Joint Chairman Has Cheek To Blame Jacko

By news
- Tweet
- Pin It
Updated: May 14, 2012

Sometimes our joint-chairmen really need a lesson in when to keep their mouths shut, as the latest criticism of Peter Jackson from Julian Rhodes really smacks of a chairman that is not in-touch with reality, or at least is in severe denial.

Joint-chairman Julian Rhodes has pointed the finger at Peter Jackson signing poor players as the reason for Bradford City under achieving yet again last season. But maybe he should be looking much closer to home.

His join chairman, Mark Lawn? Had it not been for Lawn, Jacko would not have been forced to share a budget with Archie Christie. And had Jacko alone been responsible for who joined Bradford City Football Club, Rhodes might have found himself in a position to be able to judge Peter Jackson fairly.

The failures of last season are down purely to the air headed decisions by those at the top, and it is no coincidence that once a manager was allowed to manage on his own without anyone else running off buying players, the ship started to steady and City’s fortunes started to change for the better.

But it is pointing the finger at Peter Jackson that again makes me cringe and ask myself what sort of idiots are running Bradford City Football Club. If I were Peter Jackson reading what Julian Rhodes said in the Telegraph & Argus I would be furious.

So Mark Lawn, for whatever reason decided it was a good idea to bring Archie Christie to the club and give the man far too much power, this power was so much so, that it allowed Christie to be able to bring players to the club most of which Phil Parkinson has got rid of. You cannot blame Peter Jackson for this Mr Rhodes, this is purely the fault of your joint chairman for allowing Christie to act like a kid in a sweet shop and sign players that were not fit for league 2.

So it is unsurprising we were in a situation where many of the players in our stupidly large squad, were nothing more than semi-pro footballers living it up in the Football League, our football club was heading in the same direction. But when the club is being run like a semi-pro club (if that) it is a natural progression.

This changed when a manager had the authority to get rid of everybody that Archie Christie brought to the club. And that is exactly what Phil Parkinson has done. He set about removing those players Archie Christie brought to the club, and unsurprisingly our fortunes improved.

It is unfair, no, it is bang out of order for Julian Rhodes to point the finger at Peter Jackson. Maybe he should be pointing the finger at Mark Lawn who must have been pissed when he thought giving Archie Christie a budget for players was a good idea. And I cannot help thinking that John Still had pulled a master stroke in finding someone stupid enough to take away such a liability from him.

So crazy was the situation that an independent scout who worked with a club that only a few seasons ago were a non-league club themselves was by all intents an purposes (and this was also said by Julian Rhodes) Director of Football at Bradford City.

In the end, even Lawn seemed to come to his senses. So Julian Rhodes comments in the Telegraph & Argus were hard to understand and again have me questioning his grasp of reality.

Had roles been reversed and Phil Parkinson had to manage the club during the period Peter Jackson was supposedly managing Bradford City and it been Jackson that was allowed to get on with the job Phil Parkinson has since he joined City. It would have been Parky being criticised by Julian Rhodes, and him singing the praises of Jacko for lifting the club away from relegation to a not very respectable 18^th position.

Again I have to ask myself, is this football club really in safe hands the “joint chairmen”.

Join the Forum discussion on this post