If Nige is at the next reserve game, I'll ask him who he was going sub. If it wasn't Brady, you owe me a house.
To be fair Erik we were a lot more threatening today with Koren and Brady consistently producing good crosses. If anyone was going to score, it was us. We still need to work on stuff and this result is nothing for us to get carried away with but we seemed to have a bit of threat back up front again. Let's see if we can back this result up at Peterborough!
Pretty much every goal has an element of luck in it, even the best teams in the Premier League often win by a one goal margin, and you can usually say there is a bit of luck involved in that goal, "what if that didn't deflect", "what if he didn't stumble", "what if etc...". What matters is the win. Obviously a bit of attention has been brought to our goal scoring record, which is still a bit of a concern, but if we keep creating chances like we did today, goals will always come.
I think Brady was trying to shoot, but even if he wasn't, I'm certain that he deliberately does those shot-crosses to the far post which could go in with a slight touch or if it gets through etc. The one Fryatt just missed in the first half was very similar. It reminds me a little bit of Morten Gamst Pedersen at Blackburn, he likes to cross it in that same way.
My point was that the cutting edge in the final third was missing once again, and that we shouldn't let a jammy goal like that - albeit a winning one - hide that fact. And I don't know what you mean about every goal having an element of luck to it. That's a pretty stupid argument. When was the last time we looked like scoring a team goal, or even one that didn't come as the result of favourable luck or hoofing the ball?
