Match Reports RSS Feed


Bradford City on the receiving end against Bristol Rovers as ref gets it all wrong

Craig Fagan appears to foul Elliot Richards in the box but no penalty was given. There was drama in the final minute when a similar appeal, this time from City, also fell on deaf ears Craig Fagan appears to foul Elliot Richards in the box but no penalty was given. There was drama in the final minute when a similar appeal, this time from City, also fell on deaf ears

Bristol Rovers 2 Bradford City 1

The eighth Bristol Cider Festival took place over the weekend, offering a choice of 90 assorted brews.

Phil Parkinson could have supped every one and still not matched the headache that referee Chris Sarginson left him with at the Memorial Stadium.

Moaning about officials is a common and tiresome theme but there are days – and far too many of them lately – when you simply cannot ignore the fact that the chief talking point was the performance of one man.

True, City were masters of their own undoing with poor defending for both goals. Errors at the back were nothing to do with the referee.

But Rob Kozluk’s sending off – the club’s fifth red card of the season – was debatable and Sarginson seemed too easily swayed by the home crowd’s reaction.

And then, having set up a stirring finish, City’s ten men were deprived of the most blatant penalty you will see.

The best referees get the big decisions right and they are brave enough to give them

Phil Parkinson

Bristol Rovers, of course, will argue that it was payback. Revenge for the soft decision that went against them at Valley Parade after Jamie Devitt fell theatrically.

And new boss Mark McGhee will also point to the first-half shout when Craig Fagan impeded Elliot Richards.

Yes, that looked a penalty as well. But, to drag out a phrase that has cropped up in so many refereeing rants, two wrongs do not make a right.

Remember Macclesfield away? This one was even more obvious.

Only one person in the entire ground felt that Chris Zebroski’s trip on Kyel Reid was not worth blowing for. And he happened to be the one with the whistle in his hand.

Zebroski, by the way, could have been in an early bath by then like Kozluk. Already on a booking, the fiery Rovers striker sent Andrew Davies tumbling with a late and heavy lunge which drew no reaction at all from the assistant five yards away.

Parkinson stopped his players from talking afterwards but the manager had plenty to say, even if – by his own admission – he was going over old ground.

“The best referees get the big decisions right and they are brave enough to give them,” he said wearily.

“That’s why the top refs get the top games. For me the referee has called the major decision wrong and it’s cost us the chance of a point.”

General consensus was that had the incident happened at the other end – and the home team were attacking – then Sarginson would not have thought twice. Had it been 2-0 and not 2-1, would he have looked more sympathetically on City’s appeals?

Who knows for sure but it was a critical moment. Rovers, two goals and a man up 20 minutes earlier, were on the ropes and hanging on grimly to make McGhee’s home debut a winning one.

Parkinson rushed to tackle Sarginson at the final whistle. The referee invited him to call in the morning after watching it again on the DVD.

“I don’t need to,” argued the Bantams chief. “I was only 20 yards away and saw it for myself.”

But the defeat meant that having won the December manager of the month, he finished January winless.

And as much as Sarginson played a significant part in their downfall on Saturday, individual mistakes were just as culpable.

The first goal after just six minutes was woeful. City had three chances to clear from the game’s opening corner but the ball kept coming back in and eventually skimmed off Lee Bullock’s head to land at the feet of the unmarked Lee Brown.

Jon McLaughlin half-appealed for offside but it was more a blast at his back four for not getting rid of the danger when they had ample opportunity.

Rovers’ second ten minutes into the second half resulted from a rare blunder from Andrew Davies. Trying to cushion the ball down, he got caught out by the lively Richards who whisked the ball away before winning the one-on-one with McLaughlin.

But it is impossible to be too harsh on Davies, who had once again led from the front and staged a brave role in the late fightback playing as a makeshift target man.

Parkinson said: “When you get a player who produces the commitment Andrew does, any mistake he makes is an absolutely honest one.

“The way he threw himself into things to try to get us back in the game was an example to everybody.

“Of course he’s disappointed because defenders have got to play safe. That mistake was costly but the rest of his game was first class.”

As Rovers doubled the lead, the game looked done. It was a “start the car” moment as David Lloyd would say.

But throwing caution to the wind – and Davies into a three-pronged attack – City grabbed a lifeline with 18 minutes left. Deane Smalley nodded the ball into the six-yard box where Davies and David Syers were on hand.

The midfielder marked his return from a three-game ban with the decisive touch while Davies was left in a heap on the floor, having taken a whack for his troubles.

But it was Rovers who were looking increasingly woozy as City suddenly sensed the most unexpected of points.

Kyel Reid was at the hub of their late flourish, making light of his month’s absence to terrify the home defence every time he got on the ball.

Parkinson had preferred to start with new boy Will Atkinson, who will have better afternoons. One excellent cushioned pass to Fagan aside, the young winger found it tough to make an impact.

There were no such problems for Reid when he was summoned in his place. He whipped in three juicy crosses which went unrewarded, though James Hanson was close to jabbing one inside the near post.

Hanson was also caught on his heels by a miskick from Ciaran Bolger that suddenly presented City’s top scorer with a clear sight on goal.

And Michael Poke produced the save of the game to tip away a Davies header from Bullock’s long free-kick.

But that all just added to the overriding sense of frustration as the Rovers mantra “Goodnight Irene” boomed around the ground to celebrate a third win in four games.

Parkinson admitted: “Despite the penalty claim, we had some great chances to get back in it in open play with ten men. We should be talking about a point.

“There are aspects of our game that need to be better but the way the lads responded after going down to ten was fantastic.

“When we’ve got 11 players right at the races, running, working hard and closing down. We’re a decent side. At times we weren’t quite all there and let Bristol Rovers off the hook.”

Comments(12)

dannbradfc says...
8:46am Mon 30 Jan 12

In't Parker from Bristol??

TirNaNog says...
10:09am Mon 30 Jan 12

No - Thunderbirds!

dannbradfc says...
11:14am Mon 30 Jan 12

TirNaNog wrote:
No - Thunderbirds!
he prefers cider though, even cheaper than thunderbird....

therealmrblobby says...
11:42am Mon 30 Jan 12

What rubbish! Stop moaning about referees, City only have themselves to blame.

The red card for Rob was not debateable, he could easily have got a red for the second yellow alone. Just have a look at the BBC highlights! As for the penalties, you said it yourself, both sides had decent shouts turned down.

Referees do not deserve to be made scapegoats for BCFC's inability to play football.

irish bantam says...
12:48pm Mon 30 Jan 12

Just like i mentioned last week about seip......He is not good enough to play left back as saturday again proved, he was well out of position for their first goal, and did not have a good game against their winger who turned him inside out and went past him with ease.Give ob his shirt back for the crawley game, a recognised left back who has a point to prove to pp.

Prisoner Cell Block A says...
1:27pm Mon 30 Jan 12

So if refs are blameless why do so many people continue to rebuke their ridiculous decisions? Just as a player makes a mistake that can cost a goal, so can a ref, and they do it just as often. Bullock and Davies have been given stick for the mistakes which led to goals, the man in the middle, who is a professional, should get stick, even dropped from league officiating if he is constantly screwing up.

derrie-t- says...
2:08pm Mon 30 Jan 12

the ref's are dire in this league you all have to admit but still jesus! our defenders are rubbish at the moment, OB should be at left back not seip and.
GET RID OF FAGAN. or at least put the crock of s**t on the bench and make him work for his place, he walks about like a god jut because of his past. well peter taylor had the pedigree past and look how that helped.

lonniejockstrap says...
7:44pm Mon 30 Jan 12

Forget about poor decisions by refs if we are going to defend like we did for their 1st goal. Like a bunch of school kids all looking at the ball instead of picking up an oppo and sticking with him. And in the pen area at that! Basic stuff that can't be carried out by professional footballers gets my blood boiling. Anybody know what Seip was doing so far out of position? or was Bully playing left-back? jeeeeez!!

dannbradfc says...
10:04pm Mon 30 Jan 12

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Forget about poor decisions by refs if we are going to defend like we did for their 1st goal. Like a bunch of school kids all looking at the ball instead of picking up an oppo and sticking with him. And in the pen area at that! Basic stuff that can't be carried out by professional footballers gets my blood boiling. Anybody know what Seip was doing so far out of position? or was Bully playing left-back? jeeeeez!!
Ultimately both Seip and Bully are playing out of position. This may justify to some extent if they are found not to be where they should be. Its simply not natural to play this way. We should perhaps be questioning why with such a big squad this situation has arisen. How many natural left backs do we have? Yet we also bring in a right back when Seip and Mitchell can cover/play there.

I don't care that people thought Bully had a good game last week at home. yes he did some decent tackles around him but his positional sense is not good enough. Even factoring that he's a midfielder if you watch him for any length of time you will see a player who points at his colleagues to mark whilst been nowhere near anyone himself. he's very lucky to have gotten a career out of the game for me and was in the top five mistakes that Stu made has manger. e.g. believeing he was an attacking midefielder.

The side will continue to make mistakes such as you mention whilst we continue to play a different team every week and deploy short term loans. No consistency and/or team building is a major factor in our own inconsistent performances and results......

dannbradfc says...
10:19pm Mon 30 Jan 12

lonniejockstrap wrote:
Forget about poor decisions by refs if we are going to defend like we did for their 1st goal. Like a bunch of school kids all looking at the ball instead of picking up an oppo and sticking with him. And in the pen area at that! Basic stuff that can't be carried out by professional footballers gets my blood boiling. Anybody know what Seip was doing so far out of position? or was Bully playing left-back? jeeeeez!!
PS i also feel that refs 'cop' for alot of unfair flak. take the recent Sturridge penalty. The ref took all the blame for awarding it but why wasn't Sturridge getting stick for diving?? Yes he was touched thus by the letter of the law the ref has to give it but Sturridge has basically cheated for me.

The ref's can often be bad/poor but not has often has our poor results suggest.......

lonniejockstrap says...
12:02am Tue 31 Jan 12

dannbradfc wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote:
Forget about poor decisions by refs if we are going to defend like we did for their 1st goal. Like a bunch of school kids all looking at the ball instead of picking up an oppo and sticking with him. And in the pen area at that! Basic stuff that can't be carried out by professional footballers gets my blood boiling. Anybody know what Seip was doing so far out of position? or was Bully playing left-back? jeeeeez!!
Ultimately both Seip and Bully are playing out of position. This may justify to some extent if they are found not to be where they should be. Its simply not natural to play this way. We should perhaps be questioning why with such a big squad this situation has arisen. How many natural left backs do we have? Yet we also bring in a right back when Seip and Mitchell can cover/play there.

I don't care that people thought Bully had a good game last week at home. yes he did some decent tackles around him but his positional sense is not good enough. Even factoring that he's a midfielder if you watch him for any length of time you will see a player who points at his colleagues to mark whilst been nowhere near anyone himself. he's very lucky to have gotten a career out of the game for me and was in the top five mistakes that Stu made has manger. e.g. believeing he was an attacking midefielder.

The side will continue to make mistakes such as you mention whilst we continue to play a different team every week and deploy short term loans. No consistency and/or team building is a major factor in our own inconsistent performances and results......
Bully is a far better player than you have given him credit for. In fact his own Team mates voted him their player of the year a couple of seasons ago.
.
Bully wasn't out of position for the 1st goal on Saturday, I was being sarcastic in asking if he was playing at left-back because Seip was no-where to be seen. I HAVE watched Bully for 'lengths of time' and he is superb at breaking down attacks because of his timing and reading of the game. As I have stated before, IMO, he is probably the most underrated player we have ever had at City. A very close second was Oliver last season.
.
I don't accept that a professional footballer who is a defender in his occupation 'justifies' in any way in the slightest being out of position because he isn't playing in his favoured position. He has been playing left-back for most of his games for us, I would have thought he would have got the hang of it by now.
.
The thing that frustrates me with the Managers we have brought in over recent years is that they seem to be only capable of 'improving' their the Team they take over by making wholesale changes via a mass influx of new faces. Can't any of them simply improve the vast majority of players that are already at the Club through Coaching, motivation, tactics and encouragement etc? It appears not. I look forward to the day when we get a bloke in who only needs to add the odd one or two new faces each season and continues with and improves on what went before. No excuses, no mass influx, just do the job that they claim they are so good at WITHOUT taking us through yet another Revolution.

dannbradfc says...
10:57am Tue 31 Jan 12

lonniejockstrap wrote:
dannbradfc wrote:
lonniejockstrap wrote: Forget about poor decisions by refs if we are going to defend like we did for their 1st goal. Like a bunch of school kids all looking at the ball instead of picking up an oppo and sticking with him. And in the pen area at that! Basic stuff that can't be carried out by professional footballers gets my blood boiling. Anybody know what Seip was doing so far out of position? or was Bully playing left-back? jeeeeez!!
Ultimately both Seip and Bully are playing out of position. This may justify to some extent if they are found not to be where they should be. Its simply not natural to play this way. We should perhaps be questioning why with such a big squad this situation has arisen. How many natural left backs do we have? Yet we also bring in a right back when Seip and Mitchell can cover/play there. I don't care that people thought Bully had a good game last week at home. yes he did some decent tackles around him but his positional sense is not good enough. Even factoring that he's a midfielder if you watch him for any length of time you will see a player who points at his colleagues to mark whilst been nowhere near anyone himself. he's very lucky to have gotten a career out of the game for me and was in the top five mistakes that Stu made has manger. e.g. believeing he was an attacking midefielder. The side will continue to make mistakes such as you mention whilst we continue to play a different team every week and deploy short term loans. No consistency and/or team building is a major factor in our own inconsistent performances and results......
Bully is a far better player than you have given him credit for. In fact his own Team mates voted him their player of the year a couple of seasons ago. . Bully wasn't out of position for the 1st goal on Saturday, I was being sarcastic in asking if he was playing at left-back because Seip was no-where to be seen. I HAVE watched Bully for 'lengths of time' and he is superb at breaking down attacks because of his timing and reading of the game. As I have stated before, IMO, he is probably the most underrated player we have ever had at City. A very close second was Oliver last season. . I don't accept that a professional footballer who is a defender in his occupation 'justifies' in any way in the slightest being out of position because he isn't playing in his favoured position. He has been playing left-back for most of his games for us, I would have thought he would have got the hang of it by now. . The thing that frustrates me with the Managers we have brought in over recent years is that they seem to be only capable of 'improving' their the Team they take over by making wholesale changes via a mass influx of new faces. Can't any of them simply improve the vast majority of players that are already at the Club through Coaching, motivation, tactics and encouragement etc? It appears not. I look forward to the day when we get a bloke in who only needs to add the odd one or two new faces each season and continues with and improves on what went before. No excuses, no mass influx, just do the job that they claim they are so good at WITHOUT taking us through yet another Revolution.
Totally agree with the last part of the post. I do disagree with the bully part though. I always argued that Bully could do a job as a defensive midfielder but in his early days at the club he was under the illusion he was an atacking midfielder, a box to box one at that. He simply does not have neither the finsih, nor pace for that. I thus judge him on this. Had he mastered the art of defensive midfielder, which is where is physical and football attirbutes suggest is his best position and may have rated him higher.

If i was the opposition i'd paly someone up front with pace when i see Bully at centre-half. I remember the crewe game and them doing just that and they ripped us apart.....

I also actually feel that Seip has done a very reasonable job at full back. He's not exactly an attacking one but he can't be blamed for been picked there as there others who are actual left backs at the club not been picked. Is it because Parkinso was the one who brought him in? There does definately seem to be a pattern of Parkinson accomodating the players he brought in even if they have to play out of position......thus he has got the fans accusing him of favouritism in his selections.

click2find

Get Adobe Flash player

Most popular


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