WSC League Two review (2010/11)

With the new football season just two weeks away, here is an article I wrote for the June edition of When Saturday Comes reviewing the 2010/11 League Two season.

Given the controversy over Notts County the previous season, colossal point deductions for Luton, Rotherham and Bournemouth the year earlier, and the odious presence of MK Dons for two seasons before, this year’s League Two seemed quiet and conventional in comparison. True, there were some minor point deductions and an almost farcical number of management changes, but in the main headlines were derived from where it really matters – on the pitch.

Encapsulating this new era of saneness was Chesterfield’s title victory – exactly a decade on from their last ascent from this division being overshadowed by financial irregularities. The club appeared reborn at the delightful B2Net Stadium – genuinely one of the finest new grounds of recent years – with attendances doubling and Craig Davies and Jack Lester piling in the goals. Arguably Chesterfield’s optimum moment was a televised 5-0 thrashing of near-neighbours Rotherham in March, which prompted Sky’s Don Goodman to declare them the best League Two team he’d ever seen.

That it came over Rotherham was also telling. This was a season where the more-fancied League Two sides failed miserably. The Millers, financially well-backed these days, faded during the second half of the season; Port Vale initially impressed, but losing manager Micky Adams to Sheffield United saw form plummet; Gillingham were no longer so dominant at Priestfield – all missed out on the play offs. Even bigger flops were Bradford and Northampton: considered to have the largest playing budgets, both came closer to relegation.

Instead the so-called lesser lights stole the attention. Bury clinched 2nd – reward for several years sound management under Alan Knill, though he wasn’t around to finish the job after quitting for Scunthorpe in April. The under-hyped Wycombe immediately bounced back to League One by taking the third automatic spot, with 39-year-old Gareth Ainsworth enjoying an Indian summer. Their promotion saw controversy, however, after Ainsworth was awarded a goal at Shrewsbury that didn’t cross the line in a 1-1 draw. The one point Wycombe gained from it was the same margin that they pipped Shrewsbury to promotion.

Alongside Shrewsbury was a play off line up no one would have predicted – Stevenage, Accrington and Torquay. A memorable first Football League campaign for Stevenage ended in a second successive promotion, via Old Trafford; though their physical approach was less admirable. Torquay – deducted one point for fielding an ineligible Jake Robinson – and Accrington produced wonderful passing football in comparison. Stanley boss John Coleman’s summer trip to the World Cup saw him import a low-rent version of Spain onto a dreadful pitch in East Lancashire, with stunning results. They became formidable at home, backed by the passionate Accrington Ultras. Rarely has a football club looked so united.

At the bottom Stockport dropped straight through the division on their return from League One, conceding at least four goals in a game on 11 occasions. For much of the season it seemed Barnet would be joining them, but manager number three of their campaign, Martin Allen, sparked an unlikely revival before astonishingly quitting for Notts County after just 19 days in charge. Yet Barnet regrouped under Giuliano Grazioli – climbing out of the bottom two on the final day.

Their place was surprisingly filled by Lincoln. Although bottom in January, under Steve Tilson they hit superb form in late winter to spark talk of a late play off charge. But then they hit the buffers, taking just one point from their last 10 games to slide out of the league. Hereford (deducted three points for fielding an ineligible player) and Macclesfield (who for a second season were in mourning, following the shock death of midfielder Richard Butcher) struggled on. The best side I saw was Crewe – twice they destroyed my team – yet despite been the league’s top scorers and possessing golden boot winner Clayton Donaldson (29 goals), they only finished mid-table.

And that probably summed up League Two this season for those of us who didn’t go up or down. There was a surprising amount of flair and attractive football around the division, but the relative shortfall of quality was evident in a general lack of consistency. Every year we fans declare “it’s a poor league” and reflect on minnows succeeding as further reason to slate our own team’s failures. But as the dubious arrival of Crawley threatens to steal next season’s headlines and leave the rest of us crying foul over their mysterious financial might, perhaps we’ll look back on the 2010/11 season with fondness over the fact that, occasionally, football really is all about football.

2010/11 season review: a boy from brazil on writing about Bradford City

It is a Friday during the middle of August, and an evening watching a DVD at home with the wife is disrupted by me somewhat foolishly having a quick read online of the latest Bradford City news first. The Bantams have made a good start to the season – winning two of their first three games, including a Carling Cup victory over Championship Notts Forest – but someone is not happy. Not happy about me. And someone else, who I have been arguing angrily with for some months (we’re all friends now), has sent me a private message (PM) demanding I log on and explain myself.

This takes place on the public forum that is the Bradford City Official Message Board. The annoyance at me has been triggered by a BoyfromBrazil (BfB) article I published that morning, registering my disappointment over the recent sale of winger Scott Neilson. I am accused of trying to rock the boat, of not being able to get over the past, and of attempting to undermine the club’s promotion efforts.

I argue my views on Neilson with the person upset, and we at least come to a friendly ‘agree to disagree’ conclusion. But criticism from others – especially that one particular protagonist – continues. Meanwhile friends watching it all unfurl on the message board have text me to offer support. The DVD doesn’t get past the trailers.

All of which represents the negative side of the somewhat surreal experience writing about your football team for a website can provide. It’s my choice, and the praise you get along the way from readers can feel extremely rewarding. But every now and then someone will have an almighty go at the opinion you’ve expressed, and you reflect on the hours spent writing something and, in darker moments, you wonder why you bother. A thick skin is required at all times, but occasionally criticism can catch you out.

That Friday night argument was perhaps the peak of a series of battles with a small number of fans on the Official Message Board which had occurred during the summer. One day I had noticed an article I’d written being slagged off, and made the mistake of logging on to defend myself. Attempts to reason only triggered more public attacks about the site in general. Do you carry on arguing, or make a better effort to ignore it?

The disapproval over BfB spurned from our response to Stuart McCall being driven out of the club by Boardroom and supporter discontent the February before. Opinion among fans on McCall was split; but regardless of the merits or otherwise of his management style, the manner that those who wanted the Bradford City legend to walk away had conducted themselves left a bitter taste, which myself and BfB editor Michael Wood weren’t shy from expressing. The club’s final weeks under McCall were poor for sure, but the bigger picture of the young squad he was developing on a reduced budget was tossed out because of impatience over the speed of progress. McCall was holding us back, was the loud argument that ultimately won the day.

As Michael eloquently wrote on the day McCall finally resigned, “I’m proud to say that I stood behind him in his third spell where as manager things were not going as well as he hoped.” Many people, including me, strongly agreed, and BfB’s popularity was strengthened as a result. Others accused us of lacking credibility and of shoving our own views down other people’s throats.

Despite the divisions, McCall’s replacement, Peter Taylor, was met with almost universal approval. The five-time promotion winner seemed to impress everyone as he saw out the end of City’s season, being rewarded with a one-year contract. But despite numerous positive write ups about Taylor from myself, Michael and others, our enthusiasm was lacking compared to others and a weariness had crept in. It wasn’t so much that the decision to drive McCall away still jarred, but the way it had been carried out which left us, for a spell, no longer viewing the club with the same affection we usually possess.

Any new manager is hugely popular at first; but as little stories of the changes Taylor was implementing found gleeful approval from others, BfB was perhaps more reserved in our praise in comparison. And here was where the criticism of us began in earnest. We were accused of not supporting Taylor, of pining for our “beloved” McCall and of wanting City to fail. “No one reads BfB anymore,” someone on the message board yelled at me. “Face facts, you’ve had your day”. Looking at BfB’s web stats told a very different story, but attempts to point this out fell on deaf ears. It was definitely time to start ignoring.

This wasn’t a unique dispute, however, but reflective of an overriding mood that emanated from the club Boardroom. When City Gent editor Mike Harrison made some flippant remarks in a pre-season preview article for the Yorkshire Post, the club hauled him in for a meeting – upset that he had predicted City would only finish 8^th. The Bantams are going to succeed under Taylor this season was the popular expectation, and those people who slightly disagreed – Mike was warned the City Gent could be banned from Valley Parade – were in trouble or verbally attacked.

A day after that Friday night row, City lost 2-0 to Torquay and those who talked up the brilliance of Taylor quickly turned on him. As bad result followed bad result, it seemed few people other than BfB were still willing to back him.

The attacks on us had all but stopped by this time, after I wrote an article for BfB revealing the club was considering banning the City Gent. Upset at the way a Valley Parade institution was being treated, the article prompted plenty of approval for the City Gent and for us – and even an olive branch from my number one detractor. BfB does not, and never has, attempted to represent the views of all fans, but the right to at least air our own opinions – which we’d been attacked over repeatedly – was now being recognised. Peace at last, and now I can go back to enjoying reading the Official Message Board.

Covering Taylor’s ultimately failed reign in charge of City was a strange affair at times. My previous views of always giving the manager time to do the job were tested by his often erratic decision making and worries over a shockingly bad league position. In September we heard from a reliable source that Taylor was close to the sack, and that evening I wrote a favourable report of a 0-0 draw at Rotherham. Four days after that seemingly turning-the-corner-moment, Taylor had signed two young kids on loan from Manchester United and shunted two of the team’s outstanding performers at Rotherham – Luke O’Brien and Zesh Rehman – to the bench. I felt devastated for the pair, and wrote up a piece about Taylor was seemingly not the man for the job for reasons both within and beyond his control.

Form did pick up, but the one defeat sandwiched amongst four superb victories – 3-0 at Burton – lead to me writing about how City haven’t progressed since McCall departed, which triggered more than a few angry responses. You take the constructive criticism on board, but maintaining thick skin helped me to stay true to my beliefs and opinions.

In the end I lost support for Taylor, writing in January about how I no longer wanted him as manager due to his dour and negative style of football – I was part of the majority. A month earlier I’d also written a piece about how disengaging this season felt, a view which many readers said they could relate to and which, ultimately, I think was connected to Taylor’s management style. The treatment of Rehman – continually left out in favour of inexperienced loanees – left me leaning onto the player’s side when the two fell out and City’s captain was transfer listed.

January also saw BfB’s most high profile moment of the season, interviewing joint-Chairmen Mark Lawn. Myself and Michael both attended the two-hour long chat in an executive box overlooking the Valley Parade pitch. We were both apprehensive at first, fearing a ticking off over the negative articles we’d written about Lawn over the previous year. He was, however, very welcoming: answering all our questions in a frank, honest and engaging way. Lawn appeared to enjoy the experience as much as us, and the result was a two-part interview (here and here) that attracted some 4,500 visitors to BfB in two days. Needless to say, the positive feedback we received for it felt hugely rewarding.

Perhaps the proudest thing about the interview – other than the fact we seemed to portray Lawn’s personality accurately and in a balanced manner – is that it has stood the test of time. We spoke about so much, and his answers remain relevant and thought-provoking even months later, despite the events which have occurred since. We are hopeful of interviewing Lawn again in July, once off-the-field matters clear up and if the club will still have us.

Soon after Taylor was gone, with hopes of promotion long since evaporated and the league position worse than when McCall had departed. However, it had never been about seeking verification of previous arguments that pushing McCall out wouldn’t improve the club, or of getting to finally say we told you so. That McCall was now managing Motherwell and would end the season guiding the club to its first major final in 20 years offered a few what might have beens, but the rights and wrongs of the past can’t be changed and BfB’s focus was on where the club might turn to next for managerial inspiration.

On the message boards some of the people who’d hounded out McCall admitted they might have been wrong in hindsight and even offered apologies, and that in itself probably summed up the Bradford City universe and BfB’s position within it. Our views have altered only slightly over time, while those around us seemed to keep changing. It’s not a criticism of anyone else, but perhaps the fact we don’t hide behind message board user names and it can take us hours to write an article leaves us well practiced in expressing more considered views. Our opinions are no more or less valid than anyone else’s, but they probably take longer to construct which means they are less likely to change compared to some.

Peter Jackson’s arrival as manager was strange, and even now it feels odd to be writing positive things about someone who, for my City-supporting life at least, was always considered the pantomime villain. It was a close call in the end, but relegation was at least averted. Still Mike’s telling off for only predicting an 8^th place finish – City ended up 18^th – speaks volumes of the dashed expectations. You were way too optimistic, Mike.

Off the field matters dominated in the end, and I was proud that at BfB we were able to exclusively break the news that City were seeking talks with their landlords over the rent. Since then we have tried to be leading from the front in terms of the coverage and insight we offered. I worked with a couple of accountants (one my brother) to analyse City’s finances, for example. Of course we can’t compete with the local media in devoting hours chasing the story and don’t have access to interview the main players of the talks, but I’d like to think we’ve made a positive difference towards keeping fans informed. Further increases in web hits supports that hope.

And it got noticed wider too. Twice at the end of the season I appeared on BBC Radio Leeds – a nerve-wracking but enjoyable experience. Radio Leeds had also attempted to approach me last July about appearing on a different show, after my article about Bradford in general was apparently discussed on air. They didn’t get my contact details in time.

Not much has been positive about this season for Bradford City, but at the risk of blowing our own trumpets I think BfB can look back on a season of quality writing. All of which wouldn’t be possible without the superb editorship of Michael. It’s an odd relationship between him and I in many ways, given it is carried out most of the time via our keyboards and through text messages. But the few times I’ve met up with Michael have been enjoyable affairs and it would be good to meet for a pre-match pint more often in future. We have similar views on City – though don’t agree on everything – and different styles of writing. It seems to work well.

Other BfB writers have also produced some excellent articles, while the input of readers’ comments helps to generate a lively and intelligent debate. We are fortunate to get plenty of positive feedback and a strong readership, which ultimately makes it worthwhile.

It can be testing at times, for sure. Who wants to go home and write a match report of City’s 3-0 loss to Accrington given you’ve wasted your afternoon – not to mention your wife’s – to witness such a poor performance? A long hard day at work is never the best preparation for drafting a preview to go live the following morning, either. There are, you could argue, much more important things we could be doing with our time.

But the enjoyment of writing, the passion to air our views to those who want to hear them and the desire to offer fans a place to carry on living and breathing Bradford City away from Saturday afternoon at Valley Parade, or in the pub with friends, keeps us going. We aim to provide an in-depth coverage of City that is not available elsewhere.

No one visits BfB to find out how the Bantams got on at the weekend, because that service is provided elsewhere. But the opportunities to tell the story of matches from a different angle, to offer more considered views on players than “get rid” and to assess the direction the club is taken are ones we pursue with relish.

Ultimately we are ordinary supporters with very ordinary views, and so the higher profile – and the praise and the criticism – that comes with writing for BfB will always seem surreal.

Yet more uncertainty for Bradford City – TwoHundredPercent article

Last week, I had a second article published on the award-winning football website, TwoHundredPercent.Net concerning the recent problems at Bradford City.  The club is seeking a rent reduction on its Valley Parade home – or could leave its 108-year-old home.

Bradford was in a desperate position when the ground was sold to Gibb, and for many fans – not to mention the Board – there remains a begrudging frustration that he is allowed to make a 15% profit per year on something that ethically shouldn’t belong to him. But whatever happens over the next few weeks and months, it’s to be hoped the longer-term picture is fully considered. For sure City could move to Osdal, go through some financial pain and emerge it celebrating a promotion or two in their neighbour’s pad. But is the possibility of some success over the next few years really worth giving up the club’s home of 108 years for? Or perhaps that decision was made when the ground and the club were separated eight years ago, and the current Board are trying to manage a business which – were it not in football – would have been wound up a long time ago as unviable.

Click here to read the article.

Elsewhere, I have written the following articles on the current situation, including getting an exclusive story for BfB on the fact City was launching talks with their Valley Parade landlords.

Tuesday 5 April – Bradford City made half a million profit in 2009/10, but it’s not all good news

Without the unexpected windfall from Delph, City would have lost over £1 million over the previous two campaigns and something similar this year – whether these totals includes loans provided by Lawn and Rhodes is unclear.

Click here to read the article.

Wednesday 6 April – Is there any solution to Bradford City’s Valley Parade problem?

BfB understands that Bradford City are attempting to negotiate with Valley Parade landlord Gordon Gibb over the terms of the current rental agreement…Gibb has no reason to agree to reduced terms, but if the rent issue remained so difficult that it threatened the existence of Bradford City Football Club, he could suddenly be left with no annual return and a piece of land that would be difficult to sell in the current climate.

Click here to read the article.

Thursday 14 April – The stark warning as Bradford City’s future is presented in the bleakest terms

There are worrying times for the club. Lawn has revealed that we cannot carry on as we are, and the answers apparently lie with people who seemingly don’t have the club’s best interests at their heart and have very different priorities.

Click here to read the article.

Midland Road Mutterings – CG170

The following column appeared in City Gent 170, March 2011

In the end it wouldn’t have just been a tame performance in losing to Chesterfield which finally triggered the departure of Bradford City manager Peter Taylor. Not only was the lack of quality in the efforts to recover from an early Spireites goal a huge worry, but so was the extra empty seats around Valley Parade that signalled many supporters were staying away. Forget the ‘official’ crowd of 10,782, the Board will have known the evening’s real attendance – and must have been left worried.

Indeed it was only immediately before and during the following game at home to Stockport that the scale of the dwindling crowd problem was truly brought home. In the pub before the game, several season ticket holders talked about how this was their first game in weeks. During the match I heard loud grumbles from people who sit nearby, whose voice was instantly recognisable but who I realised I hadn’t heard for some time. People who had paid for the right to attend every home game had stopped bothering to show up, an illustration of how bad things had become.

And therein was a new angle to the tricky dilemma which had been facing joint Chairmen Mark Lawn and Julian Rhodes. Ever since the dismal home defeat to Barnet in early January, City’s promotion hopes had nose-dived to the point we were longer bothering to look upwards, and instead were glancing over our shoulders at the clubs in the relegation zone. Given City had only awarded Taylor a one-year contract last May, with the obvious premise he needed to secure at least a play off spot to be offered another deal, he was already effectively a sitting duck increasingly unpopular with supporters. Whatever the final few months might have seen under Taylor, had he stayed on, there was little doubt he would have been departing in May.

But the Board had already looked at the finances for next season, and there has been growing talk about the fact the playing budget will have to be reduced and that the 2011/12 campaign could prove a difficult one. So although there was growing pressure on Rhodes and Lawn to dismiss Taylor early, the cost of terminating his contract and having to recruit a replacement would have probably impacted further on next season’s budgets. If Taylor is going to be leaving anyway, they might have considered, can’t we hang on for now rather than waste money booting him out?

Yet the decreasing attendances provided strong warning signs that all might not be so simple. Those planned budgets for next season – reduced or otherwise – still require certain revenues to be generated between now and then in order to be realised. One of the biggest areas of money to bring in will be season ticket sales for next season and, although the club was happy with the early-bird sales in December, they still have to persuade thousands more to purchase a season ticket when they are put back on sale this March. If many of the supporters they need to target are already staying away because of Taylor and he stayed in charge for the rest of the season, the money saved in keeping him on may actually lead to an even lower budget for next year due to lack of revenue generated.

So as much as Taylor was let go because of the increasing danger of getting sucked into a relegation battle, it also seemed something had to be done to get supporters enthused and excited about their club again. At the time of writing Taylor’s successor is yet to be confirmed; but whoever it is and whatever the additional cost, the Board will be hoping the new manager sparks a late season run of form that can restore optimism over the future and persuade disgruntled supporters to keep the faith and renew their season ticket. A short-term gamble perhaps, because the cost of getting the next managerial appointment wrong could prove even more difficult to recover from.

Quite how it got to this stage is still a matter of surprise and bewilderment. A year ago Taylor appeared to be the outstanding candidate and was largely presented with all the tools he asked for to implement a strategy which had proved so successful at other clubs. Of course there is never any guarantee a manager can repeat previous results in other environments – indeed City can now be added to the likes of Leicester, Crystal Palace and Stevenage on Taylor’s list of failures – but no one could have anticipated it would go quite this badly. Stuart McCall was ultimately forced out of managing City because many felt the speed of progress was too slow, but a year on it’s difficult to argue that the Bantams have moved in any direction other than backwards. Unlike McCall’s final season, Taylor had a reasonably large playing budget to build a squad with – indeed the Board even allowed him to go over it when the season began badly – but despite looking like he could guide the club to promotion at two occasions during the season, the disastrous run of form since early January left City in a perilous position. It doesn’t tell the full story of course, but the cold facts are that, despite having had greater resources, Taylor left the Bantams in a worse position than the one he inherited from McCall.

It doesn’t tell the full story – largely because of injuries. There’s no doubt Taylor was very unfortunate with the amount of medium and long-term injuries that disrupted his team selection, and he had to do without some key players for lengthy periods. Certainly losing Michael Flynn and Simon Ramsden for the first half of the campaign was a major blow, as both are talented players who also demonstrate clear leadership on the field. Ramsden’s understudy, Lewis Hunt, also suffered a long-term injury, leaving Taylor recruiting loan players to take the right back slot. No sooner did Ramsden return, he broke down injured again. Meanwhile a Flynn/Tommy Doherty midfield partnership – which must have been in Taylor’s mind as first choice for this season – has never happened after the injury-plagued Doherty finally had to have an operation which has kept him out.

And there are plenty of others who have struggled to achieve a run in the first team due to repeated injuries: James Hanson, Steve Williams, Shane Duff, Gareth Evans, Leon Osborne and Lee Bullock. It’s difficult to recall a season here so many players were visiting the treatment room so often, and it is worth recalling the words of Gary Walsh when interviewed on the pitch at Molineux in May 1999 about the reasons behind the Bantams successful promotion campaign: “I think we’ve been really lucky with injuries, most players have been able to play 40+ games.”

Such disruption goes a long way to explaining why City have not been able to challenge for the play offs, but they don’t necessarily justify why the Bantams have fallen so perilously close to the bottom two under Taylor’s tutelage. Undoubtedly the biggest problem has been the lack of goals City have managed all season. Last August Taylor had spoken about missing a striker with the greater level of intelligence – a Peter Thorne or a Dean Windass if you will – and there has been plenty of criticism directed at those who’ve led the forward line.

The injuries to Hanson haven’t helped, but undoubtedly he has struggled to reach the heights of last season with just four league goals up to the point Taylor left. Evans, who has often played as a wideman, suffered from an early season dip in confidence and has never been a great goalscorer. Jake Speight started well and was unfortunate to lose his place and then to be loaned out, but although he has the intelligence to make good runs and sniff out chances he lacks composure. Louis Moult, Luke Oliver, Jason Price and Scott Dobie have also toiled up front, but City’s best football came through a Hanson/Omar Daley partnership that was perhaps too hastily abandoned by Taylor following a couple of blanks.

Is the lack of goals the strikers fault? I don’t believe so, as the rest of the team has struggled to provide chances for them to miss. Certainly Taylor’s unwillingness to sign wingers or set the team up in a way where they can attack down the flanks has been the subject of much debate. Too often City have had the ball in good positions – either in possession in the final third or through set pieces – and failed to deliver quality balls to the forward line.

For much of the season there’s been a lack of balance to the midfield. At Crewe away in January, for example, City attempted to go for it but an attack-minded 4-3-3 saw the team badly outgunned and defeated. At other times there’s been an unwillingness for the midfield to get forward and support the frontmen. David Syers has proved a great find and scored a lot of goals, while putting in some accomplished displays, but elsewhere it’s been patchy. Tom Adeyemi has shown glimpses of his potential and played well on occasions, but at other times has been anonymous and hidden away from the ball. Bullock has done reasonably well but hasn’t been as effective as he was the season before; Jon Worthington arrived in January and looked a decent signing if lacking fitness. It was surprising, though somewhat typical, to see Taylor drop Worthington and not select him again soon after he arrived. Lee Hendrie produced some promising displays before leaving in December, and it was a shame Taylor couldn’t afford to keep him.

What to say of Doherty? He arrived on reportedly good wages and has had to play through the pain barrier with an injury since day one, yet has been branded a disappointment by even Lawn. I personally think he is an excellent player who has produced some superb displays at times, but often it seems the team hasn’t been set up or proved good enough to make the most of his talents. Doherty is a brilliant passer and particularly effective dropping deep, but in front of him not enough players have been willing or able to make the sort of runs he would be capable of picking out. It would be interesting to have seen how good he’d have proved if fully fit, but with Taylor departed it seems likely he will leave before next season and be destined to go down as a bad signing.

Although goals for have been a problem, the defence has hardly covered itself in glory either. Luke O’Brien has had a fantastic season and maintained high levels of consistency, while Oliver has not been as poor as he is often made out to be. Williams also had an excellent start to the campaign before injury struck, and he is not the first player this season to be rushed back into action and look rusty. His performance against Stockport was poor, despite his two goals, but he is undoubtedly a talent worth nurturing and continuing to develop. Williams can go further in the game than League Two, but he’s probably not ready to be taking that next step just yet. Duff has also suffered injuries and, each time he’s come back, has looked very shaky. However once he’s had a run of games under his belt he’s demonstrated why Taylor signed him during the summer.

Nevertheless just eight clean sheets under Taylor this season illustrates that the defence has not been good enough. To often opposition teams haven’t had to do much in order to score past Lenny Pidgley or Jon McLaughlin. One would have thought City would have been tough to beat under Taylor, yet instability at the back has contributed to the outgoing manager losing 20 of their 36 games he took charge of this season.

But his departure is down to more than just losing too often. We all knew that Taylor had a reputation for playing a more dour style of football before he joined, but we were willing to sacrifice entertainment value if his approach led to success. The early season win over Stevenage – which was greeted by boos – was an early indication of the difficulty many of us were having adapting to his style of football; and with subsequent results proving wretched the viewing became even more painful. For me it was the defensive long ball tactics, more than the poor results, which led me to no longer support Taylor and to look forward to his departure. I want City to win of course, but entertainment and style matters to me as well. We were getting neither under Taylor, which was damaging supporters’ enthusiasm and clearly turning people away.

So the Board has taken action and, whoever comes in, the revised target for the rest of this season is probably a more modest top half finish. The challenge is to lift the mood, provide us fans with more frequent moments of excitement and for us to end the season looking forward to the next one. In many ways the short-term goal is to get back to where we were at the end of last season – after Taylor had impressed sufficiently for us all to head into the summer optimistic about the next campaign.

If the new manager can achieve an improved, uplifting end to this desperately disappointing season, he might be able to benefit from stronger resources to plot next year’s expected promotion push with after all.

When Saturday Comes article on Zesh Rehman

The following article about ex-Bradford City defender Zesh Rehman appeared in When Saturday Comes Issue 288, January 2011.

Saturday 7 March 2009, Bradford City are thrashing Aldershot Town 5-0 to climb into 4^th place in League Two. Around Valley Parade there are Mexican waves, but in quieter moments a pocket of dissenting home supporters can be heard protesting their displeasure.

“We want Zesh!” is their loud, high-pitched cry. These were no regular supporters but children from local schools, predominately Asian. And their vocal disapproval, aired during Bradford’s biggest win for 11 years, was due to the benching of Pakistan international centre back, Zesh Rehman.

It was more than a coincidence that, a few weeks after Bradford appointed it’s first-ever Asian Ambassador – entrepreneur Omar Khan – to encourage more Asians to support their local club, Rehman arrived on a five month loan deal. He became the first Pakistan player to play for Bradford – a city where over 20% of the population is Asian.

More importantly for manager Stuart McCall, Rehman had a strong pedigree which eased fears he was a commercially-motivated signing. Zesh began his career in the Premier League with Fulham, before spending three years in the Championship at QPR. His Bradford arrival prompted a flurry of local and national media interest, and Rehman quickly became used to fielding journalists’ questions about why there aren’t more Asians making it in professional football. Rehman was regularly out in Bradford Asian communities promoting the virtues of supporting your local team. A flurry of school visits to matches and Zesh chants suggested a portion of Bradford’s public had a new sporting hero.

But for seasoned supporters, the main concern was Rehman’s performances. Deployed in an unfamiliar right back position, Zesh struggled to impress – though he wasn’t helped by the team’s form collapsing at the wrong time. The 5-0 Aldershot thrashing was followed by a nine-game winless run which destroyed Bradford’s promotion hopes. In the season’s final game, Rehman played his natural centre back position and impressed. He was signed on a permanent contract and named club captain.

With the playing budget slashed, McCall’s more cheaply-assembled squad struggled to mount a promotion challenge the following season (2009/10). Rehman, now playing as centre back, particularly struggled. Some decent performances were overshadowed by a number of weak displays and individual errors. Twice in a matter of weeks he was hauled off at half time; but no matter how poorly he performed, Rehman would usually keep his place the following week. This prompted malicious rumours from a section of supporters; chiefly that he had a clause in his contract stating he must always play. No evidence ever came to light, but that many fans were willing to believe it underlined how lowly they rated him.

As for his presence encouraging more Asians to support Bradford, that seemed to fail too. In April joint-Chairman Mark Lawn was quoted by the BBC saying: “I’m not going to lie to you. It’s been very slow and we haven’t had any intake (of British Asian fans) at all”. Rehman continued to devote hours working in the community. He even established the Zesh Rehman Foundation, aimed at providing Asian children with more opportunities to make it into sport.

Back on the pitch McCall resigned as manager in February, with promotion hopes over. Peter Taylor took charge and, for the rest of the season, continued to select Rehman despite his inconsistency. At Easter another Rehman error gifted Macclesfield a goal, which lead to a section of supporters booing his every touch. Taylor kept faith and, when a week later Rehman played well and scored, he raced over to embrace the gaffer in thanks. He ended the season in excellent form.

That was as good as it got. This season, summer signings kept Rehman out of the starting eleven – and he’s been limited to occasional opportunities at right back when injuries have struck. Ironically Rehman was playing better than ever and, when called into the team, results improved; but Taylor kept signing inexperienced defenders on loan to play ahead of him. Clearly upset at been overlooked, Rehman used his media profile to publically declare his unhappiness. He even told David Cameron, after the Prime Minister invited him to a Downing Street reception to celebrate “immense contributions” of Asians to Britain.

Taylor’s patience with Rehman’s outbursts was wearing thin, and another interview on local radio in December – where Zesh claimed his team mates couldn’t understand why he wasn’t playing – proved the final straw. Taylor stuck him on the transfer list – two weeks later he signed for Thailand Premier League champions, Muangthong United.

Where this leaves Rehman’s legacy, not least his Foundation, is unclear. Undoubtedly he has made some impact in the communities of Bradford, but extra numbers attending on a Saturday have been minimal to nil. Clearly attracting more Asian supporters isn’t a quick-fix and could take years to bear fruit, but Rehman’s time at the club made it clear that the presence of an Asian player in the team – whether merited or gimmicky – isn’t enough on it’s own to win people over. Particularly if that target audience is left unhappy about a 5-0 win.

Interviewing Bradford City joint-Chairman Mark Lawn

On Tuesday 25 January, myself and BfB colleague Michael Wood met and interviewed Bradford City joint-Chairman Mark Lawn. It was a hugely enjoyable experience, and the 90-minute interview provided a lot of interesting content. We have since published the interview on BfB in two parts, and the subsequent positive reaction to it has been hugely rewarding.

Here are links to the two parts of the interview:

Talking to Mark Lawn: part one

Talking to Mark Lawn: part two

When Saturday Comes articles

In December I wrote an article about Bradford City’s season ticket initiative which appeared on www.wsc.co.uk. A link to the piece can be found here, and below is an extract:

At a time when even lower-league football is becoming an expensive luxury for many, such efforts in making professional football affordable deserve to be loudly applauded. But Bradford’s continuing failings on the field make this far from the happy story it should be – and cast doubts over how long this economical season ticket philosophy can be upheld for.

In addition, I have produced an article about ex-Bradford City defender Zesh Rehman which appears in the latest edition of the When Saturday Comes magazine (issue 288). I will include this article on here at a later date, but for now click here for more information and to buy a copy.

When Saturday Comes piece – Screen Test

The following article appeared in When Saturday Comes Issue 283, July 2010. An online version can be viewed from here.

Football videos re-visited – Bradford City Goals of the season 1997/98

Aside from supporters of perennially-successful clubs, usually only that rare season of notable achievement or a glorious derby victory are really worth shelling out on an over-priced and under-produced video memento. But like player-of-the-year award dinners, many clubs bother to arrange end-of-season reviews of even the most disastrous campaigns. And many of us foolishly buy them to re-live defeats we questioned our sanity in witnessing there and then.

Yet for a number of years Bradford City’s end-of-season reviews have proved worthwhile purchases for how often you re-watch them. Given the Bantams’ tradition for lower league underachievement, it’s rarely for the quality of football; instead for the excitement – and unintentional comedy genius – of club commentator Keith Coates.

Coates is a world away from modern-day football commentators, ready to antagonise your TV-viewing with tedious stats and over-rehearsed witticisms. He is an elderly man who’ll often mix up his words, forget players’ names and sometimes even the score; but through his words and reactions the videos help you re-live the emotions you experienced at the time. Coates simply acts like a football supporter barely conscious he’s holding a microphone. When City score, he excitedly roars “YEEESSSSS!” like the rest of us. When City concede, he becomes too upset to speak. Insightful comments won’t be found here, just genuine passion.

The 1997/98 review video was classic Coates. He commentates on every home and away game – goodness knows what those around him at Huddersfield thought as he wildly cheered City defeating their local rivals to top Division One in September. The Bantams made an excellent start to the campaign and are in early play off contention, so during the first half of the video Coates’ screams of delight are regular occurrences.

And with the pain of the season then falling apart long-since forgiven, watching back his reactions to the increasing number of goals against now seems utterly hilarious. In February Bradford concede late goals to Swindon and Wolves, and Coates’ voice is full of panic. “Oh no!” he winces as Steve Bull nets a 93^rd minute Wolves winner. “What a disaster. Deary me [long, long pause] What a disaster.” When Sheffield United score controversially days later he bitterly utters: “Thanks very much referee.” You’d never hear such straight-talking from Clive Tyldesley.

And even though Bradford plummet to mid-table, the video remains watchable to the end because of Coates. As the Brazilian Edinho pushes Man City closer to relegation with a memorable Bantams winner in March, you instinctively find yourself cheering as enthusiastically as Coates all over again. His outrage during a 5-0 collapse at Crewe (38 minutes in and 4-0 down – “I think we can all go home.”) makes you feel better for still harbouring bitterness at having also endured it.

Football supporting is all about living the moments, and watching repeats on video can never recapture those instantaneous bursts of exhilaration. But that’s the beauty of Coates; his excitable commentaries encourage you to look back on crap seasons and recall that at least it seemed worth it at the time.

Bradford City Midland Road Mutterings – CG167

The following column appeared in CG167, October 2010

As Bradford City’s early season form went from bad to worse during September, it was not surprising to see everyone and everything blamed for the club’s continuing slump. Players and management were the obvious targets for frustration; there was even plenty of debate over the nature of support offered by fans. Also getting more than a few mentions and the subject of numerous arguments were the club’s joint owners – Julian Rhodes and Mark Lawn.

Not for the first (or last) time, feelings of disappointment were expressed over why City can’t attract outside investment which could make such a difference to a club which can compete at this level, but which doesn’t have the level of resources befitting its stature as the biggest in the division. Why is no one willing to take over and help the club to realise its potential? – has been the cry. At the same time criticisms over the job Rhodes and Lawn have done have raged, with Rhodes’ involvement in the club prior to administration in 2002, and his record thereafter, coming under scrutiny. Since investing in 2007, Lawn’s enthusiasm and ideas have so far been unable to lift the Bantams upwards. And after a particularly dispiriting home defeat to Morecambe in early October, which left City languishing 91^st out of 92 clubs, it became difficult to avoid fearing things might have got even worse.

Yet the mantra of being careful what you wish for should apply when envious eyes become fixated upon other clubs which have attracted wealthy investors, in recent times. Over recent weeks the problems with Liverpool’s ownership took a series of remarkable twists that left English football’s most successful club facing the prospect of relegation and administration. As the drama switched from Anfield to the High Court, a happy ending of sorts eventually arrived and unpopular owners Tom Hicks and George Gillett lost control of the club and lost millions of pounds. Many lessons to take on board for everyone involved.

And problems over club ownership don’t end on Merseyside. There’s Manchester United, Newcastle and Portsmouth, who would surely wish to turn back the clock. QPR and Leeds, who both have owners’ raising ticket prices to ridiculous levels and not caring about their less well-off supporters. Hull City, Notts County and Sheffield Wednesday, where previous owners left others to clear up the over-spending mess they’d left behind. Wycombe, Stockport and Rotherham, who have endured significant stadium issues. Chester City, who went bust and started out all over again.

And that’s just the tip of the iceberg.

The difficulties of modern football club ownership is that the intentions of investors and expectations of supporters are so widely different – and the latter group often seem to struggle to understand the former’s motives. Unless these investors are already supporters of the club, why would they want to take control? These are rich people who have got to where they are in life through making huge sums of money, but the perception that they are taking over a football club to spend their fortune on buying footballers as some form of ‘hobby’ remains widespread and accepted. There are exceptions, such as the mega-rich Man City owners, but even if a new owner parts with a lot of cash for the manager to spend on new players when they first arrive, the intention of most owners is to ultimately become even richer.

In the Premier League the rewards for investing are obvious – TV money from around the world will raise £1.4bn alone over the next three years, and that’s before we consider sponsorship, gate revenue and merchandise. Even the poorer relations of the Championship are now earning greater revenue, with the Premier League’s solidarity payment scheme – taking effect this season – meaning each member of England’s second tier receives £2.2m per season. The current Football League TV deal, collectively worth £264m, is heavily weighed in favour of Championship clubs. Meanwhile clubs relegated to it from the Premier League receive a whopping £48m worth of parachute payments over four years.

So it seems most clubs in England’s top two divisions make for an attractive investment opportunity. Even clubs in Leagues One and Two carry the potential for investors to one day benefit from Championship revenue, by spending money to get promoted before recuperating it and making a profit in the long-term.

If this sounds cynical, it’s worth pausing to consider why anyone would want to invest their money in anything. The intention in 99% of cases is to receive a greater return for their money in the long run, earning a level of reward that more conventional ways of placing money – such as in a bank savings account – couldn’t achieve, in return for the level of risk the money is exposed to. Gillett and Hicks invested their money in Liverpool to become richer; but as they lapped up the media acclaim and stood on the Anfield pitch with red scarves back in 2007, proclaiming their loyalty to an institution they had previously had no involvement with or affection towards, it’s arguably easy to understand why supporters were fooled into believing it was something different. The fact the pair have reportedly been left £140m out of pocket from it all going wrong shows the level of risk that was involved; but had Rafa Benitez spent his budget a little wiser the rewards could have been immense.

It is the same with most of football’s modern investors. Whereas the traditional model for football club ownership was a local businessman-made-good trying to give something back to their community – signing players from his own pocket but always watching the pennies – increasingly these people have sold up for a handsome profit and the club has been put into the hands of people who don’t necessarily judge success by how many times the open top bus is deployed to parade the players around town. More situations like Liverpool and maybe the penny will drop. But for now we observe their supporters firstly holding up banners proclaiming ‘Yanks go home’ and then two minutes later are welcoming another American owner, who will remain popular so long as the manager has money to spend during the transfer window.

Which takes us back to Bradford City – and the question of why the club can’t attract investors of this nature? On the face of it the set up at City is ideal for a would-be investor: a sizeable fan base, a large stadium which won’t require redevelopment work anytime soon and only two divisions below the relative high financial rewards of the Championship. However a close inspection quickly shows why it’s a less attractive option compared to others.

The Valley Parade ownership issue is a huge millstone around the club’s neck. Gordon Gibb – and now there’s an investor who it appears is getting richer from the Bantams – is a happy landlord seemingly unwilling to change the set-up which sees City pay some £600k rent per year for the right to use their home of over 100 years. Gibb paid £5 million to buy Valley Parade in 2003 and, since the rent payments to his pension fund kicked in, is well on his way to recuperating that and making a handsome profit as the years go by – especially given the saleable value of the land. When you throw in a reported £600k annual running costs for the stadium, and then inspect the loans Lawn at least has put into the club to keep it operating, which apparently one day must be paid back, it’s obvious why any investor with no affinity for City but a desire to get richer would run a mile from BD8.

The reality is that the risk is too high to be considered an attractive investment. Any new owner would have to pay these huge costs before they’ve even got to looking at the transfer budgets. The revenues coming back in are limited, particularly bearing in mind City’s catering and club shop streams are leased out to third parties. They could put ticket prices up of course, but to get a team out onto the pitch that would be good enough to get City promoted twice would result in sizeable losses initially. And even then the higher levels of TV and solitary payment money available from getting to the Championship would struggle to be enough for any investor to earn a sufficiently high return on their money. Finally there’s the huge level of risk involved – football history is littered with clubs who spent big on players failing to achieve their objectives. A high level of risk, a lot of up front investment, a meagre return; to quote Duncan Bannatyne: “I’m out”.

Unless there are any rich Bradford City supporters out there willing to lose some of their fortune in return for the glory of their team achieving success, it’s unlikely there’ll be any investors rocking up to Valley Parade anytime soon. Ken Morrison is often mentioned at times like these (and has been again) with the usual criticisms of why doesn’t the self-made millionaire give something back to the local area. But if he has no affection for football, why should we expect him to do so? The fact is there are far more important causes in the Bradford area which deserve financial support than a football club which has at least become self-sufficient again in recent times.

All of which leaves us with Rhodes and Lawn, and all of which should leave us thankful for the pair. Rhodes is continually criticised during difficult times like this September, as his reign in charge has almost entirely seen failure on the field. Some friends even argue to me that Gibb should have been allowed to run the football club instead of Rhodes when the pair fell out in 2003, despite the obvious lack of affection Gibb is proven to hold for the club. Yet the sacrifices the Rhodes family have made – and continue to undertake – for the club should not be dismissed so readily. Without the Rhodeses, there would be no football club to fret about – at least not a Football League club. It should never be forgotten they were the only people willing or able to save the club in 2004 – and that commitment for Julian included remortgaging his own house. It’s true the Rhodeses did collect large dividend payments along with Geoffrey Richmond during the boom days, but they’ve had to reinvest it back and then some. No one can deny that joining the Bradford City board back in 1998 has negatively impacted on their financial wellbeing.

Lawn too has put significant amounts of money into the club and has helped it to operate on a much sounder footing. When Jake Speight was signed for £25k this summer no one really battered any eyelid, yet for many years City were unable to pay a transfer fee for anyone. During the season before Lawn invested (2006-07) a significant part of City’s team had to be made up of loan players. Today City do not have the level of resources opposition managers often claim they do, but we are among the most financially-equipped teams in the division and for that we have Lawn to thank.

We are fortunate that we have two owners who care deeply about the club, and who are not here to get richer. The lure of outside investment might still seem appealing, and if someone was to come in and throw a lot of money at the club to get it back up the leagues we would probably all be thankful even if we knew their motives were to achieve a personal profit. But to know that we have owners who genuinely understand the ethos of the club and care deeply – well, even Liverpool supporters might feel envious of us.

Of course it’s not perfect. For a while it seemed there was big ambition and new ideas, but it’s all gone a bit quiet from the boardroom these days. A year ago Lawn loosely talked about getting City into the Championship in five years, but if there is a blueprint for how this might be achieved we fans are yet to be privy to it. In a sense too much emphasis is placed on whoever is the manager, with the rise and fall of the club’s fortunes almost entirely attributed to how good a job they are doing. Peter Taylor made certain investment demands when agreeing a one year contract last April, most notably training facilities, but this wasn’t delivered by the Board. This was perhaps as close to a public-stated strategy as we’ve seen – Taylor’s advice on what the club needed to do in order to become successful again. But the fact only a one-year contract was offered to Taylor suggests it was not a plan the Chairmen believed in enough.

The upshot is that Taylor came very close to losing his job at the start of October and whatever strategy was in place would have been torn up. Back-to-back wins over Barnet and Cheltenham have eased that pressure for the moment, but it seems the reality is that Taylor must deliver promotion this season or he’ll be out of the job. And then the responsibility or reviving the club will belong to someone else, who will have their own ideas that need implementing from scratch. The fact that some will argue every manager since Paul Jewell has been a failure would suggest this strategy of placing all the onus on who is in charge of the first team isn’t working.

So in difficult times Rhodes and Lawn face criticism and some fans openly wishing someone else would take over instead. But the financial economics and the motivations of your average modern-day investor don’t make Bradford City an attractive proposition, and so we must retain our faith that the pair – supporters at heart – can find the answers to achieve the sort of on-the-field success that wouldn’t look that amazing on a balance sheet, but would mean everything to all of us.

More torment for Bradford City

As the pain carries on this season, here’s a couple of articles I’ve written about Bradford City’s latest slump which have both had good feedback from City fans and non-City fans alike.

TwoHundredPercent.net – 10 years of torment for Bradford City

Article I wrote for the football fans site TwoHundredPercent, which earlier this year jointly won best website in When Saturday Comes.

As I said, the prize for longest-suffering fans should be handed to us. So I’d like accept the award on behalf of all City fans, and to thank Richmond and Gibb for making this possible. To Robert Wolleaston for making us believe we couldn’t possibly see a worse player, and then to Bobby Petta for proving that theory wrong. I’d also like to thank every one of you whose team beat us over the last decade. I know that’s a very long list, but thanks guys – we genuinely couldn’t feel this miserable without you. But to close my acceptance speech I’d like to give this message to the Football Gods. Come on now, we’ve suffered enough. Surely it’s someone else’s turn to feel miserable and our time to experience some joy. We don’t expect to return to the previous heights, an Alan Partridge-style ‘Bouncing Back’ will do just fine. Please.

Click here to read the article.

BoyfromBrazil.co.uk – The wrong man

A piece on the problems afflicting Peter Taylor and the club.

Peter Taylor is the wrong person to manage Bradford City – because we no longer seem to want to care about the bigger problems. We’re miserable being in this league, and all that matters is getting out of it. Sod your training ground Taylor, just tell your players to run around the dog poo. Sod developing young players like Gareth Evans and James Hanson. Sod playing a style of football we might enjoy. And in the end, sod off. It’s just about getting out of this league, that’s the only problem we want to believe exists.

Click here to read the article.