems to be applied both frequently and sub-consciously. 'Fault' for what is exactly? I would suggest that any 'fault' shold be with those supporters who expected too much from this group of players.[/p][/quote]Fault for having no (apparent) coherent recruitment policy. Victor Clayton
  • Score: 0

10:53am Fri 7 Mar 14

Michael Clayton says...

Victor Clayton wrote:
Michael Clayton wrote:
Victor Clayton wrote:
Michael Clayton wrote: Waynus1971 and bcfc1903 have nailed this one. At the time of promotion, nobody could have argued with any decision Parkinson made to 'keep faith' with the majority of League Two squad. However, I think it was contract terms that dictated that, in any case, we would be seeing the bulk of the squad again in 2013/4. Either and/or both way(s), a fait-accompli. Unfortunately, Parkinson has been faced with a triple-edged sword: (1) From fans who set their levels of expectation to high; and (2) The legacy of the previous season; and (3) Having reduced opportunity to re-build a squad in time for this season(for the reasons explained above). With this in mind, I would suggest that the majority of those making critical comments made on here fail to acknowldege the many mitigating circumstances. Leave it to the experts.
I wouldn’t think any fan has problem giving last year’s team a chance and IMO we didn’t need to sign many player. We needed a winger, a striker and a central midfield player, but they all needed to better than what we had. I can not see any forethought or planning in what PP does. For example, he had a good idea that Wells would leave but IMO has handled it badly. As a club we may live week to week, and so it is not his fault. Who knows!
The word "fault" seems to be applied both frequently and sub-consciously. 'Fault' for what is exactly? I would suggest that any 'fault' shold be with those supporters who expected too much from this group of players.
Fault for having no (apparent) coherent recruitment policy.
OK. Perhaps I misunderstood your point. At least you identify an issue; others like to throw words such as 'fault' or 'blame' about usually as a consequence of some non-defined failure.
[quote][p][bold]Victor Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Michael Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Victor Clayton[/bold] wrote: [quote][p][bold]Michael Clayton[/bold] wrote: Waynus1971 and bcfc1903 have nailed this one. At the time of promotion, nobody could have argued with any decision Parkinson made to 'keep faith' with the majority of League Two squad. However, I think it was contract terms that dictated that, in any case, we would be seeing the bulk of the squad again in 2013/4. Either and/or both way(s), a fait-accompli. Unfortunately, Parkinson has been faced with a triple-edged sword: (1) From fans who set their levels of expectation to high; and (2) The legacy of the previous season; and (3) Having reduced opportunity to re-build a squad in time for this season(for the reasons explained above). With this in mind, I would suggest that the majority of those making critical comments made on here fail to acknowldege the many mitigating circumstances. Leave it to the experts.[/p][/quote]I wouldn’t think any fan has problem giving last year’s team a chance and IMO we didn’t need to sign many player. We needed a winger, a striker and a central midfield player, but they all needed to better than what we had. I can not see any forethought or planning in what PP does. For example, he had a good idea that Wells would leave but IMO has handled it badly. As a club we may live week to week, and so it is not his fault. Who knows![/p][/quote]The word "fault" seems to be applied both frequently and sub-consciously. 'Fault' for what is exactly? I would suggest that any 'fault' shold be with those supporters who expected too much from this group of players.[/p][/quote]Fault for having no (apparent) coherent recruitment policy.[/p][/quote]OK. Perhaps I misunderstood your point. At least you identify an issue; others like to throw words such as 'fault' or 'blame' about usually as a consequence of some non-defined failure. Michael Clayton
  • Score: 0

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player
About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree