That's it in a nutshell Harry .Its a danger and I'm pleased that it is acknowledged openly here.
Keane's fourth goal from a header on by Crouch is a fine example of how it can work if used as an occasional tactic. Burnley didn't simply drop off and try to pick up the second ball because they were unsure of what we were going to do.
Keanes third goal was aresult of a lovely lofted ball from Huddlestone.
His second goal, taken with assurance and confidence was a result of a fine ball inside the fullback by Jenas and a Lennon cutback.
Variety from us causing uncertainty in the opposition.

He'll play against Bolton, and we'll be all the better defending set pieces for it.

The key will be getting Lennon and Keane close enough to him to pick up the second ball, and that means not lumping it up too early (as 'arry says).

For that reason, I would be inclined to play Huddlestone at centre half again. Dawson must still be some way from full fitness, and Huddlestone bringing the ball out from the back has got to be preferable to Dawson's tendency to lump it long. They play one up front, so Bassong and Huddelstone between them should be able to manage. The only time they are really likely to threaten (he says) will be from set pieces. With Crouch in the side, plus Charlie and Wilson, we have plenty of size to match them. Although Dawson's heading would be a bonus.

Bull shit from the Daily Mail,
Harry would have told the team after Man U game that we should only play long ball when are under intense pressure. Crouch is a much better player than a lot of people give credit.

Intresting points mate, I agree Dawson does use the long ball alot, but in my eyes he is the best passer in the defence ( I dont think of Huddlestone as a defender ), his long balls are often cross field passes and are very good for a defender.

but only 10% find its mark if that and thats giving the opposition posession right back, we play best when Crouch isnt playing, simple.

I am so glad Harry has come out and said this!

This is such a weird problem to have though. You'd think a solution, rather than benching Crouch, would be for Redknapp to get the team keeping it on the ground and playing it in to his feet. Crouch can play on the ground, he can hold the ball up and pick out a good pass, a little like Berbatov but obviously with less flair.

It may be "tempting" for players to lump it when he's on the pitch, but that's something those players need to address - it's not Crouch's fault! I suppose the only argument could be that a Keane or Defoe will find the space in the channels so the low passes have more chance of geting through, but this is just an indication that Crouch needs to hold is own in the physical battles with centre backs.

:clap::clap::clap::clap::clap:

The key to the article is HR's view of Crouch's game. Peeling away fromt he last man so that you can drop the ball to his head or chest, but not running the channels.

So basically he's not a berbatov - u can't expect him to get long balls from deep. You can't expect him to create.

Rather he needs crosses and quality balls played to feet/head, and when he's close enough to do the damage.

This implies we need attacking fullbacks and wingers who could provide those balls. This should be good news for the Bale-lovers. Bentley ought to have a future too.

This is like refusing a liqueur chocolate because you are afraid of becoming an alcoholic. Having a tall striker does not constrain you to play the long ball game.

I'm a huge Huddlestone fan, but Kevin Davies will rip him (and bassong) to shreds with the Bolton long balls.
Dawson is a must for a game like this.

But he could learn to change his game and add movement and peeling off into area's where he will get space. That in my opinion is crouch's fault and something he will need to add to his game if he really wants to progress.
Crouch has a better touch and goal ratio than Heskey, but heskey's movement and strength gets him ahead of crouch in the england team.

Its fine to talk about nice little passes to Crouch etc but its not the midfield that are doing the damage, if the midfield got the ball it would be played to his feet but its flying over them, the point people are missing is that this is the Premiership, for a lot of the time you don't have time to think, their on you so fast its a case of look up at see Crouch and hit it up the pitch giving them back possession 9 times out of 10, A 7 foot guy is an easy way out and its easier to go for him than maybe play it square or back to the keeper to get out of trouble for some players.

A couple of things, apart from retaining possession, can happen to while playing this way, it can seen like panic and desperation which puts the other team on the front foot, also it can disjoint the midfield if its going over them for a lot of the time they become like headless chickens just running round aimlessly and losing their position.

All in all the fact remains, when Keane and Defoe have started we've won, and looked fantastic, in 5 games when the ball has come from the defense, through the midfiled to the front men.

I'm not saying i don't like Crouchy but i'm saying i like, and am more confident about, the football we play with him not in the side.

Harry is spot on.

I agree - and have been saying this more or less after the 2nd game with Crouch in the side. The signs were there loud and clear: through no fault of Crouch (who CAN play on the ground and is technically good), too many players were taking the easy option of putting hopeful long,high balls in his direction instead of trying to create a move on the ground. The result most of the time was handing possession to opposition, inviting more pressure on themselves (and on nervous fans!) and losing shape / cohesion.

The only surprise is that it took the Head Coach 1.5 months to admit it and try to do something about it (a lot like finally dropping Bentley after 23 consecutive games last season) - but credit to Harry for actually coming out and admitting the situation. Many managers do not do that and continue the stubborn denial of the fact which is obvious to many observers and fans.

That's up to the players imo. Just because Crouch (who has wonderful feet by the way) is on the pitch, doesn't mean they should be ignoring Harry's instructions to get it down and play it. That's just bad discipline and no reason for Crouch to be sat on the bench imo.

Am I missing something? I always thought King was the best passer and distributor in our defence.

Crouch will start tomorrow if only because Defoe looks like he will miss out. However in all this talk about our striking options in recent weeks it is a little worrying that Pavlyuchenko isn't even getting a mention. I know he is injured at the moment, but surely the guy has enough quality to be a viable option in games?

I guess you are. King is ok passer but I dont rember a great pass by King, long cross field pass that Dawson does ( which most times is very accurate !! ). King does the simple passes... nothing wrong with that, so long as we keep the ball.