The truth

I watched all of this game. I agree that for the first half Concorde were the better team. SSA bunkered in and played with one forward. Concorde pings it around the outside of the defensive shell quite well. Concorde had better chances. SSA had two. Concorde scored an ugly goal on a cross that floated in the wind. Even Greg said it was ugly and undeserved. Concorde had had better shots including one that hit the bar that left the keeper no chance so SSA were unlucky that the score came in the weakest attempt.

The second half was a different story. SSA took the game to Concorde. SSA pressured all over the field. SSA changed formations first to 4-4-2 and then to 3-4-3. SSA created several opportunities. Concorde defense made several mistakes. SSA goal came off a nice build from the left on a shot that wrong footed the keeper. On the other end, Concorde could not finish its chances against the fewer defenders and their former keeper shut them out the second half.

After the water break, the game really opened up with end to end action as SSA went for broke. The ball moved very quickly through midfield both ways. Either team could have won this game. Anyone who says different is delusional.

My observation was that Concorde were more polished. They played fast when it suited them then slow when it suited them. They fouled when beaten rather than give up opportunity. Concorde probably more skilled top to bottom but as the pressure increased, my perspective is Concorde played worse. Greg increasingly yelled at his own players. I heard one player's parents tell his player not to listen to the coach.

There was not a huge gap between these teams when SSA finally decided to go for it.