I don't see anything wrong with shutting shop with say 10 minutes to go, but not with 30.
That's not being naive, but realistic. All we did was invite pressure and provide Canada with possession and opportunity, that if not for the tightest of off side calls and our keeper having a blinder would have cost us.
Also, another goal would have helped our GD that much more and increased the chances of us going through to the next round.
We were 2nd best... some of this falls on the players, but most falls on the coach. Shows a lack of faith in his players IMO.
Absolutely not, you're viewing it with the wrong lens. It was tactical and low risk trusting in our defensive players and quick transitions to produce a high reward. Canada were chasing the game and the extra defender helped negate their attack, when they lost possession we were going to utilise it on a quick transition to counter attack.
Where it could have gone wrong is if Canada had levelled early because it could have knocked the confidence out of our players to then possibly have conceded another but even so this meant Canada were always chasing the game while we setup for counter-attacks.
We had many opportunities on the counter and came really close to extending our lead. The style implemented on the day doesn't reflect the full abilities of our players but the result show that our players are now resilient to pressure and it was hard earned. We needed to see the mental toughness in our players and they showed it big time when the results didn't show it earlier games, we all know they have the talent and skills to succeed.