|
Post by jarhead on Mar 18, 2014 16:18:00 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?? ?? Your right but your missing my point,at the time we signed crouch jones was playing well and scoring goals.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 18, 2014 16:26:58 GMT
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. for Crouch to suddenly start performing for the first time in 2 years for US What nonsense Michael.
|
|
|
Post by salopstick on Mar 18, 2014 16:34:01 GMT
england only ever take 4 strikers to tournaments which is ridicoulus in itself
i would always take a 5th.
his record is up there for england and very poor he was discarded especially when you look at some of the dross who repeatedley get picked for england but never produce
im sorry but crouch is still a better option than Danny Welbeck
for me it would be 5
rooney, sturridge, carroll, defoe and crouch. all offer somthing different
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 16:35:48 GMT
for Crouch to suddenly start performing for the first time in 2 years for US What nonsense Michael. not really and it's not a criticism of Crouch either. i've said many times that he could (and probably would) perform far better if he wasn't just left up front to rot every match on his own. although he's technically still a lone striker, he's faring far better now because other players are getting further forward and supporting him. the last time we were doing the whole "Crouchy for England" was a good 18 months ago, since then he hasn't been terrible but hasn't been particularly noticeable either because of the system we played.only a few weeks ago there were plenty of people on here who wanted rid of him in the transfer window so let's not pretend he's been unplayable week in week out until recently.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 16:39:22 GMT
england only ever take 4 strikers to tournaments which is ridicoulus in itself i would always take a 5th. his record is up there for england and very poor he was discarded especially when you look at some of the dross who repeatedley get picked for england but never produce im sorry but crouch is still a better option than Danny Welbeck for me it would be 5 rooney, sturridge, carroll, defoe and crouch. all offer somthing different Welbeck seems to be some kind of latter day Darius Vassell, turns up for England more than he does his club. For that reason, and that reason only, I'd take him. Sturridge, Rooney, Welbeck, Carroll, Rodriguez
|
|
|
Post by mickmacc on Mar 18, 2014 16:47:50 GMT
God help us if Rooney or Sturridge get injured then.
|
|
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 18, 2014 16:49:08 GMT
God help us if Rooney or Sturridge get injured then. That's true whoever else we take though isn't it?
|
|
|
Post by mickmacc on Mar 18, 2014 16:51:54 GMT
We definitely have two nearly world class strikers at the moment.
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Mar 18, 2014 17:03:11 GMT
What nonsense Michael. not really and it's not a criticism of Crouch either. i've said many times that he could (and probably would) perform far better if he wasn't just left up front to rot every match on his own. although he's technically still a lone striker, he's faring far better now because other players are getting further forward and supporting him. the last time we were doing the whole "Crouchy for England" was a good 18 months ago, since then he hasn't been terrible but hasn't been particularly noticeable either because of the system we played.only a few weeks ago there were plenty of people on here who wanted rid of him in the transfer window so let's not pretend he's been unplayable week in week out until recently. Other than the period after he had his teeth knocked out where he was brought back too early and had a poor spell of games, I think he's played well for us. At home this season he has done everything asked of him and more. Away it has been screaming out for change at times, which transfer calamity has deprived us the option of but overall he has been a good player for Stoke, Saturdays performance has been more the norm than the exception this season at the Brit.
|
|
|
Post by timbo1988 on Mar 18, 2014 17:29:30 GMT
I'm sorry but if England take Crouch it shows how bad a state the country is footballing wise! He is slow, weak, his goal scoring record is poor over past 2 seasons! He isn't very clinical in front of goal (just look at his chance against Norwich)! He isn't really good enough for stoke anymore so a recall for England is not on the cards!
|
|