|
|
Post by march4 on Mar 17, 2014 21:47:50 GMT
After a rest while he was suspended you would have expected Carroll to have thrown himself about for 90mins.
However, he started well before fading after 20mins of the 1st half. 2nd half a similar thing happened although he didn't do as much in that 20min burst.
So, do we want a man in Brazil who can only manage 20mins on a pleasant day in the Potteries?
|
|
|
|
Post by mickmacc on Mar 17, 2014 23:20:27 GMT
Crouch's agility has proved over the years with spectacular goals that he isn't a 'big awkward lump' of course.Goals that Carroll could only dream of scoring.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 8:02:42 GMT
Crouch's agility has proved over the years with spectacular goals that he isn't a 'big awkward lump' of course.Goals that Carroll could only dream of scoring. Are you arguing that the Crouch of 2014 is more mobile and agile than Carroll? |
|
|
|
Post by werrington on Mar 18, 2014 8:12:02 GMT
Crouch's agility has proved over the years with spectacular goals that he isn't a 'big awkward lump' of course.Goals that Carroll could only dream of scoring. Are you arguing that the Crouch of 2014 is more mobile and agile than Carroll? Perhaps he thinks Norman whiteside is better than George Best because he appeared and scored in a World Cup finals for Northern Ireland |
|
|
|
Post by mickmacc on Mar 18, 2014 8:15:21 GMT
Carroll would not have scored the 'goal'(credited to Odemwingie)that Crouch did on Saturday or any of the spectacular volleys Crouch has over the years. Carroll as you say is a big awkward lump and undeniably effective in the air.He has a dreadful touch and would be exposed at international level.Class footballer like Crouch -he isn't.
|
|
|
|
Post by Danstoke82 on Mar 18, 2014 8:17:47 GMT
Sadly Crouchy's time with England is over now I feel, regardless of who he plays for.
The person that should be his replacement is Rickie Lambert and for the life of me I cannot understand why some of the media are demanding it be Andy "The Cart Horse" Carroll.
|
|
|
|
Post by vahl on Mar 18, 2014 8:20:06 GMT
We should all applaud Crouchy and rightly so because aside from a couple of poor runs in the team he has been a very good player for us. His England career is rightly over.
Crouch is like a Playstation 3, whilst Carroll is a Playstation 4. The new generation of Target Man.
At £35 million though, you're talking pissed.
|
|
|
|
Post by mickmacc on Mar 18, 2014 8:21:16 GMT
The media love Carroll.Crouchy had a great season for us,player of the year,14 goals.Carroll came in, played two games after being injured all season and went to the Euros!
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 8:25:38 GMT
Carroll would not have scored the 'goal'(credited to Odemwingie)that Crouch did on Saturday or any of the spectacular volleys Crouch has over the years. Carroll as you say is a big awkward lump and undeniably effective in the air.He has a dreadful touch and would be exposed at international level.Class footballer like Crouch -he isn't. Carroll looked very good with the ball at his feet on Saturday and has scored some decent goals on the deck as well. He's not a £35m striker but he's a very decent target man. He hasn't been exposed at international level so far - in fact he's looked pretty good for England when he's played. Out of interest do you have some sort of vested interest in Crouch? He seems to be all you ever talk about. |
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on Mar 18, 2014 9:50:48 GMT
Crouch's agility has proved over the years with spectacular goals that he isn't a 'big awkward lump' of course.Goals that Carroll could only dream of scoring. Are you arguing that the Crouch of 2014 is more mobile and agile than Carroll? Crouch is undoubtedly more mobile and agile than Carroll. Carroll is an injury prone battering ram with very little finesse. |
|
|
|
Post by jarhead on Mar 18, 2014 10:00:30 GMT
I don't want him playing for stoke never mind England at a World Cup!
|
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 18, 2014 10:05:30 GMT
I don't want him playing for stoke never mind England at a World Cup! Indeed. How much better we'd look with John 'The Beast' Parkin Guidetti leading the line |
|
|
|
Post by jarhead on Mar 18, 2014 10:07:31 GMT
He needs a go does fat boy and crouch needs a rest but at the time did we need buy crouch when jones was actually playing well!?
Crouch has done well but he's to slow and weak.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mint Berry Barks on Mar 18, 2014 11:25:38 GMT
Neither Crouch or Carroll should go to the World Cup.
Carroll has done absolutely nothing to justify being selected and Crouch isn't as good as Lambert or Rodriguz (?), both of which I'd take alongside Sturridge and Rooney.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 13:22:26 GMT
Are you arguing that the Crouch of 2014 is more mobile and agile than Carroll? Crouch is undoubtedly more mobile and agile than Carroll. Carroll is an injury prone battering ram with very little finesse. I think that's a load of bollocks personally. Opinions, eh?  |
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on Mar 18, 2014 14:01:09 GMT
Crouch is undoubtedly more mobile and agile than Carroll. Carroll is an injury prone battering ram with very little finesse. I think that's a load of bollocks personally. Opinions, eh? I was never a fan of Crouch and when QPR were interested in him during the last window I would have personally driven him there. The change of system has revitalised him and anyone who can't see how well he's playing at the moment have pre-conceived ideas going into games. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 14:13:29 GMT
I think that's a load of bollocks personally. Opinions, eh? I was never a fan of Crouch and when QPR were interested in him during the last window I would have personally driven him there. The change of system has revitalised him and anyone who can't see how well he's playing at the moment have pre-conceived ideas going into games. so if he's executing his role well then that suddenly means he MUST be agile and mobile does it? despite the fact that being agile and mobile has NEVER been a part of his game at any club he's played at? erm, no it simply means that he's a different kind of player and tends to need support up front to get the best out of his talents which he is getting now that our play is more attacking in general. he IS playing well (and i don't think anyone has disputed that so there's absolutely no relevance that that part of your post has to anything that anyone has said on here so far) but it's not down to agility or mobility at all, simply that people are getting up there and supporting him more..... but people on here think that because they're both tall men then they must play in exactly the same way...lazy assumption and incorrect as well! i don't see many people on here actually saying "Crouch is shit" at all (and i'm pretty sure Rob didn't in his post anywhere), simply people putting forward the pros and cons of both players and then people getting hysterical thinking "Oooh he said Crouch isn't agile therefore he must be saying he's a bag of wank" when in reality that just isn't what people are saying at all. if you genuinely think that Crouch is more mobile and agile than Carroll than you really need the services of some of Harley Street's best mate! that doesn't make Crouch a bad player and it's not a criticism of him (in the same way that saying that Tim Cahill was better with his head than SJW isn't a criticism) it's simply noting what talents particular people have and judging them on that. no need to get all defensive of Crouchy mate,we're talking about the England side not the Stoke side and how each player would fit into that side. he's a Stoke player so we all love him but to say that a fit Crouch (a 34 year old with no pace or movement) would be better for the England team than a fit Carroll (a 25 year old who does run and get behind the defence) in the current setup given the way England play is just ridiculous. just because some prefer other forwards to Crouch doesn't mean anyone is saying that Crouch is playing badly or that we're agenda driven. try reading their posts first and seeing the difference between what you have told them they're saying and what they've actually written eh? you'll find they are 2 entirely different things |
|
|
|
Post by foxysgloves on Mar 18, 2014 14:24:14 GMT
We need a target man option.
Personally i would go
1 Carroll
2 Crouch
3 Lambert
But given Roy's Soton fetish its gonna Lambert.
|
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on Mar 18, 2014 14:26:02 GMT
Crouch's agility has proved over the years with spectacular goals that he isn't a 'big awkward lump' of course.Goals that Carroll could only dream of scoring. Are you arguing that the Crouch of 2014 is more mobile and agile than Carroll? 2014 Crouch has a way better footballing brain and instinct than Carroll ever will have. Plus he's not self-destructive. With the right partner he really would still do a good England job, look at his record ffs. If he's stayed with just one or two clubs it would have done him more favours I think. |
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on Mar 18, 2014 14:27:38 GMT
He needs a go does fat boy and crouch needs a rest but at the time did we need buy crouch when jones was actually playing well!? Crouch has done well but he's to slow and weak. This is the Jones who couldn't get a game for Blunderland, can't get much of one for Baadiff and couldn't usually get one for us either?? ?? |
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on Mar 18, 2014 14:29:51 GMT
I was never a fan of Crouch and when QPR were interested in him during the last window I would have personally driven him there. The change of system has revitalised him and anyone who can't see how well he's playing at the moment have pre-conceived ideas going into games. so if he's executing his role well then that suddenly means he MUST be agile and mobile does it? despite the fact that being agile and mobile has NEVER been a part of his game at any club he's played at? erm, no it simply means that he's a different kind of player and tends to need support up front to get the best out of his talents which he is getting now that our play is more attacking in general. he IS playing well (and i don't think anyone has disputed that so there's absolutely no relevance that that part of your post has to anything that anyone has said on here so far) but it's not down to agility or mobility at all, simply that people are getting up there and supporting him more..... but people on here think that because they're both tall men then they must play in exactly the same way...lazy assumption and incorrect as well! i don't see many people on here actually saying "Crouch is shit" at all (and i'm pretty sure Rob didn't in his post anywhere), simply people putting forward the pros and cons of both players and then people getting hysterical thinking "Oooh he said Crouch isn't agile therefore he must be saying he's a bag of wank" when in reality that just isn't what people are saying at all. if you genuinely think that Crouch is more mobile and agile than Carroll than you really need the services of some of Harley Street's best mate! that doesn't make Crouch a bad player and it's not a criticism of him (in the same way that saying that Tim Cahill was better with his head than SJW isn't a criticism) it's simply noting what talents particular people have and judging them on that. no need to get all defensive of Crouchy mate,we're talking about the England side not the Stoke side and how each player would fit into that side. he's a Stoke player so we all love him but to say that a fit Crouch (a 34 year old with no pace or movement) would be better for the England team than a fit Carroll (a 25 year old who does run and get behind the defence) in the current setup given the way England play is just ridiculous. just because some prefer other forwards to Crouch doesn't mean anyone is saying that Crouch is playing badly or that we're agenda driven. try reading their posts first and seeing the difference between what you have told them they're saying and what they've actually written eh? you'll find they are 2 entirely different things The agile and mobile comparison is between Carroll and Crouch. In fact the more I read of your post the more I realise it is patronising drivel. I think this is the first positive post I've ever made regarding Crouch and I'm discussing the merits of whether he has earned consideration of an England recall. In my original post I considered that Crouch was more deserving of a world cup place than Carroll and Defoe. That's my opinion, many disagree some agree. Calm down, breathe deeply  |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 14:37:38 GMT
Are you arguing that the Crouch of 2014 is more mobile and agile than Carroll? 2014 Crouch has a way better footballing brain and instinct than Carroll ever will have. Plus he's not self-destructive. With the right partner he really would still do a good England job, look at his record ffs. If he's stayed with just one or two clubs it would have done him more favours I think. i have to say that this "Look at his record" stuff really is daft sal (as some have already mentioned in this thread). if he was still that age then great but he's not..he's 4 years older than he was when he last turned out for England. on the same basis are you hoping for a late Michael Owen call up? the goals people scored years ago in no way imply that they can still do it at international level, likewise him suddenly performing well for us (for about the first time in 2 years) doesn't automatically make you international quality either. he's scored 6 Prem goals so is behind Lalana, rodriguez and lambert, sturridge, rooney and wellbeck. fair enough i can see why people get pissed off when Ryan doesn't get call ups but crouch???? that's just ridiculous |
|
|
|
Post by mermaidsal on Mar 18, 2014 14:39:46 GMT
2014 Crouch has a way better footballing brain and instinct than Carroll ever will have. Plus he's not self-destructive. With the right partner he really would still do a good England job, look at his record ffs. If he's stayed with just one or two clubs it would have done him more favours I think. i have to say that this "Look at his record" stuff really is daft sal (as some have already mentioned in this thread). if he was still that age then great but he's not..he's 4 years older than he was when he last turned out for England. on the same basis are you hoping for a late Michael Owen call up? the goals people scored years ago in no way imply that they can still do it at international level, likewise him suddenly performing well for us (for about the first time in 2 years) doesn't automatically make you international quality either. he's scored 6 Prem goals so is behind Lalana, rodriguez and lambert, sturridge, rooney and wellbeck. fair enough i can see why people get pissed off when Ryan doesn't get call ups but crouch???? that's just ridiculous I know his age is prob a deal-breaker for a striker but to compare him with Owen, come on.... Crouchy is still a viable top-level footballer, sadly at the same age Owen was a mile off. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 14:42:57 GMT
so if he's executing his role well then that suddenly means he MUST be agile and mobile does it? despite the fact that being agile and mobile has NEVER been a part of his game at any club he's played at? erm, no it simply means that he's a different kind of player and tends to need support up front to get the best out of his talents which he is getting now that our play is more attacking in general. he IS playing well (and i don't think anyone has disputed that so there's absolutely no relevance that that part of your post has to anything that anyone has said on here so far) but it's not down to agility or mobility at all, simply that people are getting up there and supporting him more..... but people on here think that because they're both tall men then they must play in exactly the same way...lazy assumption and incorrect as well! i don't see many people on here actually saying "Crouch is shit" at all (and i'm pretty sure Rob didn't in his post anywhere), simply people putting forward the pros and cons of both players and then people getting hysterical thinking "Oooh he said Crouch isn't agile therefore he must be saying he's a bag of wank" when in reality that just isn't what people are saying at all. if you genuinely think that Crouch is more mobile and agile than Carroll than you really need the services of some of Harley Street's best mate! that doesn't make Crouch a bad player and it's not a criticism of him (in the same way that saying that Tim Cahill was better with his head than SJW isn't a criticism) it's simply noting what talents particular people have and judging them on that. no need to get all defensive of Crouchy mate,we're talking about the England side not the Stoke side and how each player would fit into that side. he's a Stoke player so we all love him but to say that a fit Crouch (a 34 year old with no pace or movement) would be better for the England team than a fit Carroll (a 25 year old who does run and get behind the defence) in the current setup given the way England play is just ridiculous. just because some prefer other forwards to Crouch doesn't mean anyone is saying that Crouch is playing badly or that we're agenda driven. try reading their posts first and seeing the difference between what you have told them they're saying and what they've actually written eh? you'll find they are 2 entirely different things The agile and mobile comparison is between Carroll and Crouch. In fact the more I read of your post the more I realise it is patronising drivel. I think this is the first positive post I've ever made regarding Crouch and I'm discussing the merits of whether he has earned consideration of an England recall. In my original post I considered that Crouch was more deserving of a world cup place than Carroll and Defoe. That's my opinion, many disagree some agree. Calm down, breathe deeply no, you said "Anyone who can't see how well he is playing" and i pointed out that no-one has disputed that....you then went on to say that if people can't see how well he is playing (which no-one has said) then they are going into matches with pre-conceived ideas, whilst in reality the only pre-conceived ideas anyone has is you thinking that if people say Carroll is a better choice than Crouch for england then they therefore: 1) can't see how well Crouch is playing for Stoke 2) are not seeing it because of their pre-conceived ideas neither of those things are true though.your post was based on you putting words into people's mouths. and by the way, Carroll IS more mobile than Crouch...your problem seems to be that you therefore presume people are slagging Crouch off for that..they're not! |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 14:50:52 GMT
i have to say that this "Look at his record" stuff really is daft sal (as some have already mentioned in this thread). if he was still that age then great but he's not..he's 4 years older than he was when he last turned out for England. on the same basis are you hoping for a late Michael Owen call up? the goals people scored years ago in no way imply that they can still do it at international level, likewise him suddenly performing well for us (for about the first time in 2 years) doesn't automatically make you international quality either. he's scored 6 Prem goals so is behind Lalana, rodriguez and lambert, sturridge, rooney and wellbeck. fair enough i can see why people get pissed off when Ryan doesn't get call ups but crouch???? that's just ridiculous I know his age is prob a deal-breaker for a striker but to compare him with Owen, come on.... Crouchy is still a viable top-level footballer, sadly at the same age Owen was a mile off. sal, the point of me mentioning owen,was simply to show that stats alone mean sod all...when you put Crouch's stats into context (the fact that his g/s ratio was from several years ago and almost exclusively against sides that are outside the top 30 in FIFA rankings) then there is no way whatsoever that you can use them to justify a call up nowadays. 6 Prem goals isn't amazing (and i've listed 6 english players that have got more already)..it's fairly decent for us but that's a long way from justifying an international call up. to put that into context, Crouch has basically been our forward in every game for virtually the whole match each time and scored 6 whilst Lampard is surviving on a few minutes here and there every now and again for Chelsea this season and scored 5 from midfield. for Crouch to suddenly start performing for the first time in 2 years for US doesn't mean in any way that he therefore could be a decent selection for a world cup in an international side he hasn't played for for 4 years. |
|
|
|
Post by numpty40 on Mar 18, 2014 14:56:55 GMT
The agile and mobile comparison is between Carroll and Crouch. In fact the more I read of your post the more I realise it is patronising drivel. I think this is the first positive post I've ever made regarding Crouch and I'm discussing the merits of whether he has earned consideration of an England recall. In my original post I considered that Crouch was more deserving of a world cup place than Carroll and Defoe. That's my opinion, many disagree some agree. Calm down, breathe deeply no, you said "Anyone who can't see how well he is playing" and i pointed out that no-one has disputed that....you then went on to say that if people can't see how well he is playing (which no-one has said) then they are going into matches with pre-conceived ideas, whilst in reality the only pre-conceived ideas anyone has is you thinking that if people say Carroll is a better choice than Crouch for england then they therefore: 1) can't see how well Crouch is playing for Stoke 2) are not seeing it because of their pre-conceived ideas neither of those things are true though.your post was based on you putting words into people's mouths. and by the way, Carroll IS more mobile than Crouch...your problem seems to be that you therefore presume people are slagging Crouch off for that..they're not! You are quite right, I did say "Anyone who can't see how well he's playing" I also suggested that if people can't see how well he's playing then they have pre-conceived ideas. Your point?? It's a massive leap of faith for you to presume what assumptions I'm making about what someone has posted. Oh and incidentally, it wasn't me that introduced the mobile and agile comparison. But if we're talking about mobility then Crouch was the most mobile Stoke player on the pitch on Saturday. |
|
|
|
Post by Silkystoke on Mar 18, 2014 15:45:02 GMT
Who ever goes its gonna be embarrising, fooking England, we are shit... i'm glad there are no Stoke players anywhere near the squad, otherwise the media would be blaming them for England's fuck up'ssss... Full stop
|
|
|
|
Post by cheeesfreeex on Mar 18, 2014 15:46:50 GMT
Crouchie is a mint FOOTballer, clever, skilful and acrobatic. He is the most targeted and least protected forward in the Prem.
I'm not sure what kind of decisions he'd get in the world cup with a different reffing pool.
I'd take him and think even if given little pitch time, he'd be great for the squad etc etc..
But it's all academic: age, club, and his spat with Roy, all go against it happening. {I still try and get a 'Crouchie for England' going.}
As for Carroll, he's hardly played, scored one goal this season {a gift from us} and then subbed for Carlton Cole!
Roy will have to take extra chaperones to drag Carroll out of the favelas.
I'd take Ryan Shawcross to play in the Carroll role before I'd take Andrew.
|
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 16:10:20 GMT
I think that's a load of bollocks personally. Opinions, eh? I was never a fan of Crouch and when QPR were interested in him during the last window I would have personally driven him there. The change of system has revitalised him and anyone who can't see how well he's playing at the moment have pre-conceived ideas going into games. I can see that. I've argued it consistently. I still disagree re Carroll. Massively. |
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 16:12:16 GMT
Are you arguing that the Crouch of 2014 is more mobile and agile than Carroll? 2014 Crouch has a way better footballing brain and instinct than Carroll ever will have. Plus he's not self-destructive. With the right partner he really would still do a good England job, look at his record ffs. If he's stayed with just one or two clubs it would have done him more favours I think. He won't have a partner though will he? Which is why we need someone mobile. |
|
