Peter crouch
- Thread starter seany
- Start date
sloth
Well-Known Member
- Mar 7, 2005
- 9,018
- 6,900
What the hell are some of you on, you're bending over backwards to defend a ridiculous position.
Crouch can't score goals, he doesn't hold up play very well, his assist per minute played is average. He's poor at shooting with his head or his feet. He can't run the channels, he can't get on the end of through-balls, his control is average and he can't jump so keeps giving away fouls.
In short he's very, very average.
All he has got is height, which non-plusses defenders who aren't used to playing against him. If they had him week in week out then they'd soon work him out and he'd become as ineffective in the international arena as he is in the PL.
Anyway specifically...
Crouch is a passenger. He may work hard, but it doesn't contribute to the team, except maybe when defending corners. He works harder than Pav but is no more effective than the Russian in anything and much less effective in the important things.
Pav scored more goals (14) than Crouch did goals and assists combined (11: 4;7), in far fewer minutes.
Whatever the reason he's ineffective and the team plays worse with him in the side than without him. Like someone else said I'd keep him as an impact sub to be used in desperation in the last 10 minutes or so, but that's all he's useful for.
He simply wasn't. Not even close.
Totally disagree. It is the most frustrating experience of all watching the shitty, dis-jointed football we sometimes play with him in the side.
Not saying that our other strikers can't also be frustrating, but the team as a whole, imo, plays much better with them in the side than with Crouch.
But the team didn't score enough last year. And while with Pav or Defoe on the pitch (yes even Defoe) at least you've the feeling there's the potential of goals, with Crouch you just know it's not going to happen unless some random punt happens to glance of his head into the path of VdV.
As happened 7 times in 1932 minutes last season. Or once every 276 minutes which is once every three games.
In other words we could see that Pav actually personally scored every 160 minutes or every 1.76 games, which is a tally up there with the best in the league (7th), whereas Peter Crouch could only assist once every three games.
Crouch can't score goals, he doesn't hold up play very well, his assist per minute played is average. He's poor at shooting with his head or his feet. He can't run the channels, he can't get on the end of through-balls, his control is average and he can't jump so keeps giving away fouls.
In short he's very, very average.
All he has got is height, which non-plusses defenders who aren't used to playing against him. If they had him week in week out then they'd soon work him out and he'd become as ineffective in the international arena as he is in the PL.
Anyway specifically...
Crouch is a passenger. He may work hard, but it doesn't contribute to the team, except maybe when defending corners. He works harder than Pav but is no more effective than the Russian in anything and much less effective in the important things.
Pav scored more goals (14) than Crouch did goals and assists combined (11: 4;7), in far fewer minutes.
Whatever the reason he's ineffective and the team plays worse with him in the side than without him. Like someone else said I'd keep him as an impact sub to be used in desperation in the last 10 minutes or so, but that's all he's useful for.
He simply wasn't. Not even close.
Totally disagree. It is the most frustrating experience of all watching the shitty, dis-jointed football we sometimes play with him in the side.
Not saying that our other strikers can't also be frustrating, but the team as a whole, imo, plays much better with them in the side than with Crouch.
But the team didn't score enough last year. And while with Pav or Defoe on the pitch (yes even Defoe) at least you've the feeling there's the potential of goals, with Crouch you just know it's not going to happen unless some random punt happens to glance of his head into the path of VdV.
As happened 7 times in 1932 minutes last season. Or once every 276 minutes which is once every three games.
In other words we could see that Pav actually personally scored every 160 minutes or every 1.76 games, which is a tally up there with the best in the league (7th), whereas Peter Crouch could only assist once every three games.
nickchrissi
Well-Known Member
- May 5, 2004
- 2,134
- 33
Crouch is a poor back-up. I'd rather have Carlton Cole, and that's saying something!
Bus-Conductor
SC Supporter
- Oct 19, 2004
- 39,837
- 50,713
Personally I think we all find it hard to be totally objective about all our strikers (Keane, Defoe, Pav, Crouch) because they all have very annoying traits and styles.
Throughout the season in the ratings threads on a few occasions I questioned why Redknapp didn't pair Pav with VDV more often. This seemed to me like it had the makings of the best combination. And I can fully appreciate anyone arguing for this combination. Whilst Pav is not exactly robust, he is reasonably intelligent, sees the ball a little less than Crouch - but passes it more accurately - but a lot more than Defoe, and is the best finisher of the three.
Also Pav's combined goal/assist pm ratio is better than Crouch's.
From recollection Pav and VDV didn't get many starts, but from memory, we had good results whenever they did (Fulham a, Arse a, Newc h, Ful h) although my recollection of performances still said to me we seemed to play better with the Crouch/VDV (Villa h, ManU h, Liv h, ManC a, Liv a)
So I did some research to see what the bare stats were. These just relate to games where players started the game. Here are the results:
Spurs points per game 2010-11 = 1.63 (38g 62p)
Spurs PPG away 10-11 = 1.37 (19g 27p)
PPG without Crouch at all = 1.42 (19g, 27p)
PPG with Crouch = 1.84 (19g 35p)
PPG away without Crouch = 1.17 (12g 14p)
PPG away with Crouch = 1.43 (7g 10p)
PPG without Pav = 1.5 (20g 30p)
PPG with Pav = 1.78 (18g 32p)
Of course, as I've always stated, team stats are highly dubious when applied to a single individual unless backed up with a lot of corroborative and anecdotal evidence. Which I don't have the time to do in Crouch's case, and I'm not even sure it exists.
Here are some more stats relating to the various combos:
PPG with VDV/Crouch combo = 1.29 (7g 9p)
PPG with the VDV/Pav combo = 2.00 (7g 14p)
PPG with Defoe/Pav = 1.14 (7g 8p)
PPG with Defoe/Crouch = 1.83 (6g 11p)
PPG with Defoe/VDV = 1.67 (3g 5p)
PPG with Crouch/Pav = 2.5 (4g 10p)
What does all this suggest ? Who knows, as there are so many variables that influence team stats. But I think on reflection if I had to offer an opinion, I'd say that Redknapp made a big mistake in not playing the Pav/VDV combination more often. It's hard to extrapolate some of those stats because they are based over such a small sample amount, added to the usual variables.
Pavlyuchenko came out in the best two combo's analysed, which really does beg the question that many of us asked frequently, why was he so under used by Redknapp ?
But the stats also suggest that we obtained more points with Crouch than without, and he is involved in the 1st and 3rd best partnerships analysed.
Not included in any of these is the players pass amount/completion, which for me is important. But Pav does make more accurate ppm than Crouch. It's not worth talking about Defoe as he barely sees the ball in 90 min.
Throughout the season in the ratings threads on a few occasions I questioned why Redknapp didn't pair Pav with VDV more often. This seemed to me like it had the makings of the best combination. And I can fully appreciate anyone arguing for this combination. Whilst Pav is not exactly robust, he is reasonably intelligent, sees the ball a little less than Crouch - but passes it more accurately - but a lot more than Defoe, and is the best finisher of the three.
Also Pav's combined goal/assist pm ratio is better than Crouch's.
From recollection Pav and VDV didn't get many starts, but from memory, we had good results whenever they did (Fulham a, Arse a, Newc h, Ful h) although my recollection of performances still said to me we seemed to play better with the Crouch/VDV (Villa h, ManU h, Liv h, ManC a, Liv a)
So I did some research to see what the bare stats were. These just relate to games where players started the game. Here are the results:
Spurs points per game 2010-11 = 1.63 (38g 62p)
Spurs PPG away 10-11 = 1.37 (19g 27p)
PPG without Crouch at all = 1.42 (19g, 27p)
PPG with Crouch = 1.84 (19g 35p)
PPG away without Crouch = 1.17 (12g 14p)
PPG away with Crouch = 1.43 (7g 10p)
PPG without Pav = 1.5 (20g 30p)
PPG with Pav = 1.78 (18g 32p)
Of course, as I've always stated, team stats are highly dubious when applied to a single individual unless backed up with a lot of corroborative and anecdotal evidence. Which I don't have the time to do in Crouch's case, and I'm not even sure it exists.
Here are some more stats relating to the various combos:
PPG with VDV/Crouch combo = 1.29 (7g 9p)
PPG with the VDV/Pav combo = 2.00 (7g 14p)
PPG with Defoe/Pav = 1.14 (7g 8p)
PPG with Defoe/Crouch = 1.83 (6g 11p)
PPG with Defoe/VDV = 1.67 (3g 5p)
PPG with Crouch/Pav = 2.5 (4g 10p)
What does all this suggest ? Who knows, as there are so many variables that influence team stats. But I think on reflection if I had to offer an opinion, I'd say that Redknapp made a big mistake in not playing the Pav/VDV combination more often. It's hard to extrapolate some of those stats because they are based over such a small sample amount, added to the usual variables.
Pavlyuchenko came out in the best two combo's analysed, which really does beg the question that many of us asked frequently, why was he so under used by Redknapp ?
But the stats also suggest that we obtained more points with Crouch than without, and he is involved in the 1st and 3rd best partnerships analysed.
Not included in any of these is the players pass amount/completion, which for me is important. But Pav does make more accurate ppm than Crouch. It's not worth talking about Defoe as he barely sees the ball in 90 min.
GoldstarYid
Active Member
- Jan 23, 2011
- 866
- 202
I actually think half of Crouchs assists are him attempting a first touch. Sums up how i feel about his footballing abillity. Top lad though.
Dare!
Well-Known Member
- Jan 20, 2011
- 2,983
- 1,888
:rofl:
alex3
tottenham till i die
- Jun 17, 2011
- 1,836
- 1,439
:hump::hump:
camaj
Posting too much
- Aug 10, 2004
- 8,195
- 883
How about: "It'd be fantastic if we could sell Crouch"?
Bus-Conductor
SC Supporter
- Oct 19, 2004
- 39,837
- 50,713
I've made no attempt to go any deeper than starting line ups and pairings. They are very rudimentary stats, and I wouldn't hang my hat on whatever they are saying anyway. I merely posted them as a snap shot, to use along with people's opinion.
My two bobs worth is this:
1. They are all (Pav, Keane, Defoe, Crouch) fucking annoying to watch at times. Defoe is insipid and rarely contributes anything to a game or our overall team play. Keane and Pav are both fucking fairies and Crouch is a gangly fucker who isn't always in full control of his body.
2. Pav has been the most harshly treated, and on balance is possibly the most use to our team overall, when used the right way in certain formations. But it really is a tough call with Crouch for me, as I said, for me some of our better performances involve Crouch and the one thing you get with him that you don't with the others is bravery and 100% commitment every time. But at the end of the day bravery and commitment aren't enough, the truth is Pav makes more accurate passes and his goal/assist ratio is better than Crouch, so there really is a case for Pavlyuchenko. And yet, we do have a marginally better PPG with Crouch than Pav. Go figure.
Spurtacular
Banned
- Jul 25, 2011
- 5
- 0
I don't understand how Crouch's England Goalscoring Record is so good, yet when he puts on a Spurs Shirt, its not the same. Maybe this is due to the quality of opposition, I appreciate all he has done for Spurs (Including Getting Us To The CL!), but I feel for the sake of the club he needs to move on, Providing we have already brought in Strikers.
Works for me :wink:
- Jun 5, 2004
- 32,221
- 64,290
- Staff
- #75
I hated the bit where he scored (three times) in the Young Boys game to make us qualify for the Champions League proper. I also hated the goal that got us there as well, against Man City the season before.
Don't even get me started on that goal in the San Siro.
Don't even get me started on that goal in the San Siro.
kishman
Well-Known Member
- Apr 22, 2005
- 10,575
- 771
Fucking hate Crouch. :lol:
Dannyspur
I just don't know anymore!
- Aug 17, 2004
- 10,156
- 13,891
half of his assists are down to the skill of VdV making the most of balls in his general direction. one assist I remember was an 'air' header where the ball hit his knee, bounced up to his belly and rolled along the goal line. another was a header behind vdv, who stretched to control it, swivelled and smacked it in.
if Crouch had put away just a small percentage of his missed chances, the so-called getting us int the CL goal would have been academic.
stemark44
Well-Known Member
- Mar 17, 2005
- 6,598
- 1,829
You obviously don't remember him also getting sent off against Madrid to help put us out of the competition and his own goal against City that ended any chance we had of qualifying this season.
Strikeb4ck
Well-Known Member
- Aug 8, 2010
- 4,484
- 9,417
To be fair that red card was ridiculous, and there's been worse own goals. The bigger question is what was he doing in the defense? Wasn't a corner kick was it? Don't remember the goal too well.
I like Crouchy. Admittedly he is crap sometimes, but he offers something that only Zigic and Maierhofer can match. He is a handful for defenses wether he plays well or not.
Not too mention he adds to the HG quota.
