Peter Crouch

[Shaggy]

And I wasn't saying it wouldn't be great to have him and many other decent players in reserve. Oh for an ideal world!

Liverpool need three strikers at least. One is Torres - guaranteed starter. Another is N'Gog - youngster learning the trade. And the last should be a player who can play with Torres when needed and one who can replace him.

IMO to Keep the system working we need a quick mobile forward as second choice. Not Crouch IMO.

The bit in bold is a fair point, but Ngog represents the mobile, pacey back-up. You can't have three or four identikit strikers, and Crouch gave us the different option, the different threat.

Ah well, he's gone now and we're stuck with Voronin et al.

[Bender]

The bit in bold is a fair point, but Ngog represents the mobile, pacey back-up. You can't have three or four identikit strikers, and Crouch gave us the different option, the different threat.

Ah well, he's gone now and we're stuck with Voronin et al.

Exactly

[DannyMan2006]

But cover doesn't mean "to be used as a substitute", it means to step in when others are injured. And his record when starting games is tremendous, whether it's Liverpool, Spurs or England. Wherever he goes, whenever he starts, he scores goals. Fact.

Look, if we knew Torres was going to be out for a sustained period of time over each and every season then maybe Crouch would be good enough.

But if he is only out for a few games here and there then it doesn't work. When you change players in your team then you need to change the way you play, especially if they are polar opposites.

When teams play us without Torres they can push right up due to the lack of pace up top. We need another fast player to keep them back.

Look at it thsi way. I think Crouch overall is a better player than Carlton Cole. But for me Cole would give us more of what we needed over Peter Crouch due to his greater pace.

[DannyMan2006]

The bit in bold is a fair point, but Ngog represents the mobile, pacey back-up. You can't have three or four identikit strikers, and Crouch gave us the different option, the different threat.

Ah well, he's gone now and we're stuck with Voronin et al.

N'Gog should not be not the mobile, pacy back up, because he is not good enough.

And we have no choice but to have similar strikers because we lack funds. N'Gog should not come in to consideration as he is a youngster learning his trade, he should be like the rest of the young lads and classed as a bonus type player.

Liverpool FC at the very least should have two senior pros fighting for each position. With strikers being the most important players then it would be nice to have an extra different option like Crouch thrown in. But first and fore most we need an ideal swap for Torres.

[badpiggy]

people can talk about systems and tactics all they want but crouch is a better footballer and striker than anyone we have as backup for torres at the moment.

[DannyMan2006]

people can talk about systems and tactics all they want but crouch is a better footballer and striker than anyone we have as backup for torres at the moment.

Nobody has said otherwise.

[BrianF80]

The problem with Crouch was simply that he's 1-dimensional, couldn't adapt to play other than as the lone striker and hence couldn't get enough games and we couldn't pay enough to make him accept that. If we had Chelsea money I'm sure he would still be on the bench and would be a great plan B. Alas that is not the world we live in.

[peekay]

So you choose to isolate 19 games to make your point?

Tell you what, I'll isolate the other 71.

In the league he made 44 starts for us, scoring 20 goals. That of course is forgetting his opening barren spell, so in total it was 20 in 55. Just shy of 1 in 2 for someone who started only sporadically and was nearly always taken off.

In the CL he scored 11 goals from 13 starts. He failed to score in his first 8, but we're forgetting those of course, making it in total 11 in 21 appearances.

We can all isolate figures to make our argument look stronger.

Also, he was substituted in the vast majority of those starts. His goals-to-minutes ratio for LFC was very impressive.

So Crouch isn't top class - do you seriously believe we can carry over 20 top class players in the squad? Not everyone has to be 'top class' - they just have to be able to do their job and whenever called upon to do his, Crouch invariably obliged. He was certainly good enough to be in our squad, and that blagger Mr Capello seems to think he's good enough for his squad too.

I am not sure Crouch is the answer though. He has always been a streaky player. One of my Spurs mate pointed out that Crouch has scored 1 goal in the last 21 games ( 11 for Portsmouth and 10 for Spurs). He has started and played for 75- 80 minutes in more than half of them.

Other posters have said that we need better than Ngog and Crouch maybe the answer. I am not really sure of that. We do need better than Ngog. However, based on a small sample I think Ngog knows where the onion bag is more than Crouch.

My guess is that over the long term giving time to Ngog to develop might be more beneficial for us than playing Crouch.

[Shaggy]

I am not sure Crouch is the answer though. He has always been a streaky player. One of my Spurs mate pointed out that Crouch has scored 1 goal in the last 21 games ( 11 for Portsmouth and 10 for Spurs). He has started and played for 75- 80 minutes in more than half of them.

Not sure how your mate worked that out as he's got 5 goals for Spurs this season.

[Reece]

Not sure how your mate worked that out as he's got 5 goals for Spurs this season.

Does he mean league games perhaps, as 3 of his goals were in one Carling Cup game I think?

[dww]

I think the problem is often the Crouch is a player who requires service. At Pompey in particular while he was a genuine regular he was also in a **** team who provided little. At Spurs he has been used as a secondary option as much to feed others as to score himself when I have seen also without Lennon and Modric they create fewer chances which makes it hard for players who are in and out of the side.

I'm not sure that Crouch is the option we need but on the plus side I think he would score a good number of goals, could play alongside our other players and would be excellent at taking advantage of early crosses from our attacking fullbacks. On the downside I think if we are to invest in another striker I think it has to be one who can get something out of nothing and stay upfront on their own and still provide a threat - I'm not sure Crouch is that man and he doesn't have the pace to be a tactical one for one swap for Torres. That said I really like him as a player and would welcome him back.

I'd still rather see another attacking midfielder with a goal threat come in rather than a striker though.

[peekay]

Sorry I meant league goals. He has scored 5 goals this season but 4 of them came in the carling cup, I think.

[tomasjj]

Crouch wanted to go as he wanted to start.
Fair enough.
Could have used him from the bench as a second option, but he was not up for it.
Can't expect to dislodge Torres, as Rafa prefers a one striker system most of the time.

To me, Crouch was talented, but had too many deficiencies in his game (lack of strength, aggression, heading etc).
His goalscoring record was good, but so is the record of the player who replaced him. Our team produces chances for our strikers, and this leads me to my other gripe against Crouch - he wasted too many good chances for my liking.

[Kenneth]

Yes, Crouch was annpyed at not playing, but I think he had a valid point at times, especially towards the end of his career with us. I recall a number of games where he was left out for no good footballing reason.

[tomasjj]

Yes, Crouch was annpyed at not playing, but I think he had a valid point at times, especially towards the end of his career with us. I recall a number of games where he was left out for no good footballing reason.

People might differ, but I though he wasn't putting in the effort the last season compared to earlier.