|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2013 13:38:24 GMT
Second half against Southampton he was the best player on the pitch. First half he wasn't at his best but still scored a brilliant goal, even if he did miss a sitter.
|
|
|
Post by scfcbiancorossi on Jan 18, 2013 13:41:00 GMT
No coincidence that we frequently look at our best when Jones, Jerome and Walters are all on the pitch together.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2013 13:41:24 GMT
A few points. In the FA Cup season there were question being asked over KJ, he wasn't as bullet proof as people seem to think. Re KJ scoring more, really? They've both had a full season with us in the Premier League, one with an attacking unit and one without, they scored the same amount of league goals. So it's not that simple as saying KJ would score more. I'm not saying he won't but it's not as black and white as You make it. Agree with the last paragraph. His point would have been far more effective, if he had said that although Jones and Crouch have been on a par with each other in terms of finding the net, the team as a WHOLE scores more goals with Jones in it. But was that down to the wingers in that season? I think it was. KJ is the more potent of the two at the minute, that cannot be disputed and he fully deserves to start. But I think the problem is bigger than Crouch.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 18, 2013 13:42:14 GMT
Oh its the same with all our best players - mistreated by the manager. Pulis has a rock on for big names, that is all! I bet he can't wait for Jones to have one average performance so he's got an excuse to get Crouchy back in the side! He was below average against Southampton but kept his place, and he missed a sitter & did not figure much against Chelsea but I fully expect (and want) him to start against Swansea. He is currently above Crouch in the pecking order so why all the fuss? So what if he missed a sitter? Van Persie has missed more sitters than Kenwne this season. Strikers miss sitters.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2013 13:43:52 GMT
His point would have been far more effective, if he had said that although Jones and Crouch have been on a par with each other in terms of finding the net, the team as a WHOLE scores more goals with Jones in it. What's it down to this season then? But was that down to the wingers in that season? I think it was. KJ is the more potent of the two at the minute, that cannot be disputed and he fully deserves to start. But I think the problem is bigger than Crouch.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2013 13:46:16 GMT
What's it down to this season then? But was that down to the wingers in that season? I think it was. KJ is the more potent of the two at the minute, that cannot be disputed and he fully deserves to start. But I think the problem is bigger than Crouch. KJ is simply on form, Crouchy was and was scoring (this season), he lost the form and stopped scoring. I don't think there's much more to it.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 18, 2013 13:46:56 GMT
His point would have been far more effective, if he had said that although Jones and Crouch have been on a par with each other in terms of finding the net, the team as a WHOLE scores more goals with Jones in it. But was that down to the wingers in that season? I think it was. KJ is the more potent of the two at the minute, that cannot be disputed and he fully deserves to start. But I think the problem is bigger than Crouch. Walters has played with the same wingers this season, Matty, who until Kenwyne has come back into the side has looked awful and Kightly, who is just plain rubbish. Walters scores more goals when he partners Kenwyne than when he does Crouch. The team offensively is a better unit with Jones in it than with Crouch in it because Kenwyne is far better at playing Pulisball than Crouch is.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2013 13:47:59 GMT
KJ is simply on form, Crouchy was and was scoring (this season), he lost the form and stopped scoring. I don't think there's much more to it. I meant the team scoring more goals.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2013 13:51:13 GMT
But was that down to the wingers in that season? I think it was. KJ is the more potent of the two at the minute, that cannot be disputed and he fully deserves to start. But I think the problem is bigger than Crouch. Walters has played with the same wingers this season, Matty, who until Kenwyne has come back into the side has looked awful and Kightly, who is just plain rubbish. Walters scores more goals when he partners Kenwyne than when he does Crouch. The team offensively is a better unit with Jones in it than with Crouch in it because Kenwyne is far better at playing Pulisball than Crouch is. I don't think Walters has been playing well and Matty has been doing ok all season for me. He hasn't been great for any of it but I have said I don't think he's been playing as badly as people on here think. And his form hasn't improved that much for me to think it's all down to Kenwyne "Paul Daniels" Jones. 6 league goals first season and 7 in the second would suggest that maybe he doesn't? I don't know what the true stats are but going off that it's negligible. KJ is more suited to it but I still think our attacking problems are bigger than KJ/Crouch.
|
|
|
Post by Gods on Jan 18, 2013 13:53:16 GMT
Some people will say this is pathetic but what I like most about KJ is that he plays with a smile on his face, which is almost unheard of
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 18, 2013 13:55:39 GMT
Some people will say this is pathetic but what I like most about KJ is that he plays with a smile on his face, which is almost unheard of Pathetic post.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2013 13:55:50 GMT
KJ is simply on form, Crouchy was and was scoring (this season), he lost the form and stopped scoring. I don't think there's much more to it. I meant the team scoring more goals. Barring Liverpool and Soton we haven't have we? And the Soton game Crouch played a big hand ;D in that.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 18, 2013 13:57:15 GMT
Walters has played with the same wingers this season, Matty, who until Kenwyne has come back into the side has looked awful and Kightly, who is just plain rubbish. Walters scores more goals when he partners Kenwyne than when he does Crouch. The team offensively is a better unit with Jones in it than with Crouch in it because Kenwyne is far better at playing Pulisball than Crouch is. I don't think Walters has been playing well and Matty has been doing ok all season for me. He hasn't been great for any of it but I have said I don't think he's been playing as badly as people on here think. And his form hasn't improved that much for me to think it's all down to Kenwyne "Paul Daniels" Jones. 6 league goals first season and 7 in the second would suggest that maybe he doesn't? I don't know what the true stats are but going off that it's negligible. KJ is more suited to it but I still think our attacking problems are bigger than KJ/Crouch. You don't think Walters scores more goals when he partners Kenwyne than when he partners Crouch? You don't think the team plays better as a whole when Walters partners Jones than when he partners Crouch? Forget the stats (and the penalties ) for a second and tell me what you see from the stands mate. You really don't see any improvement in the Jones/Walters partnership compared to the Crouch/Walters partnership in terms of how the team plays as a whole? Blimey ...
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2013 13:57:23 GMT
I meant the team scoring more goals. Barring Liverpool and Soton we haven't have we? And the Soton game Crouch played a big hand ;D in that. Three goals in each (and four more in the cup against Palace). We've only ever scored three goals in one game that Crouch has started.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 18, 2013 13:59:08 GMT
Barring Liverpool and Soton we haven't have we? And the Soton game Crouch played a big hand ;D in that. Three goals in each (and four more in the cup against Palace). We've only ever scored three goals in one game that Crouch has started. How do the results stack up? Average points per game started?...Perhaps also goals against stats?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2013 14:01:08 GMT
Three goals in each (and four more in the cup against Palace). We've only ever scored three goals in one game that Crouch has started. How do the results stack up? Average points per game started?...Perhaps also goals against stats? No idea. Feel free to do the honours.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2013 14:01:42 GMT
I don't think Walters has been playing well and Matty has been doing ok all season for me. He hasn't been great for any of it but I have said I don't think he's been playing as badly as people on here think. And his form hasn't improved that much for me to think it's all down to Kenwyne "Paul Daniels" Jones. 6 league goals first season and 7 in the second would suggest that maybe he doesn't? I don't know what the true stats are but going off that it's negligible. KJ is more suited to it but I still think our attacking problems are bigger than KJ/Crouch. You don't think Walters scores more goals when he partners Kenwyne than when he partners Crouch? You don't think the team plays better as a whole when Walters partners Jones than when he partners Crouch? Forget the stats (and the penalties ) for a second and tell me what you see from the stands mate. You really don't see any improvement in the Jones/Walters partnership compared to the Crouch/Walters partnership in terms of how the team plays as a whole? Blimey ... I don't think we play much better tbh Paul. It's still dull on the whole, we still look devoid of ideas up front and we still don't create many chances. I just don' it makes that much of a difference to make a song and dance over.
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 18, 2013 14:03:18 GMT
You don't think Walters scores more goals when he partners Kenwyne than when he partners Crouch? You don't think the team plays better as a whole when Walters partners Jones than when he partners Crouch? Forget the stats (and the penalties ) for a second and tell me what you see from the stands mate. You really don't see any improvement in the Jones/Walters partnership compared to the Crouch/Walters partnership in terms of how the team plays as a whole? Blimey ... I don't think we play much better tbh Paul. It's still dull on the whole, we still look devoid of ideas up front and we still don't create many chances. I just don' it makes that much of a difference to make a song and dance over. Fair do's mate, I massively disagree with you but if that's what you see, then I'll respect that fella.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2013 14:05:24 GMT
Barring Liverpool and Soton we haven't have we? And the Soton game Crouch played a big hand ;D in that. Three goals in each (and four more in the cup against Palace). We've only ever scored three goals in one game that Crouch has started. I didn't watch Liverpool so can't comment. But Southampton were bloody atrocious and we should be sticking three past them and as I said Crouch played his part as well as Jerome. And we got three goals playing a 4-2-4 almost so it's hard to pin that Paul Daniels KJ. The Palace game we should have scored more! Crouch was shite though but KJ when up against that #15 when in midfield found the same problems. And I could have saved his header. But he did play tremendously well in extra time. And as I said to Paul, overall I still think we're pretty dull and not that much better to watch when Walters and KJ play.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2013 14:08:34 GMT
I don't think we play much better tbh Paul. It's still dull on the whole, we still look devoid of ideas up front and we still don't create many chances. I just don' it makes that much of a difference to make a song and dance over. Fair do's mate, I massively disagree with you but if that's what you see, then I'll respect that fella. It is because we play best when we press up front. I think we do it very rarely, 1 in 10 games if that. I believe Liverpool was one (I didn't see it), I've been every home game bar the 'Castle one as well and we haven't done it. We're far too passive even with Walters in his correct position. Yes having Crouch and Adam up there nullifies that even more but I think the problem wears a cap. ;D
|
|
|
Post by Paul Spencer on Jan 18, 2013 14:14:29 GMT
Fair do's mate, I massively disagree with you but if that's what you see, then I'll respect that fella. It is because we play best when we press up front. I think we do it very rarely, 1 in 10 games if that. I believe Liverpool was one (I didn't see it), I've been every home game bar the 'Castle one as well and we haven't done it. We're far too passive even with Walters in his correct position. Yes having Crouch and Adam up there nullifies that even more but I think the problem wears a cap. ;D You're never going to create loads of chances playing Pulisball though, so what you see as only a slight improvement, I see as a huge one. And you're right about the pressing up front ... If you were going to a build a team from scratch to play long ball, counter attacking, 4-4-1-1 footy with a man in the hole to do the pressing and strong man with movement to lead the line ... then who in their right mind would say, ah the two players we need up front in this team are Charlie Adam and Peter Crouch?
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2013 14:19:42 GMT
It is because we play best when we press up front. I think we do it very rarely, 1 in 10 games if that. I believe Liverpool was one (I didn't see it), I've been every home game bar the 'Castle one as well and we haven't done it. We're far too passive even with Walters in his correct position. Yes having Crouch and Adam up there nullifies that even more but I think the problem wears a cap. ;D You're never going to create loads of chances playing Pulisball though, so what you see as only a slight improvement, I see as a huge one. And you're right about the pressing up front ... If you were going to a build a team from scratch to play long ball, counter attacking, 4-4-1-1 footy with a man in the hole to do the pressing and strong man with movement to lead the line ... then who in their right mind would say, ah the two players we need up front in this team are Charlie Adam and Peter Crouch? Nobody would. I was never happy with the Adam transfer. The Crouch one is difficult. As You know I love him and think he's brilliant but again I was never that happy with the thought of him joining. I wanted Bendtner over him for a start because he's more suited and younger. It was always the financial side that put me off more though, surprisingly I whinged my bag over it. There's no denying we paid far too much for Crouch, I said it at the time and nothing has changed but I think he has done well for us and can continue to do so.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2013 14:30:26 GMT
Three goals in each (and four more in the cup against Palace). We've only ever scored three goals in one game that Crouch has started. I didn't watch Liverpool so can't comment. But Southampton were bloody atrocious and we should be sticking three past them and as I said Crouch played his part as well as Jerome. And we got three goals playing a 4-2-4 almost so it's hard to pin that Paul Daniels KJ. The Palace game we should have scored more! Crouch was shite though but KJ when up against that #15 when in midfield found the same problems. And I could have saved his header. But he did play tremendously well in extra time. And as I said to Paul, overall I still think we're pretty dull and not that much better to watch when Walters and KJ play. That doesn't really explain why the occasions when we manage to hit the net three times in one game have all, with one exception, come in games that Crouch has had little or no involvement in. What's that about?
|
|
|
Post by dozintheseventees on Jan 18, 2013 14:32:49 GMT
It's very simple for me. Jones is playing very well and, as we all know, he is a very good player when he's at his best. Walters is better in the hole than he is on the wing. We are not playing brilliant stuff and we've not suddenly become a much better team overnight although some of our individuals are playing well. Strangely though, our wingers continue to struggle despite the lack of Peter Crouch to fuck up their game and the inclusion of Jones who (I'm told) is the key to wingers being able to play their game.
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 18, 2013 14:33:13 GMT
How do the results stack up? Average points per game started?...Perhaps also goals against stats? No idea. Feel free to do the honours. Didn't think you'd look into it. ;D I would do but I finish work in half an hour and need to make up some shit to fill in my time sheet.
|
|
|
Post by bayernoatcake on Jan 18, 2013 14:36:40 GMT
I didn't watch Liverpool so can't comment. But Southampton were bloody atrocious and we should be sticking three past them and as I said Crouch played his part as well as Jerome. And we got three goals playing a 4-2-4 almost so it's hard to pin that Paul Daniels KJ. The Palace game we should have scored more! Crouch was shite though but KJ when up against that #15 when in midfield found the same problems. And I could have saved his header. But he did play tremendously well in extra time. And as I said to Paul, overall I still think we're pretty dull and not that much better to watch when Walters and KJ play. That doesn't really explain why the occasions when we manage to hit the net three times in one game have all, with one exception, come in games that Crouch has had little or no involvement in. What's that about? The Palace game was won because of a suicidal opposition manager and not KJ.
|
|
|
Post by pez75 on Jan 18, 2013 14:37:34 GMT
Barring Liverpool and Soton we haven't have we? And the Soton game Crouch played a big hand ;D in that. Three goals in each (and four more in the cup against Palace). We've only ever scored three goals in one game that Crouch has started. THe L'pool game was a cracker and I will give you that - but the S'hampton game was a freak occurrence - to give a true comparison you have to apply the same factors - how many home games where we concede 3 goals against a wank team has Crouch been involved in?
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2013 14:41:35 GMT
Three goals in each (and four more in the cup against Palace). We've only ever scored three goals in one game that Crouch has started. THe L'pool game was a cracker and I will give you that - but the S'hampton game was a freak occurrence - to give a true comparison you have to apply the same factors - how many home games where we concede 3 goals against a wank team has Crouch been involved in? Freak occurrence or not, Jones played an absolutely pivotal role in it and I don't think we'd have for back in the game without him.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 18, 2013 14:43:22 GMT
That doesn't really explain why the occasions when we manage to hit the net three times in one game have all, with one exception, come in games that Crouch has had little or no involvement in. What's that about? The Palace game was won because of a suicidal opposition manager and not KJ. It was won because of both. Suicidal tactics still actually have to be punished. All four goals came after he'd come on. Any thoughts on why we can't score three goals with Crouchy on?
|
|
|
Post by foster on Jan 18, 2013 14:45:48 GMT
The Palace game was won because of a suicidal opposition manager and not KJ. It was won because of both. Suicidal tactics still actually have to be punished. All four goals came after he'd come on. Any thoughts on why we can't score three goals with Crouchy on? We probably can Rob. The Palace game was 1-1 at full time. After that it came down to stamina and them having to equalise and leave themselves exposed at the back. I think you dismiss Crouch too easily. He's just off form at the moment and we've played well with him in the side.
|
|