chip fireball wrote:
errrr, you initially started the thread with this :
we were in total control whilst Barker was on the pitch, (only 20 minutes I know) with the defence having very little to do. After Barker got injured we had to sustain long spells of pressure with no way of being able to get the ball up front and holding it up.
The defence played extremely well, especially Lee Barrett and Collins, who made a difference to everyone, and the second half was the classic smash and grab, it had nothing to do with Barker going off, we looked as though we were going to win comfortably anyway.
you suggest that " we were going to win comfortably anyway" had barker stayed on the pitch on tuesday ( not sure how you came to this conclusion ) but somehow managed to stumble across the finishing line without him as we had nobody up front to aim our long balls at.
perhaps you would like to read the post again. i would hate to be putting words in your mouth.

Howay Mr Chip, you're at it again, I said we
looked as though we were going to win comfortably anyway, not
we were going to win. Subtle difference Mr Chip
I could come to that conclusion cos I was there and was watching it.
But I have read it again, not that I needed to, but out of politeness I did cos you asked me to, and I'm sorry Mr Chip I still can't see were I said we'll be lost without Barker, or that we should get Mcunnie porter and Monky back on the bench where they belong. Or that we stumbled accross the finishing line on Tuesday.

but I guess it must be in there somewhere .
Maybe you've got that thing were you only read into things what you want to read into them, cos you certainly only see what you want to see
