Saturday 8th October, 20113 years ago, mid-October

The enemies of football as Parkinson’s City claim a first win

The Team

  • Matt Duke | Liam Moore, Andrew Davies, Luke Oliver, Robbie Threlfall | Jack Compton, Richie Jones, Michael Flynn, Kyel Reid | Mark Stewart, Craig Fagan | Guy Branston, Luke O'Brien, Nialle Rodney

More Information

Bradford City 1 Torquay United 0 At Valley Parade in League Two, 2011/2012

The last time he left Valley Parade happy Phil Parkinson was called “the enemy of football” by then City manager Colin Todd after his Colchester United team battled to a point. As Parkinson celebrated his first win as Bantams boss it seemed that no matter what how much of an enemy if the game Todd might think he may be, he is effective against the opposition.

Torquay United came to Valley Parade and were almost entirely neutered in their attempts to win the game thanks to a defensive effort from Parkinson’s side the match of anything seen at City for seasons and despite the Bantams having a man sent off.

Lining up with two rows of four, and Mark Stewart behind Craig Fagan Parkinson’s side were the picture of tight defending and – when they had to be – smart enough to kill off the game when legs got weary with the Bantams having to play over an hour with ten men following the sending off of Andrew Davies in the first half.

Now, dear reader, our views may divert (at least until television reveals more) but from my bit of plastic in the near 12,000 filled seats at Valley Parade Davies went in aggressively on Danny Stevens taking both feet off the floor and even in getting the ball the red card that Carl Boyeson showed was (as little as I like to see City players sent off) the right decision.

(Sunday note: Watching again the only way the Ref could justify a red card is if he believed that because the tackle was two footed that it was automatically either reckless, dangerous and endangered an opponent thus a yellow card even if it got the ball and, by virtue if the goal scoring opportunity denied, a red card. If that is the case Davies would get a one match ban. It was certainly not a violent or aggressive tackle which would merit a three match ban. Having seen it again, and in the context of other tackles in the game, I would not have even blown the whistle for a foul.)

My views were not shared by most and Valley Parade went into uproar and most (including t’other half of BfB Jason Mckeown) thought that Davies had taken ball hard but fair, that Stevens had made a meal of the tackles – he was booed for the rest of the afternoon – and that Boyeson was wrong.

If Boyeson did get the decision right then it was pretty much all he got right all afternoon in which time and time again he showed a near contempt for the rules that he was on the field to enforce. For sure we can all forgive mistakes – one or Jason and myself will be wrong about the red card tackle – but what can not be forgive is seeing offences and ignoring them.

So when Kyel Reid – on a foray into the Torquay United half when City were attacking on the counter – turned Eunan O’Kane on the edge of the box despite the midfielder tugging on his shirt only to be hacked at and pulled down in the box and Boyeson gave only a yellow card one had to wonder which part of the rules he was enforcing. The part that says that denying a goal scoring opportunity mandates a red card was ignored, and thirty years of football tells me that that was one.

Of the goalscoring opportunities City created the lion’s share with Matt Duke having to save once low down to his right but spending most of the rest of the afternoon watching the heroics of defenders Luke Oliver and substitute Guy Branston who blocked and blocked again whenever the ball penetrated the wall which the midfield pair Richie Jones and Michael Flynn had put up which was refreshingly not often.

In a game when plaudits were available for all special mention goes to Michael Flynn who put in a box to box midfield display which makes one wonder why at the start of the season he was seemingly on his way out of the club. His combination with Jones – who is a fine player for sure and one with a great engine – made for a powerful midfield display nullifying the previously excellent O’Kane.

Oliver and Branston – and Davies before his departure – were immense. Again Oliver was on his way out at the start of the season but his performance today looked like the best defender to have taken to the field for City since the slide into League Two. Graeme Lee, David Wetherall, Matt Clarke et al would have all loved to have put in a display like this.

Branston loved it too. Not wanting to dismiss the travelling supporters who applauded him last year he was gracious in victory but his display was the sort of showing which seemed promised when he signed.

Some of Branston’s tackles walked the line for sure, but so did much of City’s play and one was reminding of Todd’s talk of enemies when City got tough. City under Stuart McCall (in his first two seasons) and once or twice under Peter Jackson could be a joy to watch but they could also be a joy to play again for the opposition. A side that wanted to pass and impress an opposition side, Parkinson’s City were more aggressive.

Torquay United will return to the South Coast knowing they have been in a game. Michael Flynn was booked for a hard tackle, Richie Jones lucky not to follow Flynn into the book. Branston cleaned out everything, Oliver put muscle in and Craig Fagan leading the line gave his defender Hell. City, for want of a better phrase, manned up.

Sturdy at the back, giving nothing away, and ending up with a clean sheet all City needed to do was score – not something has been a problem this season – and so the goal came in the last ten minutes of the first half when a cross in from Robbie Threlfall was headed on by Luke Oliver, taken under control by Craig Fagan and struck in with power.

Fagan’s fitness is returning and he is looking like a very good player. He nearly got a second in the second half when he latched onto a the ball when racing against goalkeeper Robert Olejnik and lobbing the ball over the custodian only to see it hit bar and post and bounce away. Threlfall’s had a direct free kick pushed wide by a diving Olejnik later. Another goal would not have flattered City.

Not getting a goal though City played out the last ten minutes at game killing pace and the frustration started to show. Kyel Reid toyed with a few Torquay players and got a couple of kicks for his trouble one of which could not have been said to have been near the ball. Boyeson seemed to be happy to let that – as he did the many deliberate handballs he blew for against Torquay striker Rene Howe go without further censure.

Not one player will have left the field without the warm handshake from Phil Parkinson. Liam Moore battled hard at full back well supported by Stewart who dropped back to the right following the sending off. Kyel Reid turned a performance which seemed to be going nowhere into a great display. Luke O’Brien and Nialle Rodney put in great shifts from the bench. Parkinson has drummed in the need for hard work, and he got it today.

It was a new Bradford City modelled by Parkinson. More canny, a bit more nasty, and victorious. The sort of thing which Colin Todd called the enemies of football but without the ability to trust officials to carry out their jobs as detailed (and I reiterate that the red card, to me, seemed sound but one correct decision does not a performance make) City had to look after themselves today, and did.

Twelve games in and City have moved up the table to fourth bottom but it seems very much like this season has finally got going.

The Team

  • Matt Duke | Liam Moore, Andrew Davies, Luke Oliver, Robbie Threlfall | Jack Compton, Richie Jones, Michael Flynn, Kyel Reid | Mark Stewart, Craig Fagan | Guy Branston, Luke O'Brien, Nialle Rodney

More Information


  1. Tim Garrard says:

    From where I was sat the sending off looked unjust. Davies has put two feet in but there was little forward momentum and seemed more like he was blocking the attempt to push the ball past him. It certainly didn’t look dangerous or malicious and could have merely warranted a word from the ref about showing studs. I can’t see why this was red yet when fatty Howe put his studs in Oliver’s face, which takes some doing, it didn’t deserve and further punishment.

    Also, why does it take us to go down to ten men before we put our bodies on the line? Play with that commitment for the rest of the season and we’ll storm up the league.

    Oh, and how good was Moore today?

  2. Chris Newell says:

    What a performance. Every single one of them was superb.

    It just goes to show that everyone sees things differently as I thought the red card was incorrect, I clapped a good tackle before the ref blew for a foul! It reminded me so much of Rodwell Vs Suarez last weekend, very similar not only in the nature of the tackle but that Saurez/Stevenson rolled around and made a meal of it before getting up and getting on with the game. Red or not Stevenson’s booing was justified as he wasn’t injured but he pretended to be.

    A special word for Guy Branston, he said on twitter last night that he wanted to prove he was better than a sub, he did that and then some. In the second half especially he was everywhere, throwing his body infront of everything and putting his health on the line for the team. If that is the sort of performance that you get as a result of dropping Guy Branston then it was a managerial master stroke from Parkinson.

  3. Rob hunt says:

    I had a great view of the tackle…it was exactly like Rodwells from last week but of course we won’t have match of the day pundits clamouring for the decision to be overturned so I suspect boyeson will get away with another awful display.

    I simply don’t understand how a studs-up tackle which wins the ball at ankle height can be a red card whilst a studs up tackle that is nowhere near the all but nearly takes olivers head off is ok. And them I don’t understand why the centre forward gets booked for the heinous crime of ‘standing still’

    Super performance – to play an hour with ten men without duke having to make a save is a defensive performance the like of which we haven’t seen for so long I can’t remember.

    And fagan..that boy is a player….

  4. Ben Jones says:

    The boys today were an absolute credit to the shirt. The Internet and twitter CAN create problems as we all know. I would like to see Mr Wood and Jason reply in some way for their uncharacteristically strange outburst ( a word they will undoubtably refute) against Branston last night. Michael and I have traded opinions before, and he knows I love this site and his tee shirts, but last night s posting astounded me. Not a BFB opinion I’ve seen before. I’m not going overboard on this but I would like a response.

    Branston is a legendalreadu for me. He’s a leader, a man, a voice. When the amazing Fagan came off today he ran from point and rubbed his head and had a word. He’s a strong man.

    I am not naive. I know you’ve had some right stick for this. But, you’re both able to articulate, I would love you to come out and explain.

    By the way, you know who I am on twitter. I actually mitigated your position, but found it strange still.

    1. Michael Wood says:

      First it was just me talking to Branston.

      Second I’ve no idea what the outburst was supposed to be. When he signed Branston was our number one centreback. Now he is third after Davies and Oliver (as evidenced by the fact he was on the bench) and with Williams coming back he may fall further behind.

      I’m not sure what about stating that constitutes an outburst (or for that matter an opinion, it was all just fact and speculation) and I’ve no idea what upset Branston so much but him shouting is not going to change the facts as presented.

      So my reaction one of puzzlement. Branston may be all you say and more but it does not change the situation where Branston has dropped from first to third (at best).

      I’m not sure what Branston was upset about, my stating the fact or the fact itself, and I’m not sure what was astounding.

      Sorry I can not be more helpful but the exchanged left me more puzzled, and I was as much in the dark at the end of it as anyone.

    2. Ben Jones says:


      Firstly, it wasn’t just you talking to Branston, it appeared on the world wide web. If I’ve got a problem with the good lady I do it face to face.

      Secondly, sadly , by BFB standards it was An outburst. That’s not a criticism. It was just so against the BFB grain. You’ve either got skin like a rhino or too much belief because all anyone in the pub talked about was you’re negative comments.

      Brano is a leader. Whatever else may be said. We have entered, on you’re instigation as much as others’ the period of optimism. Fuelled by the best BFB articles ever about Christie

      Then you just went agin the party line, for me. And were met by a man! Who we haven’t seen for years, who cares, who fights, who won’t be criticised.

      BUT, then he decided to put you right, not with twitter, or a website, but by a performance on the pitch.

      Can you slag Hanson off next week please?

    3. Michael Wood says:

      I’m sorry but I don’t understand either half of this.

      First when I say it was just me I mean it was I writing from @boyfrombrazil and not Jason. I really have no idea what you mean by the “if I’ve got a problem with the good lady” but I did offer to meet Guy Branston if he wanted to talk about the comment which that had him “really pissed off” but even though I made that offer he declined, but later called me a coward. I offered to “do it face to face”, Branston declined.

      I’m going to have to ask you what the negative comments were because while I’m pleased that BfB is the talk of a pub on a Friday evening I really have no idea why. I’m not being evasive I really have no idea what part of the comments I made could be said to be critical of Guy Branston, and need you to point that out to me.

      I’m not sure what the party line on Branston is – he is the club captain – but I’d remind you that Branston had a beef with me and not the other way around (I pointed out that he was falling away from the first team, he is) and he decided that he would issue a message that he was “pissed off” (on Twitter which is something I hardly use, the @boyfrombrazil is 99% automated) so any “putting right” he decided he would start by swearing on Twitter.

      So Ben I’m going to have to ask you to point me to the part where I criticise (or slag off) Guy Branston because saying he has dropped down the pecking order is not criticism, it is statement of fact, because frankly as with Guy Branston I’ve really no idea what you are referring to. This is the comment that Branston took offence at (and you talk about):

      Torquay’s arrival at Valley Parade reminds one of Guy Branston – signed from the South Coast club following a superb display last season – and poises questions about his future. With Andrew Davies and Luke Oliver the regular pair until Steve Williams gets back to fitness – and Davies to return to Stoke at some point – it seems that Branston is increasingly being moved away from the first team.

      Which part of that criticises him? “poises questions about his future” does not, “increasingly being moved away from the first team” does not, “a superb display last season” does not. If there is no criticism there then I’m not sure how I’ve been “put right” and I’m not sure how I have slagged anyone off.

      Finally my memory of a BfB outburst is that it came with legal action and a good few lawyers.

    4. David Rhodes says:

      There are ‘facts’, and then there is talking about those facts. First of all, that Guy Branston was on the bench doesn’t make it a fact that he is the third choice necessarily (in the Torquay game, all remaining games to come, the last two games we have played?). He might be, he might not, but what you have said is merely an interpretation of the actual fact, which is that he was sat on the bench. If you actually want to know if he is the third choice at some time or other, or for some game or other, or all the time, then ask Phil Parkinson if he is. Then you can say it’s a fact (if PP says yes).

      Secondly, even if it was a fact that he was third choice, and it wasn’t anyway, why do you have to talk about it/tweet it (automatically?!)? Do you not think that will have some affect on the person involved? I’ve got a friend who lost his job recently, so should I point that out to him do you think? Will it help him in any way at all? Do you think he won’t already be dwelling on it? Have you forgotten an earlier comment I made on here about labelling theory?

      There is being a reporter, and there is positive support, and it appears that they don’t always coincide when the interpretation of a situation and then the decision to report it is made. I am certainly not saying it was intentional to misrepresent the situation, nor that you had dubious motives for talking about it, not at all. I’m totally sure it’s the opposite (although I would be interested in knowing what your motivation for it actually was). But there are only two facts here: Guy Branston was on the bench, and you talked about it. Did you have to?

    5. Michael Wood says:

      Firstly when I say it was automated I mean that the link to the story (about signing Siep) was automated. There was no mention of Branston unless one went to the website by clicking that automated link. The @boyfrombrazil Twitter account is mostly an automated feed of headlines in the same way that an RSS feed would be. That is important to note because at no point did @boyfrombrazil carry anything relating to Guy Branston that day. There was a link to a story which talked about the fact that Branston had fallen down the pecking order and that link was automatically (no need for an interrobang) created.

      I hope that is clear and I really do not want anyone to go away with the idea that @boyfrombrazil carried messages slagging off or having a go at players. It carries headlines and the occasional bit of news or a reply if someone asks us a question.

      Second, pointing out that Branston (or any player) has fallen behind in the pecking order is – in my opinion – not at all out of line. You mis-draw your comparison in Branston and your friend who has lost work. Branston has not lost his job – indeed he tells with great gusto how he is here to stay on his two year deal – just his place in the team. To ask why talk about the fact is to ask why discuss anything at all to do with the club. Of course one does not have to discuss the club at all, but if one decides one wants to then talking about which players are being selected is perfectly apt.

      The motivation for saying that Branston had dropped down the pecking order was to react to signing a player who when I saw him in trial was playing in Branston’s position (and not right back, Andrew Burns was) and I see no reason that we should avoid talking about what will happen to players at the club who play in the same position as new signings especially if – as we did – we talk about it in a questioning and not critical manner.

    6. David Rhodes says:

      Michael, it is of course up to you to say what you want and believe. Usually I have no issue with BfB, and to be honest I don’t have a big one with this. BUT you did defend yourself by saying that something you said was simply a fact when it wasn’t. You had interpreted facts to come to an opinion. My main point, however, is about your judgement and the possible impacts of what you do decide to report. You didn’t have to, you chose to when you didn’t report other facts or stories that you might have, and so when you report a particular opinion or viewpoint, of course there is the potential that it will be questioned, and especially by the person involved. Incidentally, you split hairs, the comparison between Braston being benched and someone losing a job is fairly similar, though of course not exact, and again all I was doing was pointing out the implications of appearing to rub someone’s nose in it, which if I was Branston is probably how I would feel.

    7. Michael Wood says:

      Second things first I totally reject any idea that mentioning that he has fallen down the pecking order is rubbing Branston’s nose in anything. The man is not dense and will have noticed it for himself. Commenting on it is merely that, commenting on it, and it was done with no malice and no sense of glee.

      Firstly I’m going to have to repeat that it was a fact that Branston was (at best) third in the pecking order. In the previous two league games the manager had had a chance to pick two central defenders for the team, and a third one for the bench. Branston was picked as that third one (and this was not because he was injured as Williams was) with two others ahead of him.

      I’m not known for a lack of verbosity but I do not know how to describe the person who is picked third other than third choice. He was the tertiary defender, the one which came after the second one, not A or B, and I do not think that I am showing poor judgement by acknowledging that.

      (Naturally, but less interesting, there is a point about news values and why one thing is reported and another not but that has more to do with the time that is available to the site and the desire to devote more. Given all the time in the world I would still have said that Branston has fallen down the pecking order because, well, he has.)

    8. Chris Newell says:

      Baffled by this Ben, to my reading BFB’s tweets were diplomatic and polite throughout last nights exchange. If anything it was an outburst from Branston, but more realistically it was just 2 humans discussing their opinions.

    9. Neil Myers says:

      I’ve been a fan of Branston since he came to the club and before that, his performance yesterday along with the other nine players was truly outstanding.

      In regards to what Michael said, i don’t see it as any sort of negative comment, just stating what has happened to the player since being at BCFC. I simply don’t see what the problem is.

      My motm was also Flynn, just piping any of the other nine players for that accolade.

      Regarding the sending off, having seen it on the box, i still think it was a harsh decision, Davies never jumped into the tackle, stating the obvious i know but the official had an absolutely shocking match. CTID

  5. Ryan Midgley says:

    We might as well ban tackling altogether if that was a red card…

    1. Michael Wood says:

      First, and seeing it, the tackle itself was not a red card because it did not endanger the opponent but having given it as a yellow card Boyeson may have seen it as a last man foul and given it a red card for that.

      The odd thing, perhaps, is that the red card was a result of the type of by the book refereeing which was missing for the rest of the game.

    2. Ryan Midgley says:

      I watched it again (we sit directly under the TV cameras, so in essence it’s exactly the same view I had at the time), and although his studs are showing, he’s stationary if not falling backwards. Their lad ran into Davies after the ball had gone.

      As with Rodwell last week, not even a free kick, nevermind any type of card. I also noted that their player recovered from such a leg breaker with great alacrity after the card was shown.

      And referees wonder why they get such a bad press!

    3. Ryan Midgley says:

      Also it can’t have been for Davies been the last man, he got the ball. It can only be because it was deemed reckless, dangerous or both, which it wasn’t.

      If it WAS for being the last man, why didn’t their defender go for having 3 pops at Rodney/Reid(?) in the second half? And why did Boyeson let the first 2 go, only to award the 1st foul when faced with having to give a penalty for the 3rd foul?

      And what are the point of linesmen, sorry, Referees Assistants, if they never make a decision of their own…pointless. We cope on a Sunday morning without ‘em :)

    4. Michael Wood says:

      The length of Davies’ suspension will tell us what Boyeson sent him off for. A three game ban would say it was for a reckless tackle, a one game for a foul when he was the last man.

  6. Richard Pomfret says:

    1) To describe Michael’s comments about Branston as an outburst is bizarre. It was simply stating a fact. However good our back four looked on paper, they were leaking goals alarmingly. Any manager would have had to take action. Typically, and to his credit, Branston was not happy to be the fall guy, and was prepared to say so. (I’m not a Twitter-person so haven’t seen his comments). Even more, when he came on yesterday he produced a superb display where his 100% commitment was matched by a speed of thought and accuracy of positioning which could have been seen as his weakness previously. That was the performance of a first-choice centre back. Now can we put the question of what is, or is not, an outburst to bed? It’s getting close to contravening rule 4 of the ‘Six rules’.
    2) From my position – half-way line, main stand, ten rows back – Davies’s challenge wasn’t even a foul. I chose not to comment until after seeing it on TV, and am still firmly of that opinion. I’m normally prepared to allow some leeway to refs, doing a difficult job in front of ten thousand ‘experts’, but the win allows me to say that that was a very poor refereeing display without it appearing to be ‘sour grapes.

    3) Now let’s forget all that and revel in a superb team performance. Every player showed total commitment. Stewart and Fagan ran their socks off, the back four were totally disciplined and the midfield protacted them brilliantly. We were unlucky not to win by more, and with eleven men would have almost certainly done so.
    Sorry for Jack Compton who did little wrong.

    Just a little disappointed not to see Mitchell even on the bench. I’d be interested to see some stats of his involvement in the goals we’ve scored this season.

  7. Leon Carroll says:

    Well that was comfortably the best performance I’ve seen in years, bearing in mind my trips to VP are infrequent, although that hopefully might change as I took my little lad for the first time yesterday. We missed the goal as he needed the loo, and we were just on our way back from another toilet trip when Fagan hit the bar – I do wonder if my lad’s toilet trips are the key to a successful season!

    While I wholeheartedly agree that City defended superbly and bravely, I also have to make a comparison with my last game, Burton at home last year. That night no-one in the team seemed to want the ball, and got rid of it as quickly as possible if they were unortunate to receive it. Yesterday, City’s passing was crisp, first touches were true, and I struggle to think of a single ‘howler’ and players invariably took the correct option. Confidence was clearly high and that is a credit to the manager.

    Credit too to the fans. Not for a decade have I seen and heard such positive backing at VP. Effort was applauded, players encouraged, and I was perplexed but extremely pleased to see Stewart receive a ripple of applause from the Midland Road stand when taking up position for a goal kick, and Threlfall receiving a similar ovation when trotting down to take a throw in front of the west stand. At one point Kyel Reid tried to beat his man, failed but won a throw, and I saw three individual fellas in E block stand up and roar encouragement like he was their own son. Absolutely brilliant stuff. Again compared to the fretful, pessimistic, moaning and groaning I remember from that Burton game it was like night and day. I just hope we, and the players, keep it up.

    1. Jacob Billingsley says:

      “I just hope we, and the players, keep it up.” Agreed Leon. It’s a bit of a chicken and egg one for me, but one that hopefully won’t need pondering on too much.

      The ref was awful, and I would be disappointed if we not only didn’t appeal, but pressed into it further if it were possible. I’m not saying Boyeson is corrupt, just very clearly inept. even if Davies’ red card were justified the way in which he handled the rest of the game was abysmal. Do assessors go to each game? Has anyone ever seen a ref assessors’ report…?

      Apparently Todd and Jewell were both there yesterday. Wonder what they made of the game?

    2. Michael Wood says:

      I’ve tried to get Referee reports in the past and been denied.

  8. Yesterday was the first time in a year that I stepped foot into VP, we’re in the process of moving lock, stock and smoking barrel down to distant Cornwall and it’s taking up lots of our time. My wife came with me, the first time for her since the England (u21’s?) match against Italy, this could start a new thread on it’s own, subject “where are they now?” I remember Peter Crouch and Gareth Barry as definitely playing, been racking my brains for others. Help!

    Firstly, I want to tackle the issue of “sending off”. We were in the Carlsberg Stand, on the right side facing the pitch, a long way up! We were pretty well right in line with the incident, a ball was played into the left channel, a potentially dangerous situation for City. Davies quickly spotted this & sprinted from a central position across, the attacking Torquay player also chased the ball down. Davies, clearly from our viewpoint reached the ball first, albeit sliding the last couple of metres and he clearly took the ball cleanly. The Torquay player was fully committed as well and his momentum took him into Davies’s legs and and over them. Not even a free kick! The ref, who I don’t think blew for anything in the first 20 minutes, was situated around the centre circle so his angle of sight was too poor to make such a drastic decision. He then went on to have a curious remainder of the match.

    City should have had a pen but, after playing on from a foul, he brought play back to the earlier offence. The Torquay player who reminded me of “The Hulk” was booked just for standing his ground, two players had “tete a tete” down by the corner flag and were just told off like two naughty schoolboys. Oliver, who is a much improved player from the one I saw last season, got a boot in the face which should at least brought a booking. There were a few other strange decisions as well.

    City played with a lot of grit & tenacity and no-one could argue they didn’t deserve to win. My wife isn’t a great football fan but I overheard her saying to her Mum later on the phone, “it was actually quite an exciting game!” It was an exciting match, the type where you sit nervously on the edge of your seat uncertain of the outcome right to the end. There were riveting moments, an example being in the second half when Fagan (a terrific footballer) lobbed the ball over the Torquay keeper, there was an audible silence around the ground as everyone held their breath. The ball disappeared out of our sight so it must have gone 20 to 30 feet up in the air, a real old up and under. I or no-one around me had any real idea where it had gone. It seemed like an eternity (probably only 3 or 4 seconds at most) before the ball reappeared, hitting the bar and bouncing to safety. Unbelievable tension!

    Hopefully, City came move on from here and by the time I see them again, at Plymouth in March, they will at least have moved into mid-table. Parkinson should let the team settle down now, let them get used to each other. He has plenty enough talent now for this division. I see good times ahead, at last!

  9. Richard Wardell says:

    Great to see so many comments on this match report. I think that everyone prior to me agrees that every single City player put in a good performance.

    Myself and a fellow supporter who were sat in the upper tier of the Kop thought that Davies should have received a red card. Although he appeared to win the ball he went into the tackle with studs showing and even if you win the ball, you will be dismissed from the field of play if showing studs.

    That said, the referee did have a poor game. We clearly should have had a couple of penalties in the second half including when Oliver had his shirt tugged and pulled from a City set piece.

    Hopefully, we will start to climb the table now and continue our good performances and results at Hereford next weekend.

    Finally, who can believe that it was nearly six months since our last league clean sheet – away at Macclesfield.

Comments closed

Read the BfB information about comments to find out why comments are closed.