Matt Crouch and clearances

[1970crow]

We just doubled the total clearances win in all of the first 3 games in one game and against a highly rated midfield unit. Would it be too much to ask that posters cease describing Crouch as vital to our stoppage performance. 2/3 of his possessions are uncontested, he's a handbrake and we do fine winning clearances without him.

 

[VictorianCrow85]

We just doubled the total clearances win in all of the first 3 games in one game and against a highly rated midfield unit. Would it be too much to ask that posters cease describing Crouch as vital to our stoppage performance. 2/3 of his possessions are uncontested, he's a handbrake and we do fine winning clearances without him.

Probably need a bigger sample size than one match, Rankine was enormous in clearances yesterday but unrealistic to expect that level of output every single week.

Still would be interesting to see a bigger sample size and if a true trend emerges.

 

[Drugs Are Bad Mackay?]

Matt would have noticed and will train the house down this week

 

[FR0GGY]

Matt would have noticed and will train the house down this week

Hip flexor has never felt better coach.

 

[1970crow]

Probably need a bigger sample size than one match, Rankine was enormous in clearances yesterday but unrealistic to expect that level of output every single week.

Still would be interesting to see a bigger sample size and if a true trend emerges.

The reality is that we'll win our share anyway. Crouch is not critical, he's not even vaguely important. Clearances that he wins will be won by other operators, but they'll be much more dynamic. Plus both offensive and defensive spread improves significantly, Crouch has neither. And I'm not saying you're wrong, a bigger sample size would be good. The important point is that we shouldn't fear that sample size.

When I suggested in the selection thread that we should try half a game without Crouch's influence I was shouted down as if without him our midfield would collapse. Well, after 1 game turns out it thrives. Might be a small sample size, but so far there's no evidence that we're not better without him and 1 game suggesting we are.

 

[Smart Fella]

The reality is that we'll win our share anyway. Crouch is not critical, he's not even vaguely important. Clearances that he wins will be won by other operators, but they'll be much more dynamic. Plus both offensive and defensive spread improves significantly, Crouch has neither. And I'm not saying you're wrong, a bigger sample size would be good. The important point is that we shouldn't fear that sample size.

When I suggested in the selection thread that we should try half a game without Crouch's influence I was shouted down as if without him our midfield would collapse. Well, after 1 game turns out it thrives. Might be a small sample size, but so far there's no evidence that we're not better without him and 1 game suggesting we are.

It's pretty simple. If the team is having no issues with clearance and mids are performing, there is no need for him.

He hasn't played poorly, the team just has more upside without him. In saying that, he'll be back in the team once fit.

 

[Doctor B]

I posted this in the changes thread but belongs here




Yesterdays mid mix worked well
Without Crouch we still won clearances 46-35, stoppage clearances 34-23 and were even in centre clearances 12-12

 

[spenze]

I posted this in the changes thread but belongs here




Yesterdays mid mix worked well
Without Crouch we still won clearances 46-35, stoppage clearances 34-23 and were even in centre clearances 12-12

Which is amazing given the absolute non service that Rob was dishing out yesterday. I would like them to do a breakdown of the % of clearances when Thilly was rucking, each time he went in there we were dominant. It almost seemed like a handbrake was applied when Rob went back in there, thought I did see him jump at a ruck contest in the last 1/4 so he must have been blasted.

I'd think Peatling at 50% of CBAs should be a minimum, fast can tackle, wins clearances, the potential to make our mid setup so much more effective.

 

[Samcro24]

Crouch in means no Murphy, which is reason enough to not only play him, but hold on like grim death.

 

[spenze]

Crouch in means no Murphy, which is reason enough to not only play him, but hold on like grim death.

 

[Samcro24]

Yesterday it did

 

[MrBarry]

Crouch in means no Murphy, which is reason enough to not only play him, but hold on like grim death.

I don't believe this will be the case, I feel they are nailed on thinking Murphy must be in for Rachele.

 

[1970crow]

Which is amazing given the absolute non service that Rob was dishing out yesterday. I would like them to do a breakdown of the % of clearances when Thilly was rucking, each time he went in there we were dominant. It almost seemed like a handbrake was applied when Rob went back in there, thought I did see him jump at a ruck contest in the last 1/4 so he must have been blasted.

I'd think Peatling at 50% of CBAs should be a minimum, fast can tackle, wins clearances, the potential to make our mid setup so much more effective.

One of the memorable moments in the game for me was TT impacting a stoppage with brut strength and getting the ball across the line in our defensive 50. This was about a minute after he'd kicked his 3rd or 4th goal and he'd gone straight into relief ruck. ROB doesn't even influence loose balls like that in his 90% rucking time and he's sure as shit not kicking goals as well. He used to though.

What's interesting about the ruck discussion is that somehow the correct view that hitouts won is a meaningless stat has morphed into you can just have a crap ruck and it doesn't matter. Good rucks make 22s better, there should be more to valuing them than just hitout stats. But not around here, it seems to be all we care about. Not surprising, Matty Clarke was the ruck coach for years and years, he did nothing else apart from ruck contests. Would have believed Rehn was wasting energy taking marks behind the ball.

 

[James Podsiadly]

Rankine 19/21 possessions were contested, Soligo 17/26…

That is totally unsustainable for them without an inside bull like Crouch or Berry to take some of the load, they’ll break down by round 10.

 

[1970crow]

Crouch in means no Murphy, which is reason enough to not only play him, but hold on like grim death.

Crouch in pushes Nank back out, Murphy remains as he's 'like for like' for Rachele. Whatever stoppage rotation minutes that were shared around get sucked back into Crabch. Young Sid kind of fatigued out of the game, he'll be back to sub. Which is ok in isolation.

 

[1970crow]

Rankine 19/21 possessions were contested, Soligo 17/26…

That is totally unsustainable for them without an inside bull like Crouch or Berry to take some of the load, they’ll break down by round 10.

Rankine has consistently posted higher contested numbers than Crouch. Crouch is only 1/3 contested, he's not the inside beast that you believe him to be. It's an urban myth.

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

I still think he’s serves a purpose in individual games and for the season.

Gives us more flexibility to play Rankine forward if we need to, which would have been handy yesterday.

Crouch doing the grunt work keeps Dawson and Rankine fresher.

 

[spenze]

I still think he’s serves a purpose in individual games and for the season.

Gives us more flexibility to play Rankine forward if we need to, which would have been handy yesterday.

Crouch doing the grunt work keeps Dawson and Rankine fresher.

Does he though, the figures just don't back it up

 

[Scorpus]

Does he though, the figures just don't back it up

He averages 7 ground ball gets. Dawson is at 4.8, Soligo at 9.0, Peatling at 7.8 despite having limited CBAs and Rankine at 10.0

So he's our fourth best of our main 5 mids at contested work at ground level

 

[Mr MysteryGuest]

Does he though, the figures just don't back it up

Do they? Crouch doesn’t need to do it all, he just needs to do his share

 

[Kane McGoodwin]

I still think he’s serves a purpose in individual games and for the season.

Gives us more flexibility to play Rankine forward if we need to, which would have been handy yesterday.

Crouch doing the grunt work keeps Dawson and Rankine fresher.

Agree Crouch still has an important role to play, but should be horses for courses against quicker teams on quicker decks. Will still be in his element in wintery conditions.

 

[mcleod at 50 lines it up]

I posted this in the changes thread but belongs here




Yesterdays mid mix worked well
Without Crouch we still won clearances 46-35, stoppage clearances 34-23 and were even in centre clearances 12-12

surprised peatling only got 30%, felt like Crouch going out allowed peatling more time and he had a breakout game

 

[mcleod at 50 lines it up]

Rankine 19/21 possessions were contested, Soligo 17/26…

That is totally unsustainable for them without an inside bull like Crouch or Berry to take some of the load, they’ll break down by round 10.

Heart was in my mouth when rankine started as mid, we definitely rolled the dice yesterday and history shows he's too fragile to last.

 

[Eddie Murphy]

Rankine has consistently posted higher contested numbers than Crouch. Crouch is only 1/3 contested, he's not the inside beast that you believe him to be. It's an urban myth.

I don’t necessarily disagree with your post but a larger sample size is definitely needed. Without Crouch, Dawson would be our only big bodied midfielder. Rankine was completely gassed by the fourth quarter. Soligo and Peatling are also lighter framed.

 

[1970crow]

I don’t necessarily disagree with your post but a larger sample size is definitely needed. Without Crouch, Dawson would be our only big bodied midfielder. Rankine was completely gassed by the fourth quarter. Soligo and Peatling are also lighter framed.

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