Playing against 9 - is it as easy as you think?

We didn't have 11 men ourselves that day though, was it Wagstaff or Kermorgant who got sent off as well in that match? 

MarcusH26 said:

ForeverAddickted said:

We didn't have 11 men ourselves that day though, was it Wagstaff or Kermorgant who got sent off as well in that match? 

Waggy definitely got sent off. Danny Hollands was the other I believe 

Oh yes... Sorry I misread the original comment, I thought it was Oldham who went to nine men, but you are right... But I did think there were three red cards that game

Edit: the difference was we went 1-0 up when both sides had ten men, so when we went down to nine men... We had something to defend. 

Swindon once famously couldn't beat 9 men. I may have been there 

Well Grimsby and Cardiff made it look very comfortable when they both won by 2 goals to nil against us in 1997 and 2008 respectively when we went down to 9 men in both games 

We were 2-1 down when Aizlewood and Hales were sent off at Burnley in '82(?) - finally lost 7-1!!!!

Depends how easy you think it is.

It’s easier for sure. If you think not then you have a flawed logic. Also, would you apply this logic to another workplace? 

Of course the 9 men work harder but if the 11 do the same then they should win comfortably. 

If you don’t think it's a lot easier with 2 more players, just how many more do you think you need until finally it is easier?

Leuth said:

Swindon once famously couldn't beat 9 men. I may have been there 

Was it Miguel Llera who scored the equaliser for us? 

J BLOCK said:

Absolutely yes, if you can’t beat a team with 9 men for over 45 minutes, there is something very wrong.

Good job we did then 👍 

Yes, it is as easy as I think. 

Stig said:

There's enough football played and enough examples of teams going down to nine men that it would be comparatively easy for someone (not me) to do a proper statistical analysis of scores and results rather than just recounting a few hazy memories of recent Championship and old Charlton games. What is far more rare though is a team going down to nine men in the first half. If I've ever seen it, it's long been forgotten. 

Having that numerical difference for such a long period of time is an unprecedented advantage. That is the real frustration about yesterday. We had plenty of time to tire their nine out and then really make them pay, but we never did. Even after getting an early goal we still didn't have the will or the ability to finish them off with aplomb. Good result. Disappointing scoreline. Worrying performance.

I asked ChatGPT and it couldn’t pull stats on the outcome of matches where one team goes down to 9 in the first half and the opposition retains all 11 players for the duration. As I am no longer capable of independent thought or research I guess we’ll never know unless someone else has retained those skills.

It should have been easy and we should have got a hat full of goals. We made it difficult yesterday.

We started the second half the right way. We attacked. We pressed. We pushed them back. We put them under pressure. We were rewarded with a goal. We should have continued doing that. We didn’t.

what we did was every time we got the ball we slowed the fucking game down and that gave their remaining 8 (that’s only EIGHT) outfield players time to amble, shuffle, catch their breath, save some energy, scratch their arses etc and close our players down. Eventually, they realised they weren’t tired, we had gaps and they could go back to attacking like they were doing when they had 10 outfield players. Everyone was expecting it to end up 1-1 but somehow we managed to hold on to 1-0

The best analogy I can think of is the first Haye v Bellew fight. Haye clearly on one leg, fight should be over. David Haye was a top level amateur and former world champion. Bellew I'd say was the level below that but made up for it in heart and effort. Bellew really struggled to land anytbing clean on Haye as Haye had gone full scale defensive shell purely to survive and limit damage, maybe land a sidewinder. Everyone gave Bellew shit as he couldn't starch a man with no functioning achilles tendon but if a professional goes on the back foot to survive its hard to get a clean breakthrough. 

Sheffield United did as they should do l, went compact, narrow and let us have the ball in unthreatening areas. They are full of internationals, experience, quality and have a manager who knows what he is doing. 

I'm as unhappy as most people that we didn't make hay and I was infuriated with the lack of intelligence but we are simply not a possession team, we have to be harum scarum, snappy, high pressy. The lack of short corners or even diagonals from the defence to make their full backs and centre halves think was annoying. 

It all comes back to us desperately needing the 3 points and the nerves were understandable given our recent colds we have caught. We have Jones clearly playing at about 60%, Ramsay just back who is a huge player for us and lacking sharpness, Gillesphey who is playing a level above himself, Anderson who is a wrecker, very raw and needs a brain close to him. Knibbs who I like but has also had to make do with odd appearances, Bree playing on the wrong side, Clarke, who hasn't played for god knows how long, no Bell, no Edwards, no Connor. 

I played (and captained) a team that lost 2-0 with 7 men - one car went to the wrong club's ground! We even hit the bar at 1-0. One of my favourite games that I played in.