chunkymonkey78":ofsr83rl said:jimbo_the_green":ofsr83rl said:At the time of the change we were under a lot of pressure I thought. We were conceding possession and territory as we had for the first half hour of the game. Bradley coming on was to bolster the back line.
Our deep positioning invited them on to us not the substitution. It's uncomfortable to watch but they weren't carving out any real chances and the goal came from distance as was ours.
It's disappointing to have conceded the equaliser but I'll take the positives out of today. It seems the bandwagon against adams has the momentum so it will take a miracle for people to change their view but today was a successful day at the office in my opinion
I'm in the give DA time camp, but I'm not sure the decision to put Bradley into the back three was what cost us the game, more so that we played so deep with it and didn't have a sticking point up front until 5 mins from the end.
I agree. They still only got lucky with a shot from distance (again as did we). Over the whole game they had a lot of the ball but we threatened the goal more.
There were elements of the performance that were frustrating but overall today was a step in the right direction. It means nothing if we can't kick on and improve but for today I went home happy.
Nobody should underestimate the fragility of mind the squad will have and the boost they should get from today. It's no wonder they were nervous and sat too deep