Post by GasMacc1 on Sept 30, 2018 7:43:02 GMT
Walking away talked with some Bantams who thought we could have won 5-0 'if we had a striker'. Also they thought both teams likely to remain bottom half
Bradford manager on radio said his very young team did well, scrappy but entertaining game, had worked on getting down the flanks which happened 2nd half, thought both teams could have won it, said we changed shape and played 6-3-1, which made it hard for them to get down flanks 1st half
I thought we played midfield diamond with Upson at the back, sincs up front, and The Clarkes left and right
Both teams could have won it. A draw was fair, but we were the better side I thought. Both goalies did well
You were there, AMPG? Quite a trek for you?!
Interesting Bantams comment you reported about "striker". From what I saw, our closest attempts at goal in the first half came from Kelly (from a wide position, drilled ball inches past the far post) and Sinclair (time to sweep in a side-footer after a pull-back, skewed it wide). In the second half, the best chance fell to Sercombe (free in the box, shot across the keeper, but not past him). We could have won the game comfortably without a shot from a striker!
Darrell Clarke praised the work of Reilly and Nichols in closing down the Bradford defenders. Just before he was subbed in the 90th minute, Nichols was chasing back deep to thwart a Bradford attack wide on the right.
My point is: I don't care whether our goals come from strikers, midfield or defenders! But I think it's a good sign when all of our players (including our strikers) are busting a gut to help the team.
P.S. Alex Jakubiak had a presentable chance with seconds remaining, also saved.
P.P.S. Stuart Sinclair gave another dynamic performance, but I wish he would keep his arms down when preparing to block a cross...I thought we were bound to concede a pen for handball if the Bradford left-sided player had pinged it onto Stuart's outstretched arms!