Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Options

Why can we not beat 10 men?

Ok sorry to start another negative thread but didnt see any similar....

firstly a happy new year to all in here hope you all had a good one and lets hope we can get promoted this year.

My main frustration over xmas period is the above, we play brighton for 85 minutes with 10 men and lose a 1-0nil lead?? then we play colchester for 30 mins + and they take the lead and we manage a draw again?? can anyone shed some light i unfortunately didnt go to either did we deserve to win any? if not thats a big problem when you cant beat 10 men whoever it is against

Kind regards
John

Comments

  • Options
    Both Bournemouth and Leyton Orient lost against us when we were down to ten men.

    Standards of fitness are greater these days and perhaps that and the willingness to work harder when you're down to ten men makes it more difficult to win.
  • Options
    I wasnt at any of the games aswel, but have to agree with you that it is kind of annoying that we can't use that 1 man advange! However really looking at it, 2 away draws are O.K.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: jazzyjazzyjazzy[/cite]I wasnt at any of the games aswel, but have to agree with you that it is kind of annoying that we can't use that 1 man advange! However really looking at it, 2 away draws are O.K.

    i completely agree, on paper good draws but could be chances missed eg. 4 points dropped surely if you are a top side in this league you should beat any team with 10 men?

    As said above better fitness etc and we have done well when down to 10 but i still expect us to beat any team in our league with 10
  • Options
    Given the quality of the players in this division, I wonder whether having an extra man is as much of an advantage as it is in the Premiership / Championship. It's not like we have the players to exploit the space or move the ball around until it opens up. Curbishley always used to say that there were some sides who, given the way they played, could never really take advantage of a sending off. I think we are now one of them.
  • Options
    Blimey John woke up with a bad hangover??
  • Options
    because as long as teams have two banks of 4 they will be abe to defend against us. we never play the ball around and lure teams out of position. we lump it, they clear it. could play with 9 men against us.

    like chunes says above the quality isnt great but at the same time there is no ambition to play football the right way.
  • Options
    The thing we didn't do well yesterday was make the pitch big. That for me is the best way to exploit a team going down to 10 men. Get your wingers wide and look to spread play. We didn't do that. Colchester seemed to have Reid sussed when he came on and pretty much bullied him from the start and Martin once he was moved to right midfield seemed very reluctant to get wide and tended to tuck inside more.
    As others have said I don't think going down to 10 is quite the advantage it once was but doing the right things to try and get the best out of it should be a priority.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Rudders22[/cite]Blimey John woke up with a bad hangover??

    not today mate lol, yesterday was shocking :P

    i can join the rest of u in the negative books once in a blue moon
  • Options
    I believe we need to actually think about how a sending off affects teams.

    A side being reduced to 10 men doesn't usually affect their defensive capabilities, as normally they still play 4 at the back and 4 in midfield - so just as hard to break down defensively as an 11-a-side team.

    I think we overlook that fact, as many on here seem to think that we should just roll over 10 men.


    Often the 10 man side gets sparked up by a sense of injustice over a sending off, and plays with great determination and spirit - and play in your face, denying you space and time on the ball, especially in their own half.

    But what is hard for them is getting forward in numbers without leaving holes at the back, and having to play a single striker often without adequate support. So they'll rely on shots from distance or look to force set piece situations, which are generally the only ways they can create goal scoring opportunities.


    However, it's physically draining covering the pitch with just 10 men for a long period, and that final 10 or 15 minutes can be where those teams start to flag badly.

    This is the time when they are vulnerable and 11-a-side teams often create good chances.
    But you have to take these chances.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Oggy Red[/cite]I believe we need to actually think about how a sending off affects teams.

    A side being reduced to 10 men doesn't usually affect their defensive capabilities, asnormally they still play 4 at the back and 4 in midfield- so just as hard to break down defensively as an 11-a-side team.

    I think we overlook that fact, as many on here seem to think that we should just roll over 10 men.


    Often the 10 man side gets sparked up by a sense of injustice over a sending off, and plays with great determination and spirit - and play in your face, denying you space and time on the ball, especially in their own half.

    But what is hard for them is getting forward in numbers without leaving holes at the back, and having to play a single striker often without adequate support. So they'll rely on shots from distance or look to force set piece situations, which are generally the only ways they can create goal scoring opportunities.


    However, it's physically draining covering the pitch with just 10 men for a long period, and that final 10 or 15 minutes can be where those teams start to flag badly.

    This is the time when they are vulnerable and 11-a-side teams often create good chances.
    But you have to take these chances.


    But if we are winning should we concede a goal when playing 10 men?
  • Sponsored links:


  • Options
    edited January 2011
    You are referring to the Brighton game, Jazzy?

    In that 1st half Brighton had one good long distance shot turned over the bar by Robbie, and then forced a couple of set pieces where they took the risk in pushing men forward in numbers. They equalised from one of them.

    But 10 men sides are not generally weakened in midfield...... if they lose a key midfielder to a red card, they will replace him with a substitute midfielder, and withdraw a striker. It's what they do in the attacking final third that gets limited - hence relying on breakaways, distance shots and set pieces.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: Oggy Red[/cite]You are referring to the Brighton game, Jazzy?

    In that 1st half Brighton had one good long distance shot turned over the bar by Robbie, and then forced a couple of set pieces where they took the risk in pushing men forward in numbers. They equalised from one of them.

    But 10 men sides are not generally weak in midfield...... if they lose a key midfielder to a red card, they will replace him with a substitute midfielder, and withdraw a striker. It's what they do in the attacking final third that gets limited - hence relying on distance shots and set pieces.

    Yes I was and I understand what you say regarding the goal that was scored by Brighton.
  • Options
    edited January 2011
    Benson scored 3 yesterday, with 2 not given. Was the 1st dissalowed one offside? Couldn't see from our angle.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: CafcAndy[/cite]Benson scored 3 yesterday, with 2 not given. Was the 1st dissalowed one offside? Couldn't see from our angle.

    Benson would also scored if it hadn't been handled on the line and the 2nd penalty given.
  • Options
    sorry, old chum..........Benno only scored 1 yesterday - from an overhead kick.

    He had one disallowed for climbing , and from where I was ( 8 rows from the front and behind the goal) I had a great view of it & thought straight away it would be chalked off for a foul. sometimes you get away with these vut seeing as the ref had given us 2 pens and sent one of theirs off he was hardly going to give that effort.

    Then, if you are then counting the one Benno put in after rounding the keeper - he was offside and the flag/whistle went before he even went round the keeper, so can hardly be called a goal or even a dissollowed goal. Do pay attention when watching.
  • Options
    [cite]Posted By: golfaddick[/cite]Do pay attention when watching.

    And you too, Golfie.

    Not going to give Benson credit for his header that was handled on the line for the 2nd penalty......?.
    Of course not. If you don't like a player, you are not going to give him credit where it is due, are you?
  • Options
    edited January 2011
    According to commentary yesterday, Colchester went 3-3-3 when they were down to ten, at least when going forward. No wonder our lot seemed confused!

    Using a man advantage is the same whether you're managing a school team or a pro team - you get them to play the ball around, make space, keep possession and give the opposition the run around. It seems we carried on lumping it and kept losing possesion through lack of concentration. Twice in four days.

    Parkinson's ridiculously negative comments don't help, either. Having told the world after Brighton that it's really hard to play against ten, what sort of message did that give his players when they found themselves in the same position yesterday?

    They must have been thinking, ''Oh, they're down to ten, it'; going to be really hard to break them down now, the gaffer said as much on Wednesday night''.

    When they should have been thinking, ''Great. Now we've got the chance to run them ragged.''
  • Options
    Yesterday was a rerun of the Brighton game. The opposition defended in depth and Charlton lacked the nous of how to break them down.

    In my opinion Benson and Martin do not work as a forward duo. Benson is a poacher his strength does not lie in hold up play. Long balls are played to Benson, Benson gets knocked off the ball and the attacks break down. We should revert to plan B or C, however Parkinson doesn't appear to have any further plans and the team carry on battering away at a brick wall.

    Perhaps if Parkinson changed the formation to 4,3,3 or 4,5,1 it might at least confuse the opposition, but trying the same tactics doesn't work.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Roland Out Forever!