Perfect time to rest Robbie
- Thread starter tony_parkes
- Start date
pezinhoTHFC
Member
- Mar 13, 2007
- 920
- 1
I couldn't agree more. Having excellent passers of the ball in the likes of Dawson, Huddlestone and Bentley, we've been playing long balls for a good number of seasons now. What is the difference between a cross-field ball to Lennon and a long ball to Crouch? He's difficult for defenders to handle and is very good at knocking it down. The header against Sunderland to set Keane up is a prime example. Crouch is also very good with his feet and his link up play benefits from that. I don't think we're as predictable or as route-one as a lot of people seem to believe we are.
mattstev2000
Well-Known Member
- Aug 15, 2007
- 2,803
- 5,562
- Jun 5, 2004
- 32,221
- 64,290
- Staff
- #25
It really is the case.
We simply don't go long with Keane and Defoe, or if we do, then it's a ball over the top as opposed to a ball aimed at hitting one of the striker's heads.
It may be a simplistic view, but that's because ultimately football is a very simple game. You surely cannot say with a straight face that the defenders (in particular) don't pump the ball upfield trying to relieve pressure more when we have Crouch? Because they do. As I've witnessed a helluva lot of it in front of me in my little Shelf corner. :grin:
Kendall
Well-Known Member
- Feb 8, 2007
- 38,502
- 11,933
Harry even said we do.
It annoys me really, because Crouch has good feet. We should be more disciplined in our approach and use Crouch more effectively than simply pinging a ball to his head on the off chance that he can find a runner with a knock down.
Route one can be a great tactic, if used sparingly as part of a greater game plan.
It annoys me really, because Crouch has good feet. We should be more disciplined in our approach and use Crouch more effectively than simply pinging a ball to his head on the off chance that he can find a runner with a knock down.
Route one can be a great tactic, if used sparingly as part of a greater game plan.
Dougal
Staff
- Jun 4, 2004
- 60,381
- 130,344
Football is a simple game made difficult by managers and players, however IMHO it is too simplistic to say that we play longer because of Crouch per se.
It has more to do with personnel, formations and the opposition.
Crouch played at Doncaster, did we play long? No.
Crouch played at Preston, did we play long? No
Crouch played at home to Stoke, did we play overly long? No
The second 45 minutes against Birmingham, did we play long? No
Why not? Looking at those games I would say it's a combination of factors being our own personnel, formation and the quality of the opposition. Against all of those sides we played with players more comfortable in possesion and more pace in the team, meaning we can shorten our play up. Also Defoe played against Birmingham and Preston and Lennon played in all of them except Doncaster where Gio played, this forces teams to play deeper because of the threat of their pace. Against Stoke we had Krancjar and Lennon playing in midfield which gives us much more craft and pace, hence we didn't play so long and most of the best things we done went through lennon and Niko.
It's also worth pointing out that we haven't seen Crouch with Modric who makes us play shorter and neater. And we haven't seen Crouch with Defoe, Lennon, Modric and Niko or any 3 of them 4 who give us better possesion and force teams to defend deeper creating more space.
When Crouch has played and we have played pretty long has been in completely different circumstances.
Man Utd and Arsenal for example completely dominated the midfield and the possesion, so as a defender under such circumstances what is the instinctive thing to do (and it could be argued the right thing to do)? It's to bypass the area in which you are being dominated and go past it. Especially at Arsenal where we were outplayed and out fought in midfield and had only 1 wide option in the form of the ineffective Bentley. You actually end up with no choice but to go long, regardless of who is up there.
Man Utd at home was pretty similar, we were just outplayed by a better side.
Sunderland I believe was down to a shocking formation which left us completely unbalanced and no width, Harry's fault not Crouch's. Plus we had a lack of pace and not enough comfortable players. Noticeable when Niko come on for Keane and we balanced the team and had a player very comfortable in possesion that we didn'y play nearly as long in the last 30 minutes and actually started to dominate the game.
So I believe it's not about Crouch per se, I believe that it's about other factors and to say we play long when Crouch plays for me is way to simplistic.
beals
SC Supporter
- Dec 22, 2003
- 1,540
- 193
Never thought I'd say this but without a doubt Keane and Defoe are our best combination up front at the moment, and with both fit I presume they will play on Sunday. Maybe a tad harsh on Crouch but unless Harry has drilled the rest of the team over the international break on how to play to the teams strenghts with Crouch included, I just can't see him starting. I hope he starts with Kranjcar on the left though, no more square pegs in round holes please Harry. These are the type of games we have a habit of messing up.
A nice deflection from Harry away from what was a poor choice of personnel and formation to take on Utd.
A very poor decision against such a powerful side to start with Crouch, Defoe and Keane which left us completely outplayed in midfield, which guess what? Left us with little option but to play long to Crouch and hope to get the pieces.
If he believes what he says in the first paragraph, it begs the question as to why he signed him.
Adam
Active Member
- Feb 23, 2004
- 2,556
- 82
Thats not a serious question is it? The two things are about as similar as a cross and a shot. The whole purpose of a cross-field ball is to suck in the opposition and then open the game up with by switching the play-that gives you plenty of space to work with on the other sie, and when you have pacy players like Lennon, its the best way to utilise their threats. Any coach will tell you that if you keep the ball moving from side to side then you have a great chance of opening up the oppisition as they inevitably move out of their defensive shape.
A long ball is totally different as you are looking for three things to happen perfectly-a great pass, a correctly weighted and directed flick on AND another player timing their run right so they can get on the end of it; the percentages are a lot slimmer and eventually a defence will be able to work out how to stop you, as shown by United against us, where they put one defender in front of Crouch and the other directly behind him, meaning he couldnt get a run on the ball and therefore couldnt get a decent jump.
The main problem that we have with our long balls is that the majority of them come from the centre backs and not the full backs-this gives Crouch no angle to work with and the best he can do is flick it on in the direction of the keeper, making it very hard for the second striker to get onto it AND stay onside. If we ever play a long ball, it should ALWAYS come from a full-back as that would give Crouch the opportunity to either fick it on behind him, or knock it down in front.
Either way, we have resorted to insanely boring tactics when Crouch plays, and i dont see how we can legislate playing him and in a style like that when it actually gets us worse results that when we play with the two little'uns up top.
...you
?, I'm not the one picking weird formations and playing people out of position.
Paxtonite
Active Member
- Nov 28, 2004
- 1,956
- 32
I obviously missed something.
Anyway can you see my point in my reply to Stoof or do you not agree?
Gilzeanking
Well-Known Member
- May 7, 2005
- 6,140
- 5,083
I'm frustrated with this ,if we play Crouch we only lump balls up to him , stuff
Surely Harry is the boss . Doesn't ' Look lads don't lump it long to Crouchie all the time ' work from him ?
If my old team captain told me to do something...then thats what happened...I didn't want to get an ear bashing .
not the same at Spurs ? :shrug:
Surely Harry is the boss . Doesn't ' Look lads don't lump it long to Crouchie all the time ' work from him ?
If my old team captain told me to do something...then thats what happened...I didn't want to get an ear bashing .
not the same at Spurs ? :shrug:
Dougal
Staff
- Jun 4, 2004
- 60,381
- 130,344
- Staff
- #38
I don't see how you've answered him. You've pointed out that we can play with Crouch if we use him in the right way. Stoof pointed out that too often we don't use him as we should do and instead go for the easy option, of hoofing the ball up to him, which we don't have/rely on with the shorter strikers.
Coyboy
The Double of 1961 is still The Double
- Dec 3, 2004
- 15,506
- 5,032
