Quite deliberate. After all the moaning and whining Leam didn’t want the goals scored any earlier than the 90th minute.Extended-Phenotype wrote:Why are we leaving it until the 80th oxf*rd minute to make changes?
Quite deliberate. After all the moaning and whining Leam didn’t want the goals scored any earlier than the 90th minute.Extended-Phenotype wrote:Why are we leaving it until the 80th oxf*rd minute to make changes?
You never learn, do you.Sutekh wrote:Bradford jinx all well and good I see.
Game & season over.
It worked though, didn’t itSnowflake Royal wrote:You never learn, do you.Sutekh wrote:Bradford jinx all well and good I see.
Game & season over.
In making you look clueless and negative.Sutekh wrote:Worked though, didn’t itSnowflake Royal wrote:You never learn, do you.Sutekh wrote:Bradford jinx all well and good I see.
Game & season over.
Who cares, it still workedSnowflake Royal wrote:In making you look clueless and negative.Sutekh wrote:Worked though, didn’t itSnowflake Royal wrote: You never learn, do you.
Their fans are blaming their manager for substitutional tinkering. Also had a pop at JP saying he’s made a meal of what he had to do and should have saved their goal.Orion1871 wrote:How shit must Bradford be? We won without Jack (somehow).
That's one of Brogue's many accounts. So likely to be reliable.morganb wrote:Just woke up to the following on Twitter -
https://x.com/i/status/2027647672912409057Very bad news for the Play off race , we have lost Marriott for the season due to injury and sounds like Patton has been called back from his loan due to this .
Think they are usually reliable...
Anyone else heard anything from other sources?
They're right.Sutekh wrote:Their fans are blaming their manager for substitutional tinkering. Also had a pop at JP saying he’s made a meal of what he had to do and should have saved their goal.Orion1871 wrote:How shit must Bradford be? We won without Jack (somehow).
Agree with most of this tbfRoyalwaster wrote:I think we narrowly deserved to win that - Bradford really didn't do much in the 2nd half and scored from a shot that really did go through JP's hands although it was well struck. It was nice to see us for once grab some goals at the death - both were very well taken goals. Ward was really good again at the back - what a signing! We played some good stuff today, but often the final ball let us down. But if we'd lost that it would have been harsh.
Yeah agree 100% - it was very tough on Kelvin ... low on confidence and playing in a position that just doesn't favour him. Also, agree on Savage ... and that was a very nice strike by Lane, normally the kind of shot that Marriott would do.John Madejski's Wallet wrote:Agree with most of this tbfRoyalwaster wrote:I think we narrowly deserved to win that - Bradford really didn't do much in the 2nd half and scored from a shot that really did go through JP's hands although it was well struck. It was nice to see us for once grab some goals at the death - both were very well taken goals. Ward was really good again at the back - what a signing! We played some good stuff today, but often the final ball let us down. But if we'd lost that it would have been harsh.
The one take away from today (that every fan knows and every manager doesn't seem to), is that Kelvin is utterly hopeless as a lone target man. As soon as he was moved more to the wing when we started attacking, he was a changed. Much better with the ball at his feet.
My God wasn't Savage just running around like a headless chicken for most of that game. Then like everyone else, he became a different player when we suddenly started attacking as a team
* interestingly our league record without Marriott since he signed is 14 points from 6 gamesOrion1871 wrote:How shit must Bradford be? We won without Jack (somehow).
Users browsing this forum: 6ft Kerplunk, Armadillo Roadkill, Bing [Bot], Dirk Gently, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Majestic-12 [Bot], Royal Ginger, Royals and Racers, stealthpapes and 90 guests