Diabolical!!

[Jam_Man]

I agree its a ****ing joke

Last season we had home games with that many chances with 11 men on the pitch....

 

[Fish]

Are you saying only Southend can't cope with going down to 10 men?

It seems that whilst sometimes teams hold out (we did last year v Crawley with 9 and are the only team ever to score with 8 men on the pitch v Swansea in 2003) the majority of teams that have a man disadvantage from an early stage lose the game.

No, I'm saying that it's not valid to claim that once you're down to 10 men it's game over. Because footballers are professional sportsmen who should be proficient enough at their jobs to get over losing a player for a part of the game.

Instead they are for the most part over-paid nancy boys who blame anything and everything other than themselves when they get beaten.

Commit 2 yellow card offences and expect to get sent off. Deal with it, don't blame the guy who applied the laws of the game.

 

[steveo]

teams with only 10 players on the pitch regularly score goals. Why? Cos they move the ball intelligently and quickly.

Our boys are supposed to be professional sportsmen, yet they can't work out how to move the ball on quickly and accurately enough.

So are you saying they move the ball more intelligently and quickly when they only have 10 players? You also say they should proficient enough at their jobs to get over losing a player for a part of the game.
Well if the other team are equaly proficient their 11 players will be working out how to move the ball more quickly and accurately than the team with 10.

 

[Jam_Man]

No, I'm saying that it's not valid to claim that once you're down to 10 men it's game over. Because footballers are professional sportsmen who should be proficient enough at their jobs to get over losing a player for a part of the game.

Instead they are for the most part over-paid nancy boys who blame anything and everything other than themselves when they get beaten.

Commit 2 yellow card offences and expect to get sent off. Deal with it, don't blame the guy who applied the laws of the game.

It might not be game over but most people would accept when you are away with only 10 men you are realistically going to be up against it.

If it was a simple case of stop being a nancy boy and getting on with it no one would care about getting a man sent off.

Im not blaming anyone for the sending off but as soon as it happened thought we would be hard pressed to even get a point with 70 minutes to play.

 

[steveo]

You must be missing sometihng here Jam Man. By Fish's theory you can play better with 10 becasue you will work out how to move the ball on quickly and accurately.
So surely it would be better to have 2 or 3 sent off and you would improve even more.

 

[superblue24]

Whatever way you look at it, we had 2 shots and one on target.....Thats 50% less than last years WORST game for shots.

We have one winger who is obviously eyeing up a move, another who is pony, and another who has been exiled. The midfield is looking weaker than last year and we have a crocked(Corr\Eastwood), past it (Harris) or pony (Benyon) frontline.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

 

[Jam_Man]

You must be missing sometihng here Jam Man. By Fish's theory you can play better with 10 becasue you will work out how to move the ball on quickly and accurately.
So surely it would be better to have 2 or 3 sent off and you would improve even more.

Oh as long as you can work out how to move the ball on quickly and accurately thats fine.

Guess it simplifies things, why have two strikers to aim for when you only have one?

Whatever way you look at it, we had 2 shots and one on target.....Thats 50% less than last years WORST game for shots.

We have one winger who is obviously eyeing up a move, another who is pony, and another who has been exiled. The midfield is looking weaker than last year and we have a crocked(Corr\Eastwood), past it (Harris) or pony (Benyon) frontline.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

How many players were on the pitch at that point out of interest?

Strangely we managed to have 20 shots, 6 on target only 4 days earlier when we had 11. Sadly none of them went in, but thats a different problem.

 

[superblue24]

Oh as long as you can work out how to move the ball on quickly and accurately thats fine.

Guess it simplifies things, why have two strikers to aim for when you only have one?



How many players were on the pitch at that point out of interest?

Strangely we managed to have 20 shots, 6 on target only 4 days earlier when we had 11. Sadly none of them went in, but thats a different problem.

OK, Mohsni got sent off against Gillingham last year after an hour and we scored a winner in the 87th minute...

Also, we had 10 men for roughly the same amount of time against Oldham but still conjured up 8 shots. Despite them being a division higher.....

 

[Norwichshrimper]

Whatever way you look at it, we had 2 shots and one on target.....Thats 50% less than last years WORST game for shots.

We have one winger who is obviously eyeing up a move, another who is pony, and another who has been exiled. The midfield is looking weaker than last year and we have a crocked(Corr\Eastwood), past it (Harris) or pony (Benyon) frontline.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised.

But there are negatives too..you can't just focus on the plus points

 

[Jam_Man]

OK, Mohsni got sent off against Gillingham last year after an hour and we scored a winner in the 87th minute...

Also, we had 10 men for roughly the same amount of time against Oldham but still conjured up 8 shots. Despite them being a division higher.....

Some teams do get results with 10 players Shrewsbury beat us, that doesnt mean it should be expected.

You have less players and its harder to get anything from a game.

The Oldham game we had 5 shots before Mohsni got sent off.

 

[A Century United]

No, I'm saying that it's not valid to claim that once you're down to 10 men it's game over. Because footballers are professional sportsmen who should be proficient enough at their jobs to get over losing a player for a part of the game.

Instead they are for the most part over-paid nancy boys who blame anything and everything other than themselves when they get beaten.

Commit 2 yellow card offences and expect to get sent off. Deal with it, don't blame the guy who applied the laws of the game.

Usually like your analogies with hockey when it comes to the Laws, Respect for the Referee, etc, but when it comes to comparing the effect of losing one player I can't agree. Hockey is a faster game because of a number of factors, including the artificial surface now favoured, the ability to take quick set pieces by passing to oneself, and the size of the pitch.

At first glance there doesn't seem to be much difference in pitch size, with a Hockey pitch at 91.4m x 55m, and a Football pitch not much different from 105m x 68m but in fact this means that a Hockey pitch is 5027 Square Metres, and a Football pitch at around 7140 Square Metres. When you pack 22 players onto a hockey pitch, losing one player from a side is much easier to cover for. On a Football pitch it increases the workload for the remaining ten players much, much more. It's simply not comparing like with like. A much fairer comparison is with Rugby, where it is estimated that having a player sin-binned for ten minutes is worth an average of something like 2.5 points to the opposition*

* The Rugby Paper