Matt Crouch and clearances

[Eddie Murphy]

So it's not clearances and contested possessions now, it's all about intangibles. It's ok, I predicted and posted this.

It’s about not leaving the dirty work to your star x-factor player. If Peatling can help carry that load then agree but we need to see a larger sample size for that.

You’re basing this all off one game where Izak carried our clearances and contested possession. This dirty work left him completely gassed in the fourth and managing only a single possession. Imagine how gassed it could leave him if we expect that output all season.

 

[BRL121]

It’s about not leaving the dirty work to your star x-factor player. If Peatling can help carry that load then agree but we need to see a larger sample size for that.

You’re basing this all off one game where Izak carried our clearances and contested possession. This dirty work left him completely gassed in the fourth and managing only a single possession. Imagine how gassed it could leave him if we expect that output all season.

Indeed. See my posts in the Rankine thread. First Crack has independently reached the same conclusions.

 

[Elder van Berlo]

I have been interested in what our midfield looks like without Crouch in a world involving Sid Draper. We generally pick 7 mids including 2 wingmen and 5 stoppage mids. Rankine Dawson and Soli pick themselves. Crouch has apparently been an automatic selection with Peatling apparently the 5th banana.

It might not be this year but at some point in the pretty imminent future Sid will probably become an automatic selection in there, and I myself have thought Peatling is the one who looks vulnerable, but perhaps Crouch is the one who actually should be vulnerable. Probably a bit like 1970crow I am a bit agnostic on Crouch. I see the good he does. I also question whether it makes it a better team. And I do mean question, rather than deny.

I saw both sides of the coin on Saturday. Our clearance numbers obviously didn't suffer and I'm probably not a sufficiently astute observer to be able to comment on their quality vs usual. Do Crouch clearances end up being smoother or clunkier than non-Crouch clearances? That's a genuine question.

Where I did notice the difference was not so much at stoppages but more in around the ground contested situations. Crouch's biggest strength is clean ball handling in traffic - both to pick it up and to move it effectively via handball or short kick to a player in a better position.

It felt like there were a lot of times on the weekend where the ball kind of pinballed around in traffic and players either couldn't pick it up or when they did, couldn't dispose of it effectively. Those ones where 5 times in a single passage you think one team or another is out but then they bugger it up. And it felt like every time that happened, it would be the Suns who would end up with it.

That might have been conditions to a degree, but I thought more than once on Saturday that we could have done with him calming down a manic situation.

I think he's best 22, for now at least. But I do have him as #5 of 5 stoppage mids in our 22. And if we want to priorities mid minutes for Sid, I think he's the one who needs to give way. Expendable might be going too far, but I don't think he's totally irreplaceable either.

 

[BRL121]

I have been interested in what our midfield looks like without Crouch in a world involving Sid Draper. We generally pick 7 mids including 2 wingmen and 5 stoppage mids. Rankine Dawson and Soli pick themselves. Crouch has apparently been an automatic selection with Peatling apparently the 5th banana.

It might not be this year but at some point in the pretty imminent future Sid will probably become an automatic selection in there, and I myself have thought Peatling is the one who looks vulnerable, but perhaps Crouch is the one who actually should be vulnerable. Probably a bit like 1970crow I am a bit agnostic on Crouch. I see the good he does. I also question whether it makes it a better team. And I do mean question, rather than deny.

I saw both sides of the coin on Saturday. Our clearance numbers obviously didn't suffer and I'm probably not a sufficiently astute observer to be able to comment on their quality vs usual. Do Crouch clearances end up being smoother or clunkier than non-Crouch clearances? That's a genuine question.

Where I did notice the difference was not so much at stoppages but more in around the ground contested situations. Crouch's biggest strength is clean ball handling in traffic - both to pick it up and to move it effectively via handball or short kick to a player in a better position.

It felt like there were a lot of times on the weekend where the ball kind of pinballed around in traffic and players either couldn't pick it up or when they did, couldn't dispose of it effectively. Those ones where 5 times in a single passage you think one team or another is out but then they bugger it up. And it felt like every time that happened, it would be the Suns who would end up with it.

That might have been conditions to a degree, but I thought more than once on Saturday that we could have done with him calming down a manic situation.

I think he's best 22, for now at least. But I do have him as #5 of 5 stoppage mids in our 22. And if we want to priorities mid minutes for Sid, I think he's the one who needs to give way. Expendable might be going too far, but I don't think he's totally irreplaceable either.

The bolded paragraph is absolutely right. Too much fumbling and unco ROB being unable to bend down or send signals from his brain to his feet. It was indeed always the Suns who were the first to recover and exit smoothly. This was mainly early and also was a feature early against North. More often than not, we actually touched the ball first. It probably would have been better to take the tackle, rather than attempt a fumbled handpass to the feet of the next player.

 

[1970crow]

Not sure this bloke should be as locked in as many believe, particularly our coaching group.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

He needs to be 100% fit.

I suspect that he rushed back from his hip flexor just because the mids had a good week without him. My speculation only of course but it is just the sort of selfishness some of our seniors have displayed in the past whenever their spot is under any threat. It's an attitude that can only exist if enabled our coaches. Unfortunately our coaches feel much safer having an 80% fit senior player in the team rather than rolling the dice on a relative newbie like Taylor or Dowling.

We saw it last year when Brodie Smith

33

Brodie Smith

Age

33

Ht

194cm

Wt

88kg

Pos.

Def

Career

Season

Last 5

D

19.5

5star

K

12.3

5star

HB

7.2

4star

M

4.2

4star

T

2.1

4star

MG

500.1

5star

D

17.1

4star

K

12.6

5star

HB

4.5

3star

M

3.5

3star

T

2.3

3star

MG

438.9

5star

D

17.2

5star

K

10.8

4star

HB

6.4

4star

M

3.8

4star

T

3.6

5star

tried to play through his back injury. Actually does the player a disservice as they end up playing awful football which harms their career anyway.

Frontline covered this in detail. Marty's advice to Mike Moore when Brooke was circling for a hosting role was to never let anyone fill in for you who's capable of doing your job.

Edit - actually that's probably why Murph is so popular with the players. If they ever need to miss a game they pump his tyres up to anyone who'll listen. Murph can take my spot, he's great. Knowing that he'll never show them up

 

[King Elvis]

Wasn't fit, shouldn't have played.

First few games of the season, he was excellent and extracting and getting the ball to the outsides movers, and was a good link in the chain.

Was a liability this weekend.

 

[1970crow]

Wasn't fit, shouldn't have played.

First few games of the season, he was excellent and extracting and getting the ball to the outsides movers, and was a good link in the chain.

Was a liability this weekend.

No, he wasn’t. He’s a receiver and defensive liability. You need to take notice of what’s going on when we don’t have the ball.

 

[1970crow]

He needs to be 100% fit.

I suspect that he rushed back from his hip flexor just because the mids had a good week without him. My speculation only of course but it is just the sort of selfishness some of our seniors have displayed in the past whenever their spot is under any threat. It's an attitude that can only exist if enabled our coaches. Unfortunately our coaches feel much safer having an 80% fit senior player in the team rather than rolling the dice on a relative newbie like Taylor or Dowling.

We saw it last year when Brodie Smith tried to play through his back injury. Actually does the player a disservice as they end up playing awful football which harms their career anyway.

Frontline covered this in detail. Marty's advice to Mike Moore when Brooke was circling for a hosting role was to never let anyone fill in for you who's capable of doing your job.

Edit - actually that's probably why Murph is so popular with the players. If they ever need to miss a game they pump his tyres up to anyone who'll listen. Murph can take my spot, he's great. Knowing that he'll never show them up

Even 100% fit, evidence strongly suggests that our midfield is no worse without him. We still win our share of stoppages, which is what many believe would dry up without him. You can’t argue against that.

 

[1970crow]

Wasn't fit, shouldn't have played.

First few games of the season, he was excellent and extracting and getting the ball to the outsides movers, and was a good link in the chain.

Was a liability this weekend.

He makes our midfield worse. Of the 30 he gets, we’d simply replace with 25/26 that are more dynamic and damaging to opposition. AND we wouldn’t be a man down in general play, so could defend oppo transition better.

 

[matt1202]

The irony of people coming back to this thread titled 'Matt Crouch

5

Matt Crouch

Age

30

Ht

181cm

Wt

85kg

Pos.

Mid

Career

Season

Last 5

D

28.4

5star

K

12.0

4star

HB

16.4

5star

M

3.3

3star

T

3.9

5star

CL

4.8

5star

D

24.9

5star

K

9.7

4star

HB

15.1

5star

M

2.4

3star

T

2.4

3star

CL

4.4

5star

D

21.2

5star

K

10.4

4star

HB

10.8

5star

M

4.4

4star

T

3.4

5star

CL

2.0

4star

and clearances' after the Geelong defeat to try and argue it proves their point... when Crouch won 11 clearances (most on ground and more than double any other Adelaide player).

In a game where the consensus is that the midfield got well beaten and goals from stoppage were a big problem, how can the guy with the highest clearance and contested possession numbers shoulder most of the blame?

 

[1970crow]

The irony of people coming back to this thread titled 'Matt Crouch and clearances' after the Geelong defeat to try and argue it proves their point... when Crouch won 11 clearances (most on ground and more than double any other Adelaide player).

In a game where the consensus is that the midfield got well beaten and goals from stoppage were a big problem, how can the guy with the highest clearance and contested possession numbers shoulder most of the blame?

Maybe because our clearance record is markedly better when he's not in the side. What he gets we lose by a factor of greater than 1.0. It's not really that hard to understand.

 

[matt1202]

I have been interested in what our midfield looks like without Crouch in a world involving Sid Draper. We generally pick 7 mids including 2 wingmen and 5 stoppage mids. Rankine Dawson and Soli pick themselves. Crouch has apparently been an automatic selection with Peatling apparently the 5th banana.

It might not be this year but at some point in the pretty imminent future Sid will probably become an automatic selection in there, and I myself have thought Peatling is the one who looks vulnerable, but perhaps Crouch is the one who actually should be vulnerable. Probably a bit like 1970crow I am a bit agnostic on Crouch. I see the good he does. I also question whether it makes it a better team. And I do mean question, rather than deny.

I saw both sides of the coin on Saturday. Our clearance numbers obviously didn't suffer and I'm probably not a sufficiently astute observer to be able to comment on their quality vs usual. Do Crouch clearances end up being smoother or clunkier than non-Crouch clearances? That's a genuine question.

Where I did notice the difference was not so much at stoppages but more in around the ground contested situations. Crouch's biggest strength is clean ball handling in traffic - both to pick it up and to move it effectively via handball or short kick to a player in a better position.

It felt like there were a lot of times on the weekend where the ball kind of pinballed around in traffic and players either couldn't pick it up or when they did, couldn't dispose of it effectively. Those ones where 5 times in a single passage you think one team or another is out but then they bugger it up. And it felt like every time that happened, it would be the Suns who would end up with it.

That might have been conditions to a degree, but I thought more than once on Saturday that we could have done with him calming down a manic situation.

I think he's best 22, for now at least. But I do have him as #5 of 5 stoppage mids in our 22. And if we want to priorities mid minutes for Sid, I think he's the one who needs to give way. Expendable might be going too far, but I don't think he's totally irreplaceable either.

This is absolutely spot on. Calmness under pressure, clean pick-ups and disposal. Exactly the kind of skills that went missing for some players on Thursday night.

It's not flashy or "dynamic' so it's easy for people to overlook when they have an agenda they want to push.

 

[BRL121]

Not sure this bloke should be as locked in as many believe, particularly our coaching group.

He certainly reverted to the old, crablike Crouch. Whether that was because of injury, I don't know.

 

[1970crow]

He certainly reverted to the old, crablike Crouch. Whether that was because of injury, I don't know.

Our best midfield performance was last week against the Suns. It certainly warrants asking the question.

 

[spenze]

Our best midfield performance was last week against the Suns. It certainly warrants asking the question.

When Rob plays poorly, it really amplifies Matts deficiencies

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

When Rob plays poorly, it really amplifies Matts deficiencies

To be fair our whole midfield usually struggles.

 

[Firewalker]

When Rob plays poorly, it really amplifies Matts deficiencies

What a dynamic duo they are