How important is Crouch?

[DeadlyAkkuret]

It seems that he may be available for round one, but my reaction was just a mere shrug and move on. Am i underestimating the man Aker labels a 'nuisance'?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/afl/crou...om-shock-return/2007/03/13/1173722468534.html

 

[scottwade]

I think Crouch is very good at shutting down an opponent, but you get virtually nothing going the other way. He gets few possesions and his disposal is average.

Clearly a player like Kirk came into the team and demonstrated the value of a 2 way player. Ablett & McVeigh are in the same vein as Kirk.

However at this stage we have no one else with Crouch's speed and negating ability on our books. If an Akermanis or Kerr were running amok he would still IMO be our go to man.

 

[Tuco]

I think Crouch is very good at shutting down an opponent, but you get virtually nothing going the other way. He gets few possesions and his disposal is average.

Clearly a player like Kirk came into the team and demonstrated the value of a 2 way player. Ablett & McVeigh are in the same vein as Kirk.

However at this stage we have no one else with Crouch's speed and negating ability on our books. If an Akermanis or Kerr were running amok he would still IMO be our go to man.

Oh I dunno. Crouch does rebound a lot of footy to our forwards for us. He isn't just a fast tackler. 12 possessions a game mightn't be huge. But most of them seem to count. And he always seemed to kick a goal or two on Aker.

 

[Footylover1]

It seems that he may be available for round one, but my reaction was just a mere shrug and move on. Am i underestimating the man Aker labels a 'nuisance'?

http://www.smh.com.au/news/afl/crou...om-shock-return/2007/03/13/1173722468534.html

Well, put it this way! If he had played in the Grand Final we would have won the game for sure. He would have taken Ben Cousins and he wouldn't have allowed 2 goals kicked on him. So he is a very important player for us!

 

[natlovestheswans]

Well, put it this way! If he had played in the Grand Final we would have won the game for sure. He would have taken Ben Cousins and he wouldn't have allowed 2 goals kicked on him. So he is a very important player for us!

No, not 'for sure'.

 

[Footylover1]

No, not 'for sure'.

He would have been the difference between us winning and losing the game

 

[natlovestheswans]

He would have been the difference between us winning and losing the game

If he would have played the entire game could have been different. Sure, we may have won with him, but it's definately not 'for sure'.

 

[Footylover1]

If he would have played the entire game could have been different. Sure, we may have won with him, but it's definately not 'for sure'.

In my opinion it is 'for sure' but that would vary from different people

 

[natlovestheswans]

In my opinion it is 'for sure' but that would vary from different people

Well your opinion that 'for sure' we would have won if he played, is wrong. The fact is that if he would have played the entire game could have gone differently.. right from the opening bounce. We could have won by 50 points, or they could have won by 50 points..

Things like that aren't 'for sure' because he didn't play. If Barry Hall would have played a little better, we may have won.. but we also may have not. If Luke Ablett didn't get injured we may have won, we also may have not.

In the end Barry didn't play a little better, Luke Ablett did get injured and Jared Crouch wasn't there.. so who knows what could have happened. Nothing is 'for sure' and you sound like a moron saying that it is.

 

[Footylover1]

Wow! I'm a moron for expressing my opinion that Crouch is an important player. Well sorry! I forgot he's a freaking dud! But since I'm a moron my opinions don't matter hey! My respect for you after that lame post as gone down

 

[natlovestheswans]

Wow! I'm a moron for expressing my opinion that Crouch is an important player. Well sorry! I forgot he's a freaking dud! But since I'm a moron my opinions don't matter hey! My respect for you after that lame post as gone down

Nice twist there. I never said anything about Crouch not being an important player. All i said was that it is definately not 'for sure' that with him we would have won the GF. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to relise that if he would have played everything would have been different.

 

[TheBloods]

Wow! I'm a moron for expressing my opinion that Crouch is an important player. Well sorry! I forgot he's a freaking dud! But since I'm a moron my opinions don't matter hey! My respect for you after that lame post as gone down

Oh for goodness sakes grow up. Nat's comments are perfectly sensible. Yes, Crouch is important and would have been a big plus for us. However, you can't say "for sure" because everything would be different.

 

[footy block]

He would have been the difference between us winning and losing the game

He reminds me of Simon Phillips

 

[is2SWaNz]

Crouch is vital.

We saw what we were missing, and I don't care if he was the difference between losing or winning. Actually I do, but the fact is that he can be replaced but not easily. He can tag players like Aker.

Watching past games e.g. 2005 home and away season. He's vital. Adds great depth to the midfield and bloody talented. Lets hope he can play in round one

 

[Jeffers]

Crouch looked pretty promising for a first outing in a long time. He still looked under done but the most important thing was his speed was still there. Very good news as he definitely important to our back line structure.

 

[terryo]

Very good news as he definitely important to our back line structure.

I tend to agree, and it's good that someone knows how to spell definitely

 

[natlovestheswans]

I tend to agree, and it's good that someone knows how to spell definitely

I can't help it, it's a habit. My fingers won't allow me otherwise..