Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  

Recommended Posts

On lots of threads there are comments like "we should beat 10 men", but this is nonsense when those ten men have a one goal start. 

1-0 up and you lose an attacker.   No problem, no need to score so you just concentrate on defending - and breaking - if and when possible.  With 10 men if it was 0-0 you would expect maybe a 0-0 if you defend properly.    So it is no surprise that being 1-0 up and the team defending well that they win 1-0.    Sure we could have been better, but the expectation of winning a match from being 1-0 down should be no different whether there are 10 or 11 on the pitch.  

Time after time you see 10 men performing better than 11.  Each one of those ten thinks they have to give that little bit extra and psychologically the team develop a siege mentality.  The opposite occurs in the team with 11.   They mentally celebrate the sending off, relax slightly, then the pressure builds as the reality of the situation overtakes the expectation - that actually its hard to break down a team just defending.

So although we could have played better, the real situation yesterday was tough.   10 v 11 is not easy especially when thae 10 have that one goal lead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quite so, all a side does when they go down to ten is lose some attacking intent, it has little impact on the makeup of midfield/defence, they just know they''ll have to work harder; if you are ahead already you would hope to maintain what you''ve got. We''ve seen it happen many times both for and against us.

That said, It was up to us to be creative and try to take advantage - we did create some chances but probably no more than had it been 11v11.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was at the KC & an easy observation was the Ref''s eagerness to please the home crowd. Nine times out of ten he gave whatever they appealed for!

For our players this caused confusion & uncertainty for a while - quickly replaced by absolute certainty that a mere nibble of a tackle would be an automatic free kick against us.

I''d say it was more like 11 v 11 until the sending off, then 11 v 10 with one of their supporters in possession of the whistle!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
There were many factors at work...The defensive Hull mentality after the sending off.The dodgy ref and that penalty decision.The fact it was the first game back at the KC since last season as well as back in the prem.Our players were not at the races, sloppy passes, flicks that didn''t come off, heads dropping as we didn''t get in.Bottom line was - it wasn''t our day and we will learn from it.  That performance will not define our season, not yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I was going to say that you are flogging a dead horse with this LDC and was expecting to read responses were just replies to yet again have a dig at CH....but, that''s not happened yet? ....not that I want it to happen, as there has already been so much over the top reaction to our firts defeat of the season its almost unreal.... 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Another Hughton apologist talkin b*******

Peterborough scored five goals against 10 men at the weekend!

With our brand of anti-football, hopefully the squad can manage 5 goals by Christmas

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

only a small minority of managers would come out and say things like "its harder tomplay against 10" or "the sending off did us no favours"....but its absolutely no surprise that Hughton would be one of them.

the fact that wecouldnt overturn the 0-1 deficit is an indictment of his own tactical deficencies. He'' s right in so far as the sending off panicked him more tan it did Hull....becacuse it meant that it created the very rare scenario of us being handed the attacking initiative in an away match, something so alien to us ,because of the way we''re continuouly set-up in away matches. The fact is that Hughton didn''t have a clue how to handle being the team with the majority of possession, who to bring on, at what stage of the game, what formation to deploy,nothing.

This was a test of Hughton''s tactical nous and he failed on every count.

failure to get so much as a point in those circumsances leves questions as to quite where we would get away points from this season?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hull parked the bus after that sending off, no doubt about it. I cringed when that red card came out because I knew this was the likely outcome. I still think we should have had more quality in our possession though. Their red card had no effect on our lousy passing. That is squarely on the players.

On the bright side, we can only get better.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mr 4-6-0"]

Another Hughton apologist talkin b*******

Peterborough scored five goals against 10 men at the weekend!

With our brand of anti-football, hopefully the squad can manage 5 goals by Christmas

[/quote]Another idiot talking s**t - Peterborough were already 0-2 up and had won a penalty resulting from the Red card, making them 0-3 up, so the fact they technically scored 3 goals vs 11 men and only 2 vs 10 men.......Hmmmm 5 goals before Christmas? we''ve scored 9 in our last 4 Premier league games, but lets not let facts get in the way of your irrational judgement

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

This was a test of Hughton''s tactical nous and he failed on every count.

failure to get so much as a point in those circumsances leves questions as to quite where we would get away points from this season?

[/quote]

I agree.

As I said somewhere else, we seem to have all the gear but no idea. He certainly appears to be no motivator or great man-manager.

I can see our fabulous away support dropping if that is going to be the level of performance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

only a small minority of managers would come out and say things like "its harder tomplay against 10" or "the sending off did us no favours"....but its absolutely no surprise that Hughton would be one of them.

the fact that wecouldnt overturn the 0-1 deficit is an indictment of his own tactical deficencies. He'' s right in so far as the sending off panicked him more tan it did Hull....becacuse it meant that it created the very rare scenario of us being handed the attacking initiative in an away match, something so alien to us ,because of the way we''re continuouly set-up in away matches. The fact is that Hughton didn''t have a clue how to handle being the team with the majority of possession, who to bring on, at what stage of the game, what formation to deploy,nothing.

This was a test of Hughton''s tactical nous and he failed on every count.

failure to get so much as a point in those circumsances leves questions as to quite where we would get away points from this season?

[/quote]What are you going on about? We took off two defensive midfielders and brought on a striker and Snodgrass, surely that''s a positive move which suggests we are going all out to grab a goal. We spent the entire second half camped in Hulls half and our formation went out of the window trying to grab that goal, Numerous managers have said its sometimes harder to play against 10 men, including Alex Ferguson but please just ignore that fact as I wouldn''t want it to get in the way of the rubbish you are spouting. In regards to your last comment, I am guessing Man City fans are asking the exact same question as they lost to a newly promoted club as well....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Right. Please!

Hull city going down to 10 men done Norwich no favours! Coming from the manager

This is the most negative thing from a manager ever

If we went down to ten me we would have lost 3 or 4

Get rid of this tool in a suit and he can take his boyfriend tettey with him.

Simple!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So how did it do us any favours? All it meant was Hull parked the bus, which they did, going down to 10 men doesn''t affect your defensive performance, it only affects you going forward. Yeah we got smashed at Sunderland last year after going down to 10 men didn''t we.....And who''s the tool?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="ellis206"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

only a small minority of managers would come out and say things like "its harder tomplay against 10" or "the sending off did us no favours"....but its absolutely no surprise that Hughton would be one of them.

the fact that wecouldnt overturn the 0-1 deficit is an indictment of his own tactical deficencies. He'' s right in so far as the sending off panicked him more tan it did Hull....becacuse it meant that it created the very rare scenario of us being handed the attacking initiative in an away match, something so alien to us ,because of the way we''re continuouly set-up in away matches. The fact is that Hughton didn''t have a clue how to handle being the team with the majority of possession, who to bring on, at what stage of the game, what formation to deploy,nothing.

This was a test of Hughton''s tactical nous and he failed on every count.

failure to get so much as a point in those circumsances leves questions as to quite where we would get away points from this season?

[/quote]

What are you going on about?
We took off two defensive midfielders and brought on a striker and Snodgrass, surely that''s a positive move which suggests we are going all out to grab a goal. We spent the entire second half camped in Hulls half and our formation went out of the window trying to grab that goal, Numerous managers have said its sometimes harder to play against 10 men, including Alex Ferguson but please just ignore that fact as I wouldn''t want it to get in the way of the rubbish you are spouting.

In regards to your last comment, I am guessing Man City fans are asking the exact same question as they lost to a newly promoted club as well....
[/quote]

not really the same is it?

Cardiff didnt go down to 10 men, Man City started with their best team and didnt play the first half with one arm tied behind their back in respect of the opposition

If we''d have gone for it from the start and still lost I''d accept it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Wazzy van Donkeydangler"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

This was a test of Hughton''s tactical nous and he failed on every count.

failure to get so much as a point in those circumsances leves questions as to quite where we would get away points from this season?

[/quote]

I agree.

As I said somewhere else, we seem to have all the gear but no idea. He certainly appears to be no motivator or great man-manager.

I can see our fabulous away support dropping if that is going to be the level of performance.

[/quote]Agree entirely with all of this.As I said last week, my ideal is quality attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like winning football.If I can''t have that, I will inevitably want better.I''ve had a season and two matches to judge, and my view is that Hughton''s not the right manager for us if we want to achieve better than slumming around the bottom half of the table by playing dreary negative safety-first one dimensional football.Given the quality of players signed I''d keep him as head scout, but I doubt he''d see that as a career move.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

[quote user="ellis206"]So how did it do us any favours? All it meant was Hull parked the bus, which they did, going down to 10 men doesn''t affect your defensive performance, it only affects you going forward.

Yeah we got smashed at Sunderland last year after going down to 10 men didn''t we.....

And who''s the tool?
[/quote]

didnt Martin O''neill get sacked shortly after that match?.......shows how acceptable that result was to the Sunderland board, it should be no more acceptable to us?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mister Chops"]As I said last week, my ideal is quality attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like winning football.If I can''t have that, I will inevitably want better.I''ve had a season and two matches to judge, and my view is that Hughton''s not the right manager for us if we want to achieve better than slumming around the bottom half of the table by playing dreary negative safety-first one dimensional football.Given the quality of players signed I''d keep him as head scout, but I doubt he''d see that as a career move.[/quote]

We''ve all have had a season and two matches to judge,  Mr. C,  but surely the objective view over that whole time is that it is a mixed bag of performances and results?  Some great performances, I don''t need to list them, particularly in the first half of the season - and ultimately successful overall despite some difficult and yes, poor matches, with a limited squad in the season as a whole.    As I say a mixed bag.   So why pick on the bad performances and say that is the norm?  I just don''t understand.    We had a poor match on Saturday, sure, but the team had a make-shift look to it because of injuries.  Against Everton there were encouraging signs.    The midfield is not yet functioning as well as it needs to but on balance is it not fairer to look at all the matches last season and this so far, rather than just focus on the bad ones?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Mister Chops"]As I said last week, my ideal is quality attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like winning football.If I can''t have that, I will inevitably want better.I''ve had a season and two matches to judge, and my view is that Hughton''s not the right manager for us if we want to achieve better than slumming around the bottom half of the table by playing dreary negative safety-first one dimensional football.Given the quality of players signed I''d keep him as head scout, but I doubt he''d see that as a career move.[/quote]

We''ve all have had a season and two matches to judge,  Mr. C,  but surely the objective view over that whole time is that it is a mixed bag of performances and results?  Some great performances, I don''t need to list them, particularly in the first half of the season - and ultimately successful overall despite some difficult and yes, poor matches, with a limited squad in the season as a whole.    As I say a mixed bag.   So why pick on the bad performances and say that is the norm?  I just don''t understand.    We had a poor match on Saturday, sure, but the team had a make-shift look to it because of injuries.  Against Everton there were encouraging signs.    The midfield is not yet functioning as well as it needs to but on balance is it not fairer to look at all the matches last season and this so far, rather than just focus on the bad ones?

[/quote]If you''d read my post, you will note that my remarks are based on a season and two matches, and not just the bad matches.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="Wazzy van Donkeydangler"][quote user="GJL Mid-Norfolk Canary"]

This was a test of Hughton''s tactical nous and he failed on every count.

failure to get so much as a point in those circumsances leves questions as to quite where we would get away points from this season?

[/quote]

I agree.

As I said somewhere else, we seem to have all the gear but no idea. He certainly appears to be no motivator or great man-manager.

I can see our fabulous away support dropping if that is going to be the level of performance.

[/quote]Agree entirely with all of this.As I said last week, my ideal is quality attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like winning football.If I can''t have that, I will inevitably want better.I''ve had a season and two matches to judge, and my view is that Hughton''s not the right manager for us if we want to achieve better than slumming around the bottom half of the table by playing dreary negative safety-first one dimensional football.Given the quality of players signed I''d keep him as head scout, but I doubt he''d see that as a career move.

[/quote]Great post mr chops and i mean that most sincerely  [:D]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Mister Chops"]As I said last week, my ideal is quality attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like winning football.If I can''t have that, I will inevitably want better.I''ve had a season and two matches to judge, and my view is that Hughton''s not the right manager for us if we want to achieve better than slumming around the bottom half of the table by playing dreary negative safety-first one dimensional football.Given the quality of players signed I''d keep him as head scout, but I doubt he''d see that as a career move.[/quote]We''ve all have had a season and two matches to judge,  Mr. C,  but surely the objective view over that whole time is that it is a mixed bag of performances and results?  Some great performances, I don''t need to list them, particularly in the first half of the season - and ultimately successful overall despite some difficult and yes, poor matches, with a limited squad in the season as a whole.    As I say a mixed bag.   So why pick on the bad performances and say that is the norm?  I just don''t understand.    We had a poor match on Saturday, sure, but the team had a make-shift look to it because of injuries.  Against Everton there were encouraging signs.    The midfield is not yet functioning as well as it needs to but on balance is it not fairer to look at all the matches last season and this so far, rather than just focus on the bad ones?[/quote]If you''d read my post, you will note that my remarks are based on a season and two matches, and not just the bad matches.[/quote]

I did read your post and your comment that we''ll be playing "dreary negative safety-first one dimensional football".  So you are basing that on the whole of last season and two games?   Dare I mention Swansea away, Sunderland away, Man City away, WBA, Arsenal, MU at home, Tottenham home and away, Everton home and away..........?  

  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It''s a valid point that playing against fewer men can often be tougher for all the reasons discussed so far.

Thing is, we can point to a number of things that made the game tougher or that went against us, but none of them had me bellowing at the tv more than watching us paddle the ball back to Hull every 3 or 4 passes.

For 10 vs 11 I felt their midfield had far too much time and space on the ball- one thing I would at least have hoped we would control in that situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
[quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Mister Chops"][quote user="lake district canary"][quote user="Mister Chops"]As I said last week, my ideal is quality attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like attacking winning football.If I can''t have that, I''d like winning football.If I can''t have that, I will inevitably want better.I''ve had a season and two matches to judge, and my view is that Hughton''s not the right manager for us if we want to achieve better than slumming around the bottom half of the table by playing dreary negative safety-first one dimensional football.Given the quality of players signed I''d keep him as head scout, but I doubt he''d see that as a career move.[/quote]We''ve all have had a season and two matches to judge,  Mr. C,  but surely the objective view over that whole time is that it is a mixed bag of performances and results?  Some great performances, I don''t need to list them, particularly in the first half of the season - and ultimately successful overall despite some difficult and yes, poor matches, with a limited squad in the season as a whole.    As I say a mixed bag.   So why pick on the bad performances and say that is the norm?  I just don''t understand.    We had a poor match on Saturday, sure, but the team had a make-shift look to it because of injuries.  Against Everton there were encouraging signs.    The midfield is not yet functioning as well as it needs to but on balance is it not fairer to look at all the matches last season and this so far, rather than just focus on the bad ones?[/quote]If you''d read my post, you will note that my remarks are based on a season and two matches, and not just the bad matches.[/quote]

I did read your post and your comment that we''ll be playing "dreary negative safety-first one dimensional football".  So you are basing that on the whole of last season and two games?   Dare I mention Swansea away, Sunderland away, Man City away, WBA, Arsenal, MU at home, Tottenham home and away, Everton home and away..........?  

   [/quote]I am basing it on my view of Hughton''s managerial efforts at Norwich so far, i.e. the whole season plus two games in the Prem, the friendlies, and the cup runs(!).Sorry if you are finding this difficult.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem really wasn''t the defeat against 10 men, these things happen, it was the way we went about losing to them. I would have accepted defeat if we had penned them back in their half and hit them with everything we had, the keeper pulls off great save after great save and the defence plays a blinder. The commentator on the stream was constantly questioning why we were not changing it, where was the urgency and at the end said he couldnt believe that we just seemed accepting of defeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don''t think our problem had anything to do with tactics or even Hull being a man down. It was our horrible, horrible passing. Simple as that. If the boys had managed to keep possession instead of throwing it away with piss poor passing we would have come away with at least a point.

If I''m going to fault CH for anything, it''s that he hasn''t done enough simple pass drilling. Back to basics and all that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...