Topic: Red Cards in Football and what they do to the odds and the outcome - page 2. (Read 636 times)

Pretty uneventful weekend for red card fetishists (are there these kind of people ?).

England

ManU - Tottenham
Red Card: ManU in 28th minute, score 1-2
Final Score: 1-6

ManU completely collapsed after that red card and conceded 4 more. This would have been a bad spot.

Spain

Valladolid - Eibar
Red Card: Eibar in 73rd minute, score 1-1
Final Score: 1-2

Eibar managed to get all 3 points with a late goal one man down. This is rather unusual in an away game also considering Eibar was >4.00 pre-match. Didn't watch the game, but maybe Valladolid pushed for the 2-1 and ran into a counter-attack.

---

Alaves - Bilbao
Red Card: Alaves in 86th minute, score 1-0
Final Score: 1-0

Red card came late, so had no impact no more.

Italy

Lazio - Inter
Red card: Lazio in 70th minute, score 1-1
Final score: 1-1

Laying next goal Inter would have worked here, which is maybe really something one should look into as a strategy with small money to test the results (not just on paper).

Germany

No red cards this round.

In a very easy nutshell, i can categorically confirm that Red Card in football leaves the football team with a player down compared to the other team; it leaves such team at a very disadvantage compared to the other team. Often time in football, we have seen clubs lose terribly after losing a player to the red card; and we have also seen great sides win a football match with 1 man down. It all depends on the psychological state of the team, as well as the tactical prowess of the coach to drive a performance out of the team

Do you mean Zidane during the 2006 World Cup final ? Do you know that Materazzi said he'd like to fuch his sister, and is boasting about it to this day ? Really disgraceful. He got to be world champion, he could have apologized, instead remaining a prick for the history books.

I always hate when someone from the club that I like got a red card for an unnecessary offense. However, if its offense is meant to maintain something or because of a certain problems like what Ziane did, I don't if it will be wors again. And for the team, I personally agree that a red card for one of their team will result in the game exactly. They must have a decreasing spirit and also of course they must work hard to maintain and survive.

Actually, I ever know about it that red cards may give an impact on the need to pay some fees for that red card. Is it true? probably every match or event will depend on the rules, including the red card acceptance and it is a must.

Usually in friendly matches there are not so many red cards since the result is not important and people are not taking to much risks.

Unfortunately I didn't catch any odds after the red cards, but it wasn't too interesting in terms of red cards this weekend anyway.

England

Everyone behaved well, no red cards.

Spain

No red cards.

Italy

Roma - Juve
Red Card: Juve in 62nd minute, score 2-1
Final Score: 2-2

This would have been a very profitable spot to go on the red-carded team. Too bad I didn't follow the odds, but I would think Roma was between 1.30-1.40 after the red card.

---

Bologna - Parma
Red Card: Parma in 76th minute, score 3-1
Final Score: 4-1

No impact on the outcome, Bologna with the 4-1 in the last minutes.

Germany

Mainz - Stuttgart
Red Card: Mainz in 77th minute, score 1-2
Final Score: 1-4

Stuttgart was able to extend their lead shortly after the red card and made another one some minutes later. Bad spot here, but Mainz was playing against their coach (and they succeeded, because he was sacked in the meantime ) Stuttgart had a red card in injury time as well, just for the record.

---

Schalke - Bremen
Red Card: Schalke in 84th minute, score 0-3
Final Score: 1-3

Red card came late, when the game was already decided, but Schalke actually managed to score a goal one man down in injury time.

---

---

Recapitulating things so far, it looks like there probably is some value on "next goal" for red-carded team or lay "next goal" for opponent (to cover no goals in remaining time). This would have worked twice this weekend with I guess very good odds and also 2/3 last weekend. But we need more data

Fun Fact: All games with a red card ended over 3.5 goals.

Yes, this is of course the most important data. You can get that data from Betfair, but I don't have an account there no more to scrape it (and I would probably be too dumb anyway ). I will try to record the odds for those matches which I follow live, but I can't follow them all. But we can maybe make a team effort out of it, where users post the odds in here, after a red card was given - and probably the odds right before the card as well. So everyone feel free to contribute Pre-match odds are easy go get btw at oddsportal or other odds comparison sites, but we need the inplay ones.

It will always follow the same pattern more or less, so once you/we have a big enough sample size, you can just calculate the odds yourself and will already see, if the market gives away some value.

Very nice stats you shared a few posts earlier,,, now it would be extremely interesting to take note of all the bookie odds at the start of the match, and how they changed as soon as the red card was made. For sure it makes odds go higher for some teams in a draw situation, but if Spurs had a red card, I would bet on them anyway to win. Same as City and Liverpool, MAdrid and Barcelona. These teams seem to get stronger and are fit enough to cover more field.

The rules are unlikely to change but I wonder how football would be if instead of yellow and reds (or on top of them) there was a penalty box instead. The yellow and red could be kept for the gravest offenses, but for smaller ones, instead of a yellow or nothing (because there is nothing in between) you could lose the player for some minutes.

Yep, I think so too (and thats why I created this thread to monitor things and have some discussion going on to get some input). The problem with betting on a red-carded team to win is that it might take some time to pay off and most people don't have the stamina, get frustrated quickly and quit. You will play high-ish odds and you will see lots of money going down the drain at first, before you hit on some of these odds.

I think it's better for the start to go with the result not changing after a red card, i.e. a draw stays a draw at FT, maybe from 1-1 to 2-2, or some handicaps like +1.5 for the remainder of the game, double chances, dnb. As always you would have to be cautious in choosing the right spots/games and not jump into any game that sees a red card. And trading is better than punting here imo, always take at least your initial liability out when things are going your way, until you mastered this special situation in a football match.

I also think there is good value in a red carded team to go and win it, but you have to be able to watch live. Red Card for an attacking team is ok for me (depending also who got red carded) and then defending team could be tempted to try and change to win. We have seen many teams now win with 10 or even 9 men,,,

A red card changes the momentum of the game. It affects both teams. For instance, a team who is prepared to defend and counter-attack at the beginning, with a 4-5-1 formation, will have to change it up to a 4-4-2 or to other more offensive formation if the other team is reduced to 10-man. The goal suddenly shifts from getting a clean sheet to winning the game so the pressure to score builds up. I've watched interviews from the team with complete players and they sometimes say it threw them off.

I think you were spot on when you said the impact depends on the time it was given and the score. A team who is 4-0 up by half time and received a red card at the start of the 2nd half would likely end up winning or getting a draw at least.

England

No red cards in first round, but second round had 4.

Everton - WBA
Red card: WBA in 45th minute, score 2-1
Final score: 5-2

WBA managed to score the equalizer after the red card at the beginning of second half, but 3 goals inside 12 minutes sealed the win for Everton. Would have been worth to lay Everton after the red card and trade out after 2-2.

---

Newcastle - Brighton
Red card: Brighton in 89th minute, score 0-3
Final score: 0-3

No impact since in the closing stages of an already decided game.

---

Chelsea - Liverpool
Red Card: Chelsea 45th minute, score 0-0
Final score: 0-2

Liverpool took advantage nicely of the strenghts in numbers and scored twice directly after half-time. Chelsea managed to get a penalty later, but missed it.

---

Aston Villa - Sheffield United
Red card: Sheffield in 12th minute, score 0-0
Final score: 1-0

Sheffield got a penalty to take the lead one man down, but missed it. Aston Villa then took the lead in second half and defended it till the final whistle.

Spain

No red cards in round 2 and just one in round 1.

Eibar - Celta Vigo
Red Card: Eibar in 87th minute, score 0-0
Final score: 0-0

Red card came too late to have any impact.

Italy

Just one red card.

Milan - Bologna
Red Card: Bologna in 88th minute, score 2-0
Final Score: 2-0

Again a late red card with no impact.


Germany

No red cards in first round.

---

Not very telling so far since 50% of the red cards were late. In the games where they were early-ish, two teams did good and would have given a trade profit (lets assume Sheffield normally does not miss the penalty ).

I think it depends very much on the game situation what effect a red card has. If Manchester United play against a third division team in the FA Cup, a red card on the Manchester side will not make much difference.
But if you look at yesterday's Champions League final Bayern vs. PSG, for example, a red card could have had devastating consequences for any of the teams.
At this level, even the smallest mistake can be decisive. A permanent weakening of a team by a red card, however, puts them in a serious predicament against equal teams

I think the red cards only impacts small teams which are lacking a winning mentality.I have seen so many games where big teams have been hit by one or even two red cards and they have still managed to win the game or in the worst case to not lose it by drawing to the other team.

However in small teams red cards can be devastating and can be the cause for a huge loss with a big number of goals difference.

Red cards certainly have an impact on the team because it not only weakens it due to the absence of a player, but also has a moral impact if there are doubts about the fairness of the punishment. Sometimes such doubts can lead to much more serious consequences.
I will never forget a memorable match for me at the 2006 world Cup, when the Netherlands played Portugal in the 1/8 final. At that time, 4 red cards and 16 yellow cards were shown in one match. This is a great example of a match when teams start to foul each other and the heat gradually increases. In this match played primarily psychology and excellent football players turned into boys who want to avenge each other for fouls. I don't remember a single match that I was more disgusted to watch.

I've also found very good value in a GOOD team getting a red card. But this depends still a lot on the team itself and how they play and WHO gets the red card. Barca (my team) got a red card almost every other game for the opening of the season I remember, and the odds for them to either win or keep the lead after the red card all got good value, which would win for almost every option.

But like you said, changes the dynamic too much and only worth betting IF you know and watch the game and know how well they play after.

It seems to me that after the 80th minute the chances are almost equal: if a team that plays in the majority goes ahead en masse, then it has a chance to miss the counterattack and lose the match. I can say that the situation is equal here.
As for the earlier stages, the advantage of the team playing in the majority is obvious - it is harder to defend (especially in the minority), so you can just wait until the opponent is physically exhausted.

Yes, but it's not that much easier I think. If we look at the Bordeaux - Nantes match, Zerkane got red card and Bordeaux didn't make any substitution right away. They re-organized themselves like this:


Source: https://www.flashscore.com/match/x42Vi5GG/#lineups;1

So not a lot of changes, if a) Bordeaux takes more defensive approach and b) Hwang/Maja run a bit more. For sure Nantes will have more posession and can get more easily in Bordeaux's half, but once arrived there, it's basically the same as with 11 vs 11 (also considering Bordeaux being kind of extra-motivated, team spirit increased etc.). Now these two teams are evenly matched and it's a way different ball game, if a bad team receives a red card against a superior team.

So when there is a general stat that the scoring intensity increases by 5/4, this is/was not the case for Nantes, it was way less imo, if at all. But this has to be judged on an individual basis and by following the game.


This is very simplified then again, because it doesn't take into account the circumstances when the red card happened, team strenghts etc. Maybe in those 59% lost games, in 60% of the cases this team was already pre-match underdog and down 0-1 when the red card happened

Once again a very interesting thread tyKiwanuka, thank you very much for that!


I think this is quite obvious. Often players in defense or defensive midfield are affected by red cards. So if a player is taken off the field in this position, someone from the more offensive game has to fill this gap. Either by letting him fall back or by substituting him. This will inevitably result in a lack of attacking power.
In my opinion, the higher probability for goals simply results from the fact that the opposing team can now build up attacks more easily and thus inevitably have more chances to score goals.

If you look at sports betting I find this statistic quite interesting:

Source
According to this, a team that has received a red card loses 59% of the game. I will take a closer look at that once my betting season starts again