Football matches can often change dramatically in a single moment. 

At the Checkatrade.com Stadium (yes, really) on Saturday, this turning point was not a piece of attacking brilliance or a blunder in defence, but the half-time decision-making of Neal Ardley and his management team.

After an insipid first-half that saw the Dons trailing 1-0 to an unremarkable Crawley side, we looked to be no closer to picking up our first points of the season.

But the players returned in the second half with a renewed vigour, having seemingly discovered the hunger for victory that was so clearly lacking in the first game-and-a-half of our league campaign.

This change could be attributed to a shift in formation, or to the introduction of Dannie Bulman from the bench, or even the (presumably ferocious) team-talk delivered by Ardley.

But none of these factors ought really to account for the total transformation witnessed by the 1297 Dons fans in attendance.

For all the discussion in recent weeks of the significance of tactics, particularly with regards to the much-maligned 3-4-3 formation, this game perhaps provided yet another example of how mentality and psychological factors can be every bit as significant as on-field factors in this sport.

We see it in other areas too: the appointment of a new manager invariably brings an improved run of results, and our own logic-defying struggles against teams from the bottom half of the table can surely only be put down to a lack of self-belief in such situations.

I have no intention of comparing the tactical merit of various formations, but it's undeniable that 3-4-3 brought us some strong results in pre-season - and let's not forget that these are professional footballers.

They ought really to be able to play in any system, with enough practice.

Far more significant than choice of formation is whether or not the players believe in it: and the second half on Saturday seemed to suggest that they favour the home comforts of a traditional 4-4-2, and that mental boost is more important to our performances than any tactical advantage 3-4-3 might grant us.

I don't think it would be fair to criticise Ardley for this experiment - it worked well in pre-season, when the mental pressures on the players were considerably less.

His comments after the game would suggest that it is to be put on the back burner, for the moment at least.

He may well have been right to identify it as an effective formation for this level - but his job is as much about keeping his players happy as it is about tactical manoeuvrings.

Saturday's half-time metamorphosis was not down to any particular strengths of 4-4-2, but the psychological effect on the players that arises from "trying something different".

He may have to swallow his pride and take the hit on this one, even if it isn't his fault; he will know better than anyone that giving the players what they want will ultimately bring us more success than any amount of tactical improvement ever could.