It’s a shame that Peter Crouch’s departure seems imminent, but it’s not all that surprising. He hasn’t been happy on the bench, and that’s where he’s been relegated to since the arrival of Fernando Torres.
Admittedly, I was a bit surprised we didn’t get many chances to see a Crouch-Torres combination. The two started seven games together (5 wins, 2 losses) and weren’t a standard 4-4-2 pairing in two of those.
The duo was effective in wins over Bolton and Sunderland, but still had infuriating moments when they got in each other’s way even in the best of games, which wasn’t completely unexpected given both are used to playing in similar spaces despite having different styles.
Benitez seemed hesitant to pair the two from the beginning of the season, probably for the reason in the paragraph above, but Liverpool finding success with the 4-2-3-1 formation starting in February didn’t help either.
In the two games where Torres and Crouch played but weren’t a pairing up top, Liverpool lost to Reading 1-3 away and beat Arsenal 4-2 in the Champions League. The Reading match, where Crouch, Torres and Voronin were basically a three-man front line, was Liverpool’s first loss of the season and a deserved one, despite my belief that Torres should have earned two penalties.
I went more in-depth on Crouch and the 4-2-3-1 after the second leg of the CL quarters against Arsenal, so I’ll try not to repeat myself. In this match, Crouch started in Gerrard’s role with Stevie pushed out to the left. Even though Liverpool won, scoring four in the process, it wasn’t the most convincing of displays by the front four, and two of those goals – including the winner – came after Crouch was substituted for Babel.
The best thing about the 4-2-3-1 has been Gerrard and Torres’ partnership, and Crouch’s inclusion upset that balance. As I said in April, if it comes down to accommodating Gerrard, Torres or Crouch, I’m siding against Crouch.
If Benitez truly wants to stick with the 4-2-3-1, Crouch is always going to be Torres’ understudy if he stays at Liverpool. I think the Gangly Handful can be effective in this formation – his hat trick against Arsenal in March 2007 was proof of that – but he’s never going to get 33 goals in a season.
I wish this situation wasn’t the case, and that Crouch was willing to back Torres up, but he obviously isn’t happy in that role and wants to go elsewhere. I can’t begrudge him that.
Crouch has a year left on his contract, he hasn’t accepted the club’s offer of an extension, and he could leave for free in a year. The club certainly still remembers McManaman’s departure to Real Madrid in 1999. £11m, the rumored fee, is an excellent deal even if it’s £8m upfront and the rest in add-ons, especially when compared to £8m plus Nuñez for Michael Owen. And everyone knows Liverpool could use the money that would be generated by Crouch’s sale.
It goes without saying that Crouch will need to be replaced. I’m happy to see Liverpool announce Nikola Saric’s signing, as I’m always happy when Benitez is out buying “starlets,” but Saric’s not Crouch’s replacement.
I still don’t know if Nemeth’s ready for the step-up, or if Benitez is even ready to try him out. It seemed telling that Nemeth didn’t get any time with the first team this season when Plessis, Insua and El Zhar started games, and San Jose and Putterill at least made the bench. Obviously, after the season Nemeth had at reserve level, I think he has a future at Liverpool, but I don’t know how much experience he’ll get next season.
Which means that Torres, Kuyt, Voronin and possibly Babel are the only recognized first-team strikers. It was crucial that Torres stayed fit last season; if that's Liverpool’s strike-force in August, it’ll be even more so this time around.
Showing posts with label Crouch. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Crouch. Show all posts
07 July 2008
09 April 2008
More on yesterday’s match: Crouch and the 4-2-3-1
I want to go a bit more in-depth on something I hit on in yesterday’s review (that review was more than long enough anyway). I also need to preface this by saying I’m extremely happy with the result, how it was accomplished, and Liverpool’s progression. The final minutes after Adebayor’s equalizer were simply magical, and yet another example of how this year’s team is different than seasons’ past. I have no idea why I’ve felt the need to be critical, but I started this blog to opine on the Liverpool thoughts rattling around my head.
No matter what the pre-match chat said on espn2, ITV, or wherever you watched it, yesterday’s formation was still 4-2-3-1, with Gerrard, Crouch, and Kuyt behind Torres. At times, all played on the same line (The Times called it a 4-2-4), while they shifted around at others depending on where they were on the break or after a set play. Before Liverpool’s second goal, Crouch played further up the field with Torres mostly making runs from the left channel. But for the most part, it looked like how I drew it up in the match review.
And despite Liverpool scoring 4 goals, with Crouch and Torres linking up exactly as hoped to create the second from next to nothing (just as Crouch fed Torres for the second goal against Sunderland), I’m unsure if this system has a future.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ll be happy to be proven wrong; it wouldn’t be the first time by any means. It’s just that one of the main strengths of the 4-2-3-1 formation has been how it’s freed up Gerrard to focus on the attack, pull the strings on the break, and play off of Torres, best utilizing that promising partnership.
Shifting Gerrard out to the left didn’t accomplish any of those things to the effect there’s been in previous games. By his own admission, he had one of his worst games in a Liverpool shirt until the penalty. While I wouldn’t go that far, saying that Gerrard’s had more influential games recently would be an understatement.
It might be different if Gerrard played on the right, where he’s more comfortable and where he scored 23 goals in 05-06, with Babel on the left, but another reason for this formation’s success has been Kuyt, first and foremost his willingness to defend and to run until his legs fall off. Kuyt’s not without his weaknesses, but no player works harder for the full 90 minutes, with his play in both legs a prime example of his benefit to the team. We haven’t seen if he’s able to do this from the left, either for Liverpool or when he played in a 4-3-3 for Holland.
In addition, without traditional wingers (which Gerrard, Kuyt, and Babel aren’t), the way Crouch would succeed in this formation is with long balls hoofed forward. One led to Liverpool’s second goal, but a reliance on route 1 football would be a step backward, not forwards, and doesn’t fit with Liverpool’s method of keeping possession and out-working the opposition.
If comes down to accommodating Crouch or Gerrard (or Torres for that matter), I’m siding against the gangly handful, no matter how much I want to see him do well. I realize the last paragraph comes off accommodating Kuyt to Crouch’s detriment, which has been an on-going argument all season long, and no matter how unbiased I try to be, my feelings on this probably come down to the fact I’d take Kuyt over Crouch in this system.
I’m happy Crouch has gotten a run in the team. I’m even happier that it’s ended with two good results, including an excellent goal at the Emirates, and I’ll be even happier still if it ends with Crouch extending his contract. I’ve written before that Crouch has a role in this squad, and in a squad capable of winning the title. But I also think that more often than not, it’s a matter of Crouch or Torres, not Crouch and Torres.
My theory is that Benitez is being forthright with what he said post-match: the idea to use Crouch today was because he’s been excellent against Arsenal in his last two opportunities. No more, no less.
But, knowing my luck with predictions, there’s just as much of a chance this could be a sign of things to come, especially since Babel (once again) proved so valuable off the bench. And this system did just deservedly beat a very talented, and determined, Arsenal side.
We’ll know a lot more after the two league games (v Blackburn and at Fulham) before hosting Chelsea in the first leg of the semi-finals on the 22nd.
No matter what the pre-match chat said on espn2, ITV, or wherever you watched it, yesterday’s formation was still 4-2-3-1, with Gerrard, Crouch, and Kuyt behind Torres. At times, all played on the same line (The Times called it a 4-2-4), while they shifted around at others depending on where they were on the break or after a set play. Before Liverpool’s second goal, Crouch played further up the field with Torres mostly making runs from the left channel. But for the most part, it looked like how I drew it up in the match review.
And despite Liverpool scoring 4 goals, with Crouch and Torres linking up exactly as hoped to create the second from next to nothing (just as Crouch fed Torres for the second goal against Sunderland), I’m unsure if this system has a future.
Don’t get me wrong, I’ll be happy to be proven wrong; it wouldn’t be the first time by any means. It’s just that one of the main strengths of the 4-2-3-1 formation has been how it’s freed up Gerrard to focus on the attack, pull the strings on the break, and play off of Torres, best utilizing that promising partnership.
Shifting Gerrard out to the left didn’t accomplish any of those things to the effect there’s been in previous games. By his own admission, he had one of his worst games in a Liverpool shirt until the penalty. While I wouldn’t go that far, saying that Gerrard’s had more influential games recently would be an understatement.
It might be different if Gerrard played on the right, where he’s more comfortable and where he scored 23 goals in 05-06, with Babel on the left, but another reason for this formation’s success has been Kuyt, first and foremost his willingness to defend and to run until his legs fall off. Kuyt’s not without his weaknesses, but no player works harder for the full 90 minutes, with his play in both legs a prime example of his benefit to the team. We haven’t seen if he’s able to do this from the left, either for Liverpool or when he played in a 4-3-3 for Holland.
In addition, without traditional wingers (which Gerrard, Kuyt, and Babel aren’t), the way Crouch would succeed in this formation is with long balls hoofed forward. One led to Liverpool’s second goal, but a reliance on route 1 football would be a step backward, not forwards, and doesn’t fit with Liverpool’s method of keeping possession and out-working the opposition.
If comes down to accommodating Crouch or Gerrard (or Torres for that matter), I’m siding against the gangly handful, no matter how much I want to see him do well. I realize the last paragraph comes off accommodating Kuyt to Crouch’s detriment, which has been an on-going argument all season long, and no matter how unbiased I try to be, my feelings on this probably come down to the fact I’d take Kuyt over Crouch in this system.
I’m happy Crouch has gotten a run in the team. I’m even happier that it’s ended with two good results, including an excellent goal at the Emirates, and I’ll be even happier still if it ends with Crouch extending his contract. I’ve written before that Crouch has a role in this squad, and in a squad capable of winning the title. But I also think that more often than not, it’s a matter of Crouch or Torres, not Crouch and Torres.
My theory is that Benitez is being forthright with what he said post-match: the idea to use Crouch today was because he’s been excellent against Arsenal in his last two opportunities. No more, no less.
But, knowing my luck with predictions, there’s just as much of a chance this could be a sign of things to come, especially since Babel (once again) proved so valuable off the bench. And this system did just deservedly beat a very talented, and determined, Arsenal side.
We’ll know a lot more after the two league games (v Blackburn and at Fulham) before hosting Chelsea in the first leg of the semi-finals on the 22nd.
20 November 2007
England v Croatia 11.21.07 -- Crouch as a lone striker?
Guess at a line-up
Robinson
Richards Campbell Lescott Bridge
Hargreaves
Beckham Gerrard Lampard Joe Cole
Crouch
I have a bad feeling that after the sense of relief following Israel’s victory, something could go wrong at Wembley tomorrow. Maybe it’s just the pessimist in me, but even though Croatia have already qualified, they will still be a threatening team, and it’s still England we’re talking about.
A draw will suffice. And while we’ve seen England do enough to grind out a 0-0 against every type of opposition, with Croatia’s talent (Da Silva has 10 goals in qualifying, plus Modric and Kranjcar have been known to pop up), England will want a goal to settle the nerves, the sooner the better. Which has gotten slightly more problematic with the injuries and lack of depth up front.
I’m rarely prone to taking shots at Liverpool players, but I can’t help but thinking starting Crouch as a lone striker is going to end badly.
And I like Peter Crouch. He’s an easy target and a frequent magnet for stick, even for Liverpool fans, and a frequent scapegoat for poor performances, rightly or not. I’ll continue to maintain Crouch has a place and purpose in a Liverpool squad that’s meant to be competing for the title.
But Crouch as a lone striker doesn’t always come off as hoped. He can be very effective, the best example being the 4-1 win over Arsenal. But pace and width from the wingers, fullbacks getting forward, and Gerrard in an advanced position with both Alonso and Mascherano covering were utterly essential to success in that game.
Despite his great touch for a big man™ and goal-scoring record for England (13 in 23), Crouch is best at holding up play and bringing the midfield into attack. And while this isn’t a slight on Crouch’s talent, his inclusion can lead any team to shift to route 1 football at the first sign of trouble, something England is too apt to do anyway. And Croatia has a stingy and physical defense in Corluka, Kovac, Simic, and Simunic, although they’ve conceded two more goals than England in qualifying (3 to Macedonia, 3 to Israel).
Which leads me to believe that England’s best chance for success with Crouch up top is with players like Wright-Phillips and Joe Cole on the flanks, and players like Ashley Cole (who, along with Terry, probably shouldn’t feature even if they’ve declared themselves fit, given both haven’t played in over a month) and Richards getting forward from defense. And yet, all the talk is about Beckham possibly seeing a start.
It’s tempting to think Beckham should feature to ping crosses into Crouch, as Golden Balls supplied assists for Crouch against both Estonia and Austria, but Crouch is admittedly not the best with his head despite his height, and England will need to have other goal threats in the box to support. But I have to believe it’s going to be Cole – Lampard – Hargreaves – Gerrard – Beckham, which incidentally is the same midfield that lost to Portugal in the World Cup (as I’m sure you’ve heard).
Admittedly, England has few other options, with Bent, Defoe (both of which have spent the majority of the season on Tottenham’s bench), and Alan Smith the other recognized strikers. And I’d really rather avoid a discussion about the strength and future of the national team, which is a subject that’s been steeped in landmines all week long. But I’m still afraid England will find a way to fail to qualify after being handed second chance after second chance on a silver platter, and what sticks out to me is that I don't know if England have, or will play, players suited to support Crouch in what's going to be a 4-5-1 or 4-1-4-1.
Look, I hope I’m wrong. I’ll happily eat crow if England win, and Crouch and Beckham are essential to it. I’ll be rooting for it to happen. Maybe Gerrard and Lampard will be able to work together with a lone striker, and supply the other attackers that England will need.
But I do worry.
Robinson
Richards Campbell Lescott Bridge
Hargreaves
Beckham Gerrard Lampard Joe Cole
Crouch
I have a bad feeling that after the sense of relief following Israel’s victory, something could go wrong at Wembley tomorrow. Maybe it’s just the pessimist in me, but even though Croatia have already qualified, they will still be a threatening team, and it’s still England we’re talking about.
A draw will suffice. And while we’ve seen England do enough to grind out a 0-0 against every type of opposition, with Croatia’s talent (Da Silva has 10 goals in qualifying, plus Modric and Kranjcar have been known to pop up), England will want a goal to settle the nerves, the sooner the better. Which has gotten slightly more problematic with the injuries and lack of depth up front.
I’m rarely prone to taking shots at Liverpool players, but I can’t help but thinking starting Crouch as a lone striker is going to end badly.
And I like Peter Crouch. He’s an easy target and a frequent magnet for stick, even for Liverpool fans, and a frequent scapegoat for poor performances, rightly or not. I’ll continue to maintain Crouch has a place and purpose in a Liverpool squad that’s meant to be competing for the title.
But Crouch as a lone striker doesn’t always come off as hoped. He can be very effective, the best example being the 4-1 win over Arsenal. But pace and width from the wingers, fullbacks getting forward, and Gerrard in an advanced position with both Alonso and Mascherano covering were utterly essential to success in that game.
Despite his great touch for a big man™ and goal-scoring record for England (13 in 23), Crouch is best at holding up play and bringing the midfield into attack. And while this isn’t a slight on Crouch’s talent, his inclusion can lead any team to shift to route 1 football at the first sign of trouble, something England is too apt to do anyway. And Croatia has a stingy and physical defense in Corluka, Kovac, Simic, and Simunic, although they’ve conceded two more goals than England in qualifying (3 to Macedonia, 3 to Israel).
Which leads me to believe that England’s best chance for success with Crouch up top is with players like Wright-Phillips and Joe Cole on the flanks, and players like Ashley Cole (who, along with Terry, probably shouldn’t feature even if they’ve declared themselves fit, given both haven’t played in over a month) and Richards getting forward from defense. And yet, all the talk is about Beckham possibly seeing a start.
It’s tempting to think Beckham should feature to ping crosses into Crouch, as Golden Balls supplied assists for Crouch against both Estonia and Austria, but Crouch is admittedly not the best with his head despite his height, and England will need to have other goal threats in the box to support. But I have to believe it’s going to be Cole – Lampard – Hargreaves – Gerrard – Beckham, which incidentally is the same midfield that lost to Portugal in the World Cup (as I’m sure you’ve heard).
Admittedly, England has few other options, with Bent, Defoe (both of which have spent the majority of the season on Tottenham’s bench), and Alan Smith the other recognized strikers. And I’d really rather avoid a discussion about the strength and future of the national team, which is a subject that’s been steeped in landmines all week long. But I’m still afraid England will find a way to fail to qualify after being handed second chance after second chance on a silver platter, and what sticks out to me is that I don't know if England have, or will play, players suited to support Crouch in what's going to be a 4-5-1 or 4-1-4-1.
Look, I hope I’m wrong. I’ll happily eat crow if England win, and Crouch and Beckham are essential to it. I’ll be rooting for it to happen. Maybe Gerrard and Lampard will be able to work together with a lone striker, and supply the other attackers that England will need.
But I do worry.
07 November 2007
On Aurelio and starting the attack
This isn’t meant at the expense of any of the other players on the team, because as frequently reiterated, everyone played well yesterday, but I’ve been surprised to see so little acclaim for Aurelio’s contribution to the result.
In Alonso and Agger’s absences, the onus on starting the attack has fallen to Carragher, Hyypia, and Mascherano. While Mascherano has resumed playing some lovely short passes to open up space in the last few games, none of these three has the long-range passing that’s in either Alonso or Agger’s locker. In the past few games when Liverpool’s struggled, it’s been Carra and Hyypia pumping long balls forward out of defense to varying degrees of success.
This is where Aurelio shined last night. I’m going to crib a couple of images from the invaluable flash stats at the bottom of the Daily Telegraph’s match report to illustrate.
The preferred passes category illustrates the point perfectly:
Look at the number of passes Aurelio played to Crouch compared to other players. Crouch also received the ball from Aurelio more than anyone else. In addition, Aurelio received the ball from Carra and Hyypia more often than not, showing he was a frequent pivot between defense and attack.
Admittedly, Crouch’s availability as a target-man and his ball retention played a big part in the success, but it was Aurelio who usually found him with the pass.
Too often against the likes of Marseille and Besiktas away, Liverpool lost possession when they hoofed it out of defense, and when they struggled, they ended up resorting to this option more in spite of a lack of success. But with Aurelio’s excellent long passing, coupled with Crouch’s ability to collect the ball, Liverpool was able to set up attack after attack against Besiktas.
Again, this isn’t a slight on Carragher and Hyypia. Both are superlative defenders, and both are rightful legends of the club. But I also think both would admit bringing the ball out of defense and long-range passing aren’t their fortes.
I for one am thrilled to have Aurelio back in the team.
In Alonso and Agger’s absences, the onus on starting the attack has fallen to Carragher, Hyypia, and Mascherano. While Mascherano has resumed playing some lovely short passes to open up space in the last few games, none of these three has the long-range passing that’s in either Alonso or Agger’s locker. In the past few games when Liverpool’s struggled, it’s been Carra and Hyypia pumping long balls forward out of defense to varying degrees of success.
This is where Aurelio shined last night. I’m going to crib a couple of images from the invaluable flash stats at the bottom of the Daily Telegraph’s match report to illustrate.
The preferred passes category illustrates the point perfectly:
Look at the number of passes Aurelio played to Crouch compared to other players. Crouch also received the ball from Aurelio more than anyone else. In addition, Aurelio received the ball from Carra and Hyypia more often than not, showing he was a frequent pivot between defense and attack.
Admittedly, Crouch’s availability as a target-man and his ball retention played a big part in the success, but it was Aurelio who usually found him with the pass.
Too often against the likes of Marseille and Besiktas away, Liverpool lost possession when they hoofed it out of defense, and when they struggled, they ended up resorting to this option more in spite of a lack of success. But with Aurelio’s excellent long passing, coupled with Crouch’s ability to collect the ball, Liverpool was able to set up attack after attack against Besiktas.
Again, this isn’t a slight on Carragher and Hyypia. Both are superlative defenders, and both are rightful legends of the club. But I also think both would admit bringing the ball out of defense and long-range passing aren’t their fortes.
I for one am thrilled to have Aurelio back in the team.
05 September 2007
Well, this might explain it…
If you’re at all like me, you've probably wondered why Peter Crouch is whistled for fouls far more often in Europe than in the Premier League.
World Cup refs 'targeted Crouch'
Would this be the same World Cup where the same head of refereeing (Jose-Maria Garcia Aranda) wrote about “proactive refereeing” beforehand and there were a record number of yellow and red cards on display?
I’ve long suspected Crouch was treated differently because of his height, and there have been times where he’s been frustrated straight out of matches.
Maybe this is why he averaged a foul per appearance in the Premier League and nearly double that in the Champions League last season. More tellingly, Crouch committed about twice as many fouls than were committed against him in the Champions League. In the Premiership, more fouls were committed against Crouch than by him. The numbers are even worse in the World Cup, where in 4 games, 13 fouls were committed by Crouch and only 5 fouls were committed on Crouch.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics...
He uses his height as an advantage to be sure, but the amount of fouls he’s called for in European competition has long been disproportionate and in some cases has bordered on the absurd. And now we’ve got an explanation why.
Seeing as how Crouch looks likely to get most of his time this season in the Champions League, I’d hope that Poll’s comments go some way towards rectifying this.
Also, the irony of Graham Poll criticizing referees for their World Cup performance is utterly delightful.
World Cup refs 'targeted Crouch'
Former referee Graham Poll says officials at last summer's World Cup were encouraged by Fifa to "look out for" England striker Peter Crouch.
Crouch, 26, is banned for the Euro 2008 qualifier against Israel on Saturday and Poll says that is no surprise.
He told BBC 5live: "Fifa's head of refereeing said, 'look at Crouch, he's a pain and he gets away with a lot. We need to mark him out and look for him'.
"We were shown videos of him. I tried to defend him, being English."
"We had been out there for two or three weeks before, and it was pointed out the way he used his arms.
"Now, Crouch has been picking up cautions in qualifying and is out of Saturday's match."
Would this be the same World Cup where the same head of refereeing (Jose-Maria Garcia Aranda) wrote about “proactive refereeing” beforehand and there were a record number of yellow and red cards on display?
I’ve long suspected Crouch was treated differently because of his height, and there have been times where he’s been frustrated straight out of matches.
Maybe this is why he averaged a foul per appearance in the Premier League and nearly double that in the Champions League last season. More tellingly, Crouch committed about twice as many fouls than were committed against him in the Champions League. In the Premiership, more fouls were committed against Crouch than by him. The numbers are even worse in the World Cup, where in 4 games, 13 fouls were committed by Crouch and only 5 fouls were committed on Crouch.
Lies, damned lies, and statistics...
He uses his height as an advantage to be sure, but the amount of fouls he’s called for in European competition has long been disproportionate and in some cases has bordered on the absurd. And now we’ve got an explanation why.
Seeing as how Crouch looks likely to get most of his time this season in the Champions League, I’d hope that Poll’s comments go some way towards rectifying this.
Also, the irony of Graham Poll criticizing referees for their World Cup performance is utterly delightful.
Subscribe to:
Posts
(
Atom
)