Lee Croft - Good or a lot of huff & puff?

[Iwan is God 0]

It would appear that Derby gave us a lesson in how to cross a ball last night. As much as I like Crofty for his runs & 100% commitment I wouldn''t have him in my starting XI due to his lack of final product. If he doesn''t learn how to put in a decent cross I fear he will be a sorry second choice to David Bell sooner rather than later. I never feel as if opposition defences need to worry too much about crosses coming from either flank these days & it explains our lack of goals too.

Oh & how great would it be if we had a tricky, speedy left winger who loves to take on full backs time & time again & who has the ability to win a game with a moment of brilliance at any given time?... Sorry, I know he''s gone but how badly do we miss him? A lot is the answer!!!!!!

[lincoln canary (& Golden Coppel) 0]

i agree completely agree. i dont get all this euphoria surrounding croft, why is he such a fans favourite? he gets the ball runs at defenders but like last night never got past his marker once! as mentioned aswell he has no end product. croft is ideal to throw on with 15 20mins to go to. for me bell and hoolahan have got to start week in week out and get integrated properly with the team then we will finally have threat on the wings.

talking about tricky speedy left wingers, i would love to have kris commons in my side, thought he was absoulutely awesome last night

[Tim Dawson 0]

Your question answers itself !!  huff and puff, i can`t fault his effort but what i have seen of Bell, he can cross, play either wing, a quality player, bye Crofty, hello mr Bell

[hogesar 10,761]

[quote user="Tim Dawson"]Your question answers itself !!  huff and puff, i can`t fault his effort but what i have seen of Bell, he can cross, play either wing, a quality player, bye Crofty, hello mr Bell[/quote]Is it necessarily bye Croft? Can Hoolihan produce many better crosses than Croft? I''m not too sure.

[Thecanaryfan 0]

[quote user="Tim Dawson"]Your question answers itself !!  huff and puff, i can`t fault his effort but what i have seen of Bell, he can cross, play either wing, a quality player, bye Crofty, hello mr Bell[/quote]

Bless poor little Crofty, so many weapons but missing the most important. He cant cross, he never will be able to either by the looks of it. A winger who cant cross simply isnt a winger. Hello Mr Bell indeed.

The sad thing is I dont think Hoolahan is much better so our problem is on both sides.

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="Tim Dawson"]Your question answers itself !!  huff and puff, i can`t fault his effort but what i have seen of Bell, he can cross, play either wing, a quality player, bye Crofty, hello mr Bell[/quote]

Is it necessarily bye Croft? Can Hoolihan produce many better crosses than Croft? I''m not too sure.
[/quote]

 

Of the three wingers Hoolahan is the real disappointment.For whatever reason he looks a pale reflection of what we saw last season when he ripped us apart.Crofty will always be appreciated because of his honest effort,but he isn''t a match turner, but I suspect that Bell could be.He''s certanly the best crosser of the ball by far and has the knack of getting half a yard on a defender and whipping the ball in ,whereas Crofty seems to put his head down and head for the byline .

[Syteanric 1]

[quote user="Beauseant"]

[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="Tim Dawson"]Your question answers itself !!  huff and puff, i can`t fault his effort but what i have seen of Bell, he can cross, play either wing, a quality player, bye Crofty, hello mr Bell[/quote]

Is it necessarily bye Croft? Can Hoolihan produce many better crosses than Croft? I''m not too sure.
[/quote]

 

Of the three wingers Hoolahan is the real disappointment.For whatever reason he looks a pale reflection of what we saw last season when he ripped us apart.Crofty will always be appreciated because of his honest effort,but he isn''t a match turner, but I suspect that Bell could be.He''s certanly the best crosser of the ball by far and has the knack of getting half a yard on a defender and whipping the ball in ,whereas Crofty seems to put his head down and head for the byline .

[/quote]

thats the whole point Beauseant.. Hoolahan, i think, was signed on the basis of 2 decent games against us.... was he scouted over the cours of a season? did he even want to sign for us in the first place... regrettably putting pen to paper when bigger sides didn''t come knocking...

It certainly seems like he doesnt want to be here.

jas :)

[Yellowbeagle 0]

Agreed Bell does look a promising player, but thats all at this momment, let his performances find their level after a run of 15-20 games before we hail him as our best winger. We''ve all been burnt before with players coming in looking good initially, then the levels just drop right off.

Croft does have his problems, but the one thing he does have that the rest of the team are lacking is he''s quick, and this does cause panic in opposition defences, even if he only gets 1 decent cross in 4 into the box. From what i have heard from Luton fans is Bell is not the quickest and had consistency problems of his own. Maybe Bell on the left for a few may be the better option, with him and Croft swapping over during the match.

[GJP 79]

At the moment Lee Croft and David Bell would both be in the team if I was picking it.

Personally I don''t buy into all the stuff about Lee Croft not being able to cross and having no end product.

 

[Beauseant 0]

[quote user="jas the barclay king"][quote user="Beauseant"]

[quote user="hogesar"][quote user="Tim Dawson"]Your question answers itself !!  huff and puff, i can`t fault his effort but what i have seen of Bell, he can cross, play either wing, a quality player, bye Crofty, hello mr Bell[/quote]

Is it necessarily bye Croft? Can Hoolihan produce many better crosses than Croft? I''m not too sure.
[/quote]

 

Of the three wingers Hoolahan is the real disappointment.For whatever reason he looks a pale reflection of what we saw last season when he ripped us apart.Crofty will always be appreciated because of his honest effort,but he isn''t a match turner, but I suspect that Bell could be.He''s certanly the best crosser of the ball by far and has the knack of getting half a yard on a defender and whipping the ball in ,whereas Crofty seems to put his head down and head for the byline .

[/quote]

thats the whole point Beauseant.. Hoolahan, i think, was signed on the basis of 2 decent games against us.... was he scouted over the cours of a season? did he even want to sign for us in the first place... regrettably putting pen to paper when bigger sides didn''t come knocking...

It certainly seems like he doesnt want to be here.

jas :)

[/quote]

 

Couldn''t agree more Jas.He looks a very unhappy bunny at present.I suspect that the rumours of fallouts with Roeder have some truth,but in fairness he''s not proved a damn thing on the pitch.

[One Flew Over... 33]

Croft has scored 2 goals, which is better than the rest of the midfield (as Russel has been used as a striker). He''s not afraid of running, or trying to go past defenders, even if it didn''t work last night. There''s not much more exciting in football than a player running at speed past a defence. And Neil Adams was raving about one of his crosses yesterday in the first half - but there was no-one attacking the ball, unlike when Derby put the ball in. Plus surely if you train most days at putting in crosses he''ll be getting better and better.

[Indy_Bones 444]

As per usual, Croft suffers from the usual fan problem of them looking at things in too linear a manner.No one can argue that his crossing needs to improve - IF we want him to cross.I have very strong memories of the Arsenal side that was virtually unbeatable with Pires and Ljungberg on the wings. I''m not for a minute suggesting Croft is of the same quality, nor am I about to claim that neither of them could cross, however the pertinent point is that they didn''t cross that often.Their main strength was running at defenders, cutting in from the wings, and then playing clever balls to Henry and Bergkamp.Look at our strike force, the only real ''target man'' we have is Sibierski, the rest are players who much prefer the ball to feet, so why do we insist on having a target man and forcing our wingers to cross in order to try to utilise him? Why not play to our wingers and strikers strengths and have Hoolahan and Croft run at the defenders and then look to play a nice ball into Sibi/Lupoli etc? We know they are both pretty good passers of the ball along the floor, and Lupoli, Lita and Curo all prefer the ball there, and Sibi is hardly poor either.The good option here is that Bell can be brought on if wanted to change the complexity of the game and start giving the crosses Sibi will benefit the most from, whilst still being a strong passer along the floor.For a manager who wants to play passing football and with such apparent strong links with Wenger, I find it hard to believe that he''s not trying to adopt their style more fully, and use the players we have in the best possible way.Used correctly, Croft would be one of the best players in the league for the role I have suggested, as a pure crosser of the ball then Bell is easily the better option.Indy

[Big Rons Brain 0]

[quote user="lincoln canary"]

he gets the ball runs at defenders but like last night never got past his marker once!

[/quote]

That is factually rubbish. I sat on the touch line at Derby and he got past the full back a number of times.  Derby fans sitting behind me repeatedly mentioned they felt he was our biggest threat last night.  He was actually about our only player who beat his man during the entire game.

Bell looked no better at getting past his man, and lost the ball right in front of me a few times after he came on, however  I would say on current form Croft and Bell would be the best of an ordinary bunch.

 

 

[Attleborough_Canary 96]

Against Wolves, the quality of the ball into the box was of far better quality than in any other game this season in my opinion. I felt the reason for this was that the full backs on both flanks make a concious effort to bomb past our wingers thus giving the opposition defence something else to worry about. It gave our wingers far space and time to put the ball into the box because it wasn''t Croft against 2 defenders for example. Even if the fullbacks didnt get the ball they pulled defenders away which is something I dont think we do enough of, maybe more of this would result in an improvement in the service into the box generally, not just from Croft.

[city-till-i-die 7]

great honest footballer and cant fault crofty for his work ethic...but his final ball lets him down again & again...lets hope he does some crossing practice..personnaly i like him

[Green and Yellow 0]

You can add Patterson to the list, all huff and puff but nothing else. 

[bringbackterraces 0]

Croft can do it but not very often which at the end of the day isn''t good enough!

 

Bell looks like he can play but doesn''t look quick enough!

[pennywise 0]

all croft does is run and run we may as well sign forrest gump  and play him on the wing, once bell gets his chance croft will be lucky to make the bench, oh f--k it lets not beat around the bush croft is rubbish, is it his 3rd season now ? and the jurys still out, the only reason he`s still here is because he`s been lucky with managerial sackings,hes on his 5th manager now including caretakers  lucky for him  they get sacked before they realise how rubbish he is....

[Tangible Fixed Assets anyone? 0]

[quote user="GJP"]

Personally I don''t buy into all the stuff about Lee Croft not being able to cross and having no end product.

[/quote]

Try heading one of his crosses, LOL!

[The Great Wall Of Tettey 0]

i have been saying bell over croft for a while now, i can see the effort croft is puttin in, but all he does it run around !

ive only seen bell at home games, but even in the 30 odd minutes ive seen him hes put more balls in than croft has !

i want to see bell on the right, and hoolahan on the left

hoolahan hasnt been up to form, but he still produces more than croft does, just because croft gets the ball and runs, doesnt make him better than anyone

[Syteanric 1]

Croft looks a pretty ordinary player, slightly out of his depth in this league.. he''d pee all over league 1 though...

Perhaps keep him for next season then ;)

jas :)

[One Flew Over... 33]

[quote user="Indy_Bones"]As per usual, Croft suffers from the usual fan problem of them looking at things in too linear a manner.No one can argue that his crossing needs to improve - IF we want him to cross.I have very strong memories of the Arsenal side that was virtually unbeatable with Pires and Ljungberg on the wings. I''m not for a minute suggesting Croft is of the same quality, nor am I about to claim that neither of them could cross, however the pertinent point is that they didn''t cross that often.Their main strength was running at defenders, cutting in from the wings, and then playing clever balls to Henry and Bergkamp.Look at our strike force, the only real ''target man'' we have is Sibierski, the rest are players who much prefer the ball to feet, so why do we insist on having a target man and forcing our wingers to cross in order to try to utilise him? Why not play to our wingers and strikers strengths and have Hoolahan and Croft run at the defenders and then look to play a nice ball into Sibi/Lupoli etc? We know they are both pretty good passers of the ball along the floor, and Lupoli, Lita and Curo all prefer the ball there, and Sibi is hardly poor either.The good option here is that Bell can be brought on if wanted to change the complexity of the game and start giving the crosses Sibi will benefit the most from, whilst still being a strong passer along the floor.For a manager who wants to play passing football and with such apparent strong links with Wenger, I find it hard to believe that he''s not trying to adopt their style more fully, and use the players we have in the best possible way.Used correctly, Croft would be one of the best players in the league for the role I have suggested, as a pure crosser of the ball then Bell is easily the better option.Indy[/quote]Excellent points. Croft seems to have been told to cut inside towards the box and try a shot more often,  rather than always going outside to cross. This is how he got one of his goals

[GJP 79]

[quote user="One Flew Over..."][quote user="Indy_Bones"]As per usual, Croft suffers from the usual fan problem of them looking at things in too linear a manner.

No one can argue that his crossing needs to improve - IF we want him to cross.

I have very strong memories of the Arsenal side that was virtually unbeatable with Pires and Ljungberg on the wings. I''m not for a minute suggesting Croft is of the same quality, nor am I about to claim that neither of them could cross, however the pertinent point is that they didn''t cross that often.

Their main strength was running at defenders, cutting in from the wings, and then playing clever balls to Henry and Bergkamp.

Look at our strike force, the only real ''target man'' we have is Sibierski, the rest are players who much prefer the ball to feet, so why do we insist on having a target man and forcing our wingers to cross in order to try to utilise him? Why not play to our wingers and strikers strengths and have Hoolahan and Croft run at the defenders and then look to play a nice ball into Sibi/Lupoli etc? We know they are both pretty good passers of the ball along the floor, and Lupoli, Lita and Curo all prefer the ball there, and Sibi is hardly poor either.

The good option here is that Bell can be brought on if wanted to change the complexity of the game and start giving the crosses Sibi will benefit the most from, whilst still being a strong passer along the floor.

For a manager who wants to play passing football and with such apparent strong links with Wenger, I find it hard to believe that he''s not trying to adopt their style more fully, and use the players we have in the best possible way.

Used correctly, Croft would be one of the best players in the league for the role I have suggested, as a pure crosser of the ball then Bell is easily the better option.

Indy
[/quote]

Excellent points. Croft seems to have been told to cut inside towards the box and try a shot more often,  rather than always going outside to cross.
This is how he got one of his goals
[/quote]

That''s exactly what they''ve been doing. They''re keen to get Crofty in the danger areas coming in from the corner of the box.

Because they know that Lee Croft is a talented player with a lot to offer.

[Here We Go 0]

Croft hands down, he is a great player, just people here wont give him the chance, just get on his back when one cross goes wrong, on tuesday he was a biggest threat and caused derby no end of problems, he deserves his place in the team, just stick Bell on the left, better than Fatty Crapyson and then maybe we could stick Hoolahoop in the middle, then are flanks wont be exposed, teaming him up with Clingon. we will have a good midfield.

[Empty Mirror 0]

Croft gives us width.  Hoolihan cuts inside, and Bell too gives us less width than Croft.    Which means that Croft gives other people space to play.

Croft has pace.  Pace scares defences.   And he can go past his man.  Bell doesn''t seem able to.  It''s significant that the Derby fans another poster referred to, or we8wba all felt Croft was our biggest threat.  He worries the opposition, who end up double marking him by 30 minutes in, which ought to create space elsewhere.

Croft with two goals from open play is our leading scoring midfielder.

And yes, he''s a lot of huff and puff.   Is that so bad?  I''d rather see someone trying than someone in a sulk or falling over every time he''s touched.

["6 ft 2, eyes are blue Duncan Forbes is after you" 0]

Huff and Puff - and not as good as Ian Henderson who cost us nothing

[GJP 79]

[quote user="6 ft 2 eyes are blue Duncan Forbes is after you"]Huff and Puff - and not as good as Ian Henderson who cost us nothing[/quote]

That is a joke, isn''t it?

[Shyster 0]

Given the choice I would have Chadwick & Bell starting matches and alternating on either wing.Hoolahan is thus far proving ineffective and Croft is best utilised as a sub.

[Shyster 0]

[quote user="shyster"]Given the choice I would have Chadwick & Bell starting matches and alternating on either wing.Hoolahan is thus far proving ineffective and Croft is best utilised as a sub.[/quote]

I would also start Sibierski in central-midfield alongside Clingan with out of favour Lupoli up front with Lita - still the best option in my humble opinion while we don''t have a decent target-man.With all players fit and not out on loan I would opt for a starting line-up of: (4-4-2)Marshall - gkOtsemober - rbStefanovic - cbKennedy - cbBertrand - lbBell/Chadwick - rwSibierski - acmClingan - dmcChadwick/Bell - lwLita - fLupoli - fsubs:NelsonDohertyCroftHoolahanRussell