Brad Crouch versus Tom Mitchell

[DeadlyAkkuret]

Played less than 10 games and received his first tag today. Still racked up 19 touches. No player is miles ahead of the other but Mitchell is more dangerous and his hands are lightning.

 

[Sanders]

He was tagged by Picken

No he wasn't

 

[Sanders]

Today for example

Crouch 28 disposals 8 clearance 11 contested 5 tackles

Mitchell 17 disposals 1 clearance 9 contested 2 tackles

Heck mitchell only has 16 clearances for the entire year.

Crouch is performing right in the guts, inside at the stoppage. Something Mitchell is just not able to do right now.

Mitchell's a stud, but whilst he's limited to a flank, his performances to date have to be seen in that light.

 

[.Shotties.]

No he wasn't

Uh, yes he was. It was highlighted multiple times by the commentator that Picken was on him and you could see it at every stoppage.

 

[Blacky]

It's a tough call, I would be weary of comparing stats at this point as Sydney's midfield has a lot of faces in it so Mitch doesn't get a lot of minutes in there.

 

[Sanders]

Uh, yes he was. It was highlighted multiple times by the commentator that Picken was on him and you could see it at every stoppage.

Er no he wasn't

You're confused about the difference between having an opponent and being tagged.

Mitchell was not tagged, not even nearly

 

[.Shotties.]

You're confused about the difference between having an opponent and being tagged.

I'd say being tagged is when an opposition teams tagger goes to a player and attempts to remove them from the area of play where they're best or stop them getting posession.

Kind of like Picken spending all day at Mitchell's hip and blocking him out from packs all day. Mitchell wasn't opposing Picken, the attention was all one way.

 

[Sanders]

I'd say being tagged is when an opposition teams tagger goes to a player and attempts to remove them from the area of play where they're best or stop them getting posession.

Kind of like Picken spending all day at Mitchell's hip and blocking him out from packs all day. Mitchell wasn't opposing Picken, the attention was all one way.

I watched the game, all mitchell had was a matched up opponent. He's been ignored til now, suddenly he has a match up and you're screaming "tag, tag!"

No it wasn't.

 

[.Shotties.]

No it wasn't.

Well, I laid out what happened, you've been given the chance to explain how it was a match up rather than a tag (which would be a good bit of colour since you're the only one saying it wasn't a tag), but you've done nothing except say 'nuh uh' , I'm happy to end this here.

 

[Jcpdragonx]

Picken tagged Mitchell. There is no other way of saying it.

 

[Barnzy]

Mitchell was tagged.

 

[Sanders]

Well, I laid out what happened, you've been given the chance to explain how it was a match up rather than a tag (which would be a good bit of colour since you're the only one saying it wasn't a tag), but you've done nothing except say 'nuh uh' , I'm happy to end this here.

Given the opportunity? What the...

I'm telling you, not asking you, that he wasn't tagged and by implication that you don't know what a tag actually is.

its you who are trying to pretend that a guy with no inside game, sitting on a flank, has been "tagged".

BTW for reference the guy "tagging" got 24 touches, most for the season and 1 off a career high.

Anyway, I made a simple statement of fact that remains true whether you choose to accept it or not.

 

[.Shotties.]

I'm telling you, not asking you, that he wasn't tagged and by implication that you don't know what a tag actually is.

And I've asked for the basis on which you made that statement after having provided the basis for mine. You've been unable to do it. No biggy.

 

[Chism]

Can we stay on topic now and quit it with the rubbish barbs at each other??

 

[DeadlyAkkuret]

No one who saw the game can argue that Mitchell wasn't tagged for large parts of the game.

 

[Sanders]

No one who saw the game can argue that Mitchell wasn't tagged for large parts of the game.

Sure, if you don't know what a tag is.

You might as well suggest he spent the game doing the foxtrot

 

[WWSD]

Let's not turn this thread into a shit fight please. Both players are fantastic in their own right. With Mitchell he tends to spend more time at half forward then in the midfield which is largely due to the Swans talented midfield that bats deep so Mitchell gets rotated in and out of the midfield. With Crouch he plays most of his footy in the midfield as it's one area Adelaide are trying to get better at and Crows are trying to fast track his developement. I reckon Crouch is the more the versitile player, whereas Mitchell is the more skilled player. In terms of overall talent they are basically even.

 

[bones54]

Went with Mitchell but pretty much this. Both will be stars of the league for the next decade.

Yep. I reckon Crouch. Just.

 

[GrandBlue]

Crouch easily. Mitchell strikes me as one of those players who would be struggling if he were playing for a worse team.

Crouch absolutely smashing it in the middle. Don't even care if their stats are similar, I've watched both play a fair bit and Crouch is having a significantly bigger impact on proceedings.

 

[.Shotties.]

Crouch easily. Mitchell strikes me as one of those players who would be struggling if he were playing for a worse team.

In a worse team Mitchell would be spending most of the game in the midfield and excelling just like he had through every level of football he played.

 

[DangerSloane]

Crouch with 28 touches, 5 marks and 6 tackles on the weekend.
Starting to put some consistant games together.

 

[DangerSloane]

In a worse team Mitchell would be spending most of the game in the midfield and excelling just like he had through every level of football he played.

Im not so sure that if you put Mitchell into a weak side he would be as good.
You say that he'd get more midfield time, but he'd also get some attention. At the moment hes last in the pecking order of having to mind. Sydney have O'Keefe, Jack, Hannebury, McVeigh, Kennedy etc who are more important to keep quiet.

 

[.Shotties.]

Im not so sure that if you put Mitchell into a weak side he would be as good..

Of course you're not, but that carries about as much weight as me saying Crouch wouldn't be doing as well as he now at Sydney because he wouldn't be getting as much playing time at Sydney behind the players you listed.

 

[JPod_31]

Crouch looks more complete than Mitchell.

 

[DangerSloane]

Of course you're not, but that carries about as much weight as me saying Crouch wouldn't be doing as well as he now at Sydney because he wouldn't be getting as much playing time at Sydney behind the players you listed.

Im not doubting that. I just think the timing is interesting. Crouch is starting to really hit his form the last couple of weeks while Mitchell seems to have hit the 'rookie wall' slightly due to playing a few more games.