Croft vs Bell

[Paul Spector 0]

With Croft you know you will get 100% all the time. He would run and run for the cause - although admittedly the final ball is too often lacking.

Or, Bell - who is clearly a very talented player, but in my opinion looked disinterested by the end on Saturday. He had given up in the second half, which personally I thought was disgraceful.

Always Croft for me.

[John 0]

As long as you give Bell the ball he creates and has his influence on the game.Croft rarely ever has an influence on the game in his current state. He needs to sort out his game plan before he can consider himself worth putting in the first team in my opinion.For me it''s Bell.

[National express super guard 0]

bell has quality, croft has right commitment. Love to see them both playing, but only way I can see that happening is with a 3-5-2 formation, which with current defending may lead to that kinda score. Norwich 3 Nott''m F 52!!!!

[nutty nigel 7,509]

For me it''s Bell everytime. In the few games he''s played so far he has already set up 3 goals and his delivery into the box always looks dangerous. Crofty gives everything and battles hard but delivery into the box never improves. 1 goal and 1 assist all season for Crofty.

 

[Here We Go 0]

 

I would play both, croft scares players with his pace and ability to take them on, while Bell has the crossing ability. Play Croft on the right Bell on the left.

[pete_norw 0]

[quote user="Belaugh Yellow"]

 

I would play both, croft scares players with his pace and ability to take them on, while Bell has the crossing ability. Play Croft on the right Bell on the left.

[/quote]

My point as well, you beat me to the keyboard Belaugh Yellow

[Here We Go 0]

[quote user="pete_norw"][quote user="Belaugh Yellow"]

 

I would play both, croft scares players with his pace and ability to take them on, while Bell has the crossing ability. Play Croft on the right Bell on the left.

[/quote]

My point as well, you beat me to the keyboard Belaugh Yellow

[/quote]

OoooooH Yeah!!!!

But seriously if we had croft playing on saturday, instead of Fatty Crapyson.

[Hans Castorp 0]

Am I being dense in suggesting that there was nothing more to playing Bell on the left as his style of play is incompatible with Semmy''s; Bell did not track back enough (although lost the ball often enough) which meant that our left side was exposed - especially for the last goal. I just wondered whether with Semmy getting forward our right side of defense would have been overly exposed/non-existent against Swansea. Admittedly, several time Pattison did provide cover for Semmy in a way that Bell didn''t (and Croft usually does).

I don''t think that it was a tactical masterstroke that imploded for Roeder, nor was it crass stupidity having a left footer on the right and vice-versa - more a case of the nature of the players.

Or was it because Roeder had his hands in his pockets? I just don''t know....

[The Great Wall Of Tettey 0]

skill over commitment please.

if we have a team full of commited players that dont create we will just go down

if u have a team with skillfull players then we will create.

 

its the same as lita VS cureton

cureton is commited, but does nothing,

lita doesnt care as much, but delivers

[Matt Morriss 69]

Bell was pretty poor second half, seemed to tire very quickly into the second half, mentally he looked spent by about 60 mins, this was evidenced by coming forward and then not knowing what to do and also losing it a few times. This was worrying, he should have been subbed for Hoolahan. Fozzy should have never gone off, yes he made an horrific error for their third goal but he did setup our 2 goals and had a decent game overall. Taking him off upset the balance as Pattison was playing well right wing, and Bell looked knackered and was ineffective for the last half an hour.Croft gives you 100% for 90 mins now, a prime example was his 90th mintue winner against Sheff Utd a few home games back, charging forward with pace on the counter in the last minutes.

[GJP 79]

I''d have them both in the team, different types of player and bring different things to the game.

I wonder how badly Lee Croft would have been slated if he''d turned in the performance that David Bell did at the weekend.

[psychedeliasmith 0]

Bell played well but he tired in the second half and received not much support from Bertrand. The problem was that after 60 mins, Swansea realised that he cut inside all the time and put two men on him, meaning he could no longer put the crosses in as he was never going to beat his man on the left.

When Hoolahan came on, Roeder probably should have switched the two players as although they are both skillful, they cut inside two much. Bell doesn''t look like he''s got loads of pace but his crossing is excellent, meaning he might not need to beat his man if playing on the right hand side and whip crosses in like Beckham. 

[The Colonel 0]

[quote user="psychedeliasmith"]

Bell played well but he tired in the second half and received not much support from Bertrand. The problem was that after 60 mins, Swansea realised that he cut inside all the time and put two men on him, meaning he could no longer put the crosses in as he was never going to beat his man on the left.

When Hoolahan came on, Roeder probably should have switched the two players as although they are both skillful, they cut inside two much. Bell doesn''t look like he''s got loads of pace but his crossing is excellent, meaning he might not need to beat his man if playing on the right hand side and whip crosses in like Beckham. 

[/quote]

Here here! Swansea realised bell''s crossing was the danger and doubled up! Roeder should have spotted this and moved bell to the right!

The players should have been good enough also to use the space that was being created by two players tracking bell.

Would like to see Hoolahan given a few games, looks like the only player who will try something different and look for (and is capable) of playing the killer pass. 

[Yellowbeagle 0]

Cant really say just yet, havent seen enough of Bell (just like everyone else at Carrow road) to know what he''ll be like over a sustained period of matches. Probably have a better idea after the next 10 matches.

[Saint Canary 0]

[quote user="nutty nigel"]

For me it''s Bell everytime. In the few games he''s played so far he has already set up 3 goals and his delivery into the box always looks dangerous. Crofty gives everything and battles hard but delivery into the box never improves. 1 goal and 1 assist all season for Crofty.

 

[/quote]Agree with that.  Croft is best used as an impact sub IMO as most of bes performances have been when coming of the bench.Too steal a phrase from Zippers Left Foot, less long distance runners, more ability.

[grantroederdisaster 0]

Croft looks so much better than what he actually is but at the end of the day rarely produces only runs to the flag and loses the ball!

 

Bell looks quality with his dribbling passing and crossing!

 

Bell everytime!

[Thecanaryfan 0]

[quote user="Bring Back Nielson"]

skill over commitment please.

if we have a team full of commited players that dont create we will just go down

if u have a team with skillfull players then we will create.

 

its the same as lita VS cureton

cureton is commited, but does nothing,

lita doesnt care as much, but delivers

[/quote]

true true

[Delia Out! 0]

I would go for Croft simply because of his work-rate and his 100% attitude, mind you Bell seems to have alot of talent and skill but I would have to go for Lee Croft.

[Mook 0]

Don''t know if it occurred to the original poster, but perhaps Bell isn''t fully fit having only just returned to the first team after a long injury lay off?????I would play them both, and allow them to swap wings throughout the game.