The tall tale of Peter Crouch’s aerial abilities
Crouch in training with England
Peter Crouch is a strange footballer in many ways.
Chiefly, he simply looks very strange. His gangly nature makes him stick out like a sore thumb – he looks awkward when merely running onto the pitch, and at a time when a club like Barcelona are packing their side with quick, mobile, 5′7 players upfront, with other clubs around Europe seeking to move in that direction, the sight of 6′7 Crouch battling with defenders seems somewhat bizarre.
Of course, Crouch is a good footballer. His first touch is generally good, he’s an intelligent player in terms of the positions he takes up when the ball is wide, and on his day he can stroke a ball into the net with wonderful technique. Sometimes he is unplayable – his “perfect” hattrick for Liverpool against Arsenal springs to mind as an example of his all-round footballing ability.
The initial feeling that he has ‘good feet for a big man’ has been exaggerated, to the point that he is seen as uncomfortable in the air. Paul Hayward’s article for the Guardian immediately after the England game focussed upon the Tottenham striker, saying:
“Among the many insults thrown at Crouch is the belief that a pass is best directed at his head. This casts him as a giant fetching balls out of the sky when the reality is that he has spent most of his working life trying to acquire dexterity on the ground. In his own terms, Capello’s fourth-choice striker is a carpet player who would prefer balls to be aimed into his feet…(Capello’s) thinking was that two crossers and dribblers were needed to maintain a supply of balls into the box. This reinforces a misconception about (Jermain) Defoe’s Tottenham Hotspur team-mate. If he were Alan Shearer on stilts you might justify a “direct” approach…for reasons to do with human mechanics, Crouch frequently looks ungainly in his efforts to reach a moving ball…Crouch’s supposed great strength is actually his primary weakness. In the air he seldom punches his weight.”
Especially considering Crouch’s non-impact on Tuesday night, this is a far from controversial claim. Indeed, it seems to be the prevailing attitude. The Two Footed Tackle blog featured a post yesterday that put forward a reasonably similar argument, in response to Harry Redknapp’s column in The Sun. That post said:
“For me, Crouch is far better with the ball played to his feet and I’ve always found his aerial ability somewhat disappointing.”
Neither of these writers are merely repeating the cliche that Crouch has “good feet for a big man”, but that’s the jist. Whilst Crouch does have “good feet” (most international footballers do), he is very dangerous in the air.
The statistics
Let’s take a look at some statistics from his Premier League career. In MyFootballFacts’ tremendous list of the 100 top goalscorers in Premier League history (correct to the end of last season), Crouch is in 56th place, with 56 goals. We are also given a breakdown of how the goals are scored. Crouch has scored 27 of his 56 goals with his head, that’s 48.2%.
This figure is reasonably interesting on its own, but even more so when we rank those 100 top goalscorers by proportion of goals scored with their head. Here, unbelievably for a player whose heading is supposedly ‘his primary weakness’, Crouch is in third position.
In the history of the Premier League, only Tim Cahill (mentioned here) on 55.6% and Duncan Ferguson on 51.5% are ahead of Crouch. To give more context, here are the records of other English target men – Les Ferdinand is on 28%, Kevin Campbell is on 26%, James Beattie is on 24%, Chris Sutton is on 19%. Only Dion Dublin, on 40%, comes close to rivalling Crouch here.
Recent record
Furthermore, Crouch’s recent goalscoring record is littered with important headers. He scored away at Werder Bremen with his head. In the qualification game against Young Boys, he scored twice with his head. His crucial winner last season in the “Champions League playoff” against Manchester City was with his head.
In fact, seven of his last eight Tottenham goals were scored with his head. The other was a penalty, so seven from seven in open play. Between those we find an England goal in a pre-World Cup friendly against Mexico, which was put in with his hand after he’d caused initial problems with his head. His most important goal for his national side – against Trinidad and Tobago in the 2006 World Cup, was scored with his head.
Frankly, he is very dangerous in the air. That’s not to say he’s necessarily a superb header of the ball – pure heading technique has no relation to height – Michael Owen, Romario and the aforementioned Cahill were/are all excellent in the air despite being relatively small. Les Ferdinand, amazingly, was only 5′11. But Crouch’s immediate head start makes him a very difficult player to deal with.
Assists
And of course, this only deals with goals. Crouch’s aerial dominance can be used to good effect as a provider. In his most recent game at club level, he provided two assists, both from knock-downs in the air, both for Rafael van der Vaart to score:
Capello preferences
England’s use of inverted wingers on Tuesday night was particularly frustrating because it meant the wide players came inside, rather than getting down the line, taking advantage of the weaknesses of the two Montenegrin full-backs, and swinging crosses in towards Crouch. At Tottenham recently, he has thrived on two natural wingers – Gareth Bale and Aaron Lennon – providing a traditional supply from wide areas.
This is not necessarily a justification of Fabio Capello’s choice of Crouch, either in terms of his simple selection for the first team, or in the specific way he is used. Capello has always been a fan of a ‘big man’ upfront. His belief in Emile Heskey stemmed from a game eight years ago, in which Heskey’s classic hold-up play caused Capello’s Roma side all sorts of problems, in a 2-0 win for Liverpool on the night Gerard Houllier made a return to Anfield after his heart problems.
That same Roma side itself displayed Capello’s preference for a ‘big man’ - Vincenzo Montella was 5′7 and scored a goal every other game under Capello, Marco Delvecchio was 6′1 and scored something more like one in ten. Yet for most of Capello’s time, he favoured Delvecchio.
Regardless, Crouch seems to have acquired a reputation as some kind of no-hoper in the air – when all the evidence suggests he constantly causes sides problems in this respect. It seems strange that we’re so quick to dismiss the idea that a tall player might be a danger with his head, as if we’re so keen to move away from the classic, outdated “English” approach that has brought such little success. But even the World Champions Spain – famed for their beautiful one-touch football – aren’t afraid of having a ‘big man’ in Fernando Llorente to bring on to cause a nuisance in the air.
There’s nothing wrong with using Crouch like that, for that is where he is best. Indeed, you might say that he has a good head for a big man.
The tall tale of Peter Crouch’s aerial abilities
Thank-you for this, people slagging of Crouch’s aerial ability has irritated me for a long time. It seems like the myth that he has “good feet but is poor in the air” was perpetuated as a conscious avoidance cliché, but became a cliché of its own all the same.
That’s a very neat summary.
What do you think about the cliche of Glen Johnson being a poor defensive player? I’ve always thought it too harsh and more pub-talk than anything based on proper analysis of a player who is first and foremost a defender. Any chance of an article on him?
http://www.footballfarrago.com
i don’t Jhnson being defensively weak is a cliche, more a reality in my opinion. gotta respect the kid though, when Mourinho told him he had no future at Chelsea, he worked on becoming a more modern rightback at Pompey. sadly for him, in England, he might be second best (after Ashley Cole) as an attacking fullback, but defensively his concentration lapses and positional sense have let him down time and again. it’s like the saying: a tackle looks brilliant but are unnecessary, as 9 times out of 10, its to cover a positional mistake…its all about intercepting these days
And another direct link by FoFa. Ugh. What is with the ignorance?
Crouch is no world-class.
“Good feet but is poor in the air”? Berbatov’s feet are two or three times better than Crouch’s by the way.
Berbatov > Crouch > N’gog
He does have good feet and is poor in the air.
However because he is so tall and so slow, he is clearly more threatening in the air than in behind a side. Also, his stature means he is not going to generate much power on his shots, so isn’t dangerous on the edge of the box.
Basically balls looped up to him are the best way to get crouch scoring goals. Fortunately for him, this makes him very dangerous!
Referees don’t favour him in 50-50 tackles in the air.
Eye opening, cheers. I would suggest he’s knocked off the ball too easily for a Target man role although I back this thought up with zero evidence…
Quite – that’s another point that I was going to include but the piece was getting too long…his hold-up play is basically very poor, so using him like that is pointless, furthering the idea that crosses to his head are the best bet.
Not a headed goal, but a good example of using him properly.
Beckham’s cross to crouch on the chest and volley against Croatia @ Wembley
I swear Crouch is the sort of thing that germanys relatively poor sides got right.
Get lahm to lump it in to ballack or Klose.
Simple football that gets goals
If we are talking national teams:
Gerd Müller scored 68 goals in 62 games with that simple football method. Might not be as aesthetically pleasing, but strikers with that killer instinct will always succeed. To quote from wikipedia:
In his book “Brilliant Orange: The Neurotic Genius of Dutch Football”, David Winner writes, “Müller was short, squat, awkward-looking and not notably fast; he never fit the conventional idea of a great footballer, but he had lethal acceleration over short distances, a remarkable aerial game, and uncanny goalscoring instincts. His short legs gave him a strangely low center of gravity, so he could turn quickly and with perfect balance in spaces and at speeds that would cause other players to fall over. He also had a knack of scoring in unlikely situations.”
Klose, aged 32, now has 10 goals to go to catch Müller on totals. He’ll never compete in efficiency however, seeing as he has already played 105 games by now.
Podolski, aged 25 is sitting at 42 goals in 83 games.
It’s always hard to compare players’ stats when they played in different eras though, for all we know if Klose had played back then he could have just as good a record.
I find it amazing that Klose is STILL not appreciated for what a good player he is, there’s this myth that he only comes good for big tournaments – he’s scored more than 1 in 3 overall in his career, and 58 in 105 for Germany. I’d say he’s pretty consistent.
I think that’s a crucial point actually! Crouch’s stats for headed goals / assists might be great, but it’d also be pertinent to see how many aerial challenges he wins.
The great dilemna surrounding Crouch is not whether he can score headed goals off crosses (he obviously can) but whether he can do the job of a traditional target man – ie hold the ball up, win headers off long goal-kicks, occupy opposition defenders. I’d argue that he isn’t great at any of these. Unfortunately, this is exactly how Capello seems to want his ‘big men’ to play.
In other words, one can’t expect Crouch to replace Heskey… (;
I was thinking exactly the same thing.
Spurs get the ball wide and whip crosses in, England play the ball long to him. I don’t think he’s suited to playing as a target man. If the ball is flying across the box his height is the difference between a good contact and just brushing the ball slightly of course, if the balls been in the air a long time he’s not the sort of player who’ll win every battle for a header.
Thanks ZM glad you were HEADING in that direction
I think the main issue is that the general footballing media/fanbase think that
good at headers = target man
There’s a lot more to it than that and Crouch is a case in point. Crouch can be pretty deadly in the final quarter but behind that and he’ll struggle to be effective.
Thanks, ZM, thoroughly enjoyed this. There was a massive argument among Spurs fans last year relating to Crouch’s effectiveness and I think all of those questions have been answered.
The point is maybe that he has very good feet for a tall man but what he does with his head is somewhat that “can be expected” from a tall man and is not exceptional (or “average”, which seems to be more and more like a more polite way to say “bad”). This is of course hard to debate since there aren’t many other players of his height in top-flight football.
By the way, interesting article. I enjoy reading something from you that is not about a certain match or shape.
I think that was a previous feeling, but now it’s been exaggerated to the point where it’s said that his heading is “his primary weakness”, which surely is not true. And many thanks.
Any information on the ratio of headers scored to headers attempted?
interesting question ^_^
Exactly what I was just wondering. He might have scored half of his goals with his head, but who knows, maybe he’s had thousands of poor headers that went off target. I agree that it’s a cliche that he’s poor in the air, but still think those stats skew it the other way a little too much. I’d take Klose, Cahill or Shearer on the end of a cross any day.
I think that the Crouch & Van Der Vaart partnership could be a successful one long-term. The flight of the cross from Van Der Vaart for the Crouch goal against Werder Bremen was every bit as good as the headed finish from Crouch itself.
VDV gives Spurs the tactical flexibility they might have needed to improve on last year’s success. He might be tactically indisciplined himself to a certain extent, but his inclusion gives other teams something to think about other than a classic ‘Arry 4-4-2 with flying wingers.
Don’t forget the two assists from crouch to VdV. I’d say these two player supplement each other perfectly. If Gerrard can fill the same role in the english team, then maybe Crouch can become a little more useful there. Question is, does Gerrard have the skillset to do that?
Even if Gerrard could do that, where would that leave Rooney?
Question, what do you mean by “tactically indisciplined”? Got a little confused there.
If Van Der Vaart’s default defensive position is on the right-side of a four man midfield, he will drift infield and/or higher up the pitch. He will often do this without paying attention to or tracking back on his direct opponent i.e. the left-back.
Like Gerrard, it is theoretically less risky to play him off one forward, because he will have less defensive responsibility.
gotcha… i agree he isn’t the most attentive player when it comes to defending.
And now that i’ve agreed on this, i remember in the World Cup final, his bad clearance prompted Cesc Fabregas to hold the ball and pass it to Iniesta for the winning goal. Just a fact…
I agree that he is strong in the air (having witnessed it first hand when he was a youngster playing in the Championship against my club)…but I would level one criticism at him in that area: he is very prone to ‘climbing’.
Obviously that has a lot to do with his height – he is naturally inclined to use the shoulders of defenders for support – but he does seem to concede a lot of fouls this way (whilst also getting away with it a lot, a strange example being his famous goal against Trinidad & Tobago in the 2006 World Cup where he used Brent Sancho’s hair for support: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UJrHkMc5_J8)).
Have you ever seen a player called Mário Jardel?
The opposite dilema…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s9kPciTqOjo
Best regards,
JC
Some quality headers in there, what happened to Jardel’s career in the end?
He had drug problems and he is playing now in the turkish league, after a 14 clubs world tour… He was just a perfect striker!
My goodness…didn’t realize he was still playing! Used to love this guy, an incredible striker
Having watched Crouch a lot in his Liverpool days (took him 19 games to get his 1st goal)
He was not that good with his header there early on at all. All he did was fouled the defender before he would hit the ball with his head eventually.
But i also would say that watching him today he is certainly better with the head than he was at Liverpool when i saw him.
“Neither of these writers are merely repeating the cliche that Crouch has “good feet for a big man”, but that’s the jist.”
I just want to point out that I think that this is a very unfair interpretation of my comments. My opinion of Crouch’s ability on the ground is a bit more nuanced than that and I also would never say that he was especially poor in the air, just that as a Villa and England fan I’ve been disappointed that he isn’t *better*.
The jist is that he is better with the ball played his feet than in the air, no? Indeed it is more ‘nuanced’, hence the statement that you’re not merely repeating the cliche, but your basic point is that he’s better with the ball played to his feet.
Yes, or rather that he’s just as good with the ball played to his feet and I’d like him to be better in the air sometimes than he is. Which is different to “good feet for a big man”.
My point was this: Crouch is good, and better in my opinion that Redknapp gave him credit for by suggesting England hoof it at him.
I can’t see that it was an unfair interpretation, really. Your point is that he’s good with his feet, and not so good in the air. Which is the same point people make when they say someone has ‘good feet for a big man’. Which I did point out that you weren’t merely saying.
I don’t see why you think the idea of using a player’s height is some kind of insult to him anyway. It’s not about whether Crouch is ‘good’ or ‘better’ or whatever, it’s just about using his strengths.
I don’t think the phrase ‘good feet for a big man’ means he’s poor in the air – it means exactly what it says, that he’s got good feet for a big man. How good the player in the air isn’t what’s being discussed.
The funny thing is it’s usually used about players who generally don’t have great footwork, like John Carew or Jan Koller.
I’d like to find ANY footballer who is better with the ball passed to his head than to his feet.
Excellent, as always.
I was also compelled to write a blog about Peter Crouch this week, specifically addressing why he is not a fans’ favourite at White Hart Lane while Roman Pavlyuchenko is.
http://www.youllwinnothingwithyids.com/2010/10/curious-cases-of-roman-pavlyuchenko-and.html
I once heard Mark Viduka described as ‘having good feet for a big man’. He was one of the best players in the division with his feet, regardless of height.
And yet anybody who said he was better served by his team having a more varied approach would be lumped in with the “good feet for a big man” brigade.
Great article; the stats really dispel that myth.
I just wanted to second Serdal’s comment, that it’s nice to see an article that isn’t a write-up of a specific game for a change. The match write-ups are nice, but personally I like this stuff more (unless the match report itself relates to a game I actually watched).
I often wonder, Crouch may have “good feet for a big man”, but does he have “good feet (or at least adequate feet) for an international level footballer” (since this is surely the benchmark against which me must be judged)? Personally I think he does have good enough feet for international football, but he does seem mis-used by the England set-up. He’s definitely useful on the end of crosses into the box, but playing long forward passes to him just don’t work, due to his poor hold up play.
Ditto re: non-match analysis. Would love to see work on:
Senna
Essien
Vidal
Seedorf
Rosicky
Sagna
Mainz
Palermo
Chile
4213
Brazilian teams
Ta, will bear this in mind
Been listening to Football Weekly again?
Actually I’ve only just listened to it, didn’t realise they talked about it too
“for reasons to do with human mechanics, Crouch frequently looks ungainly in his efforts to reach a moving ball…”
for reasons to do with human mechanics, Crouch frequently looks ungainly in the air.
Players like Crouch or Jan Koller look “ungainly” in nearly every situation on the pitch. But looking ungainly and being clumsy are different storys.
I should imagine Crouch looks ungainly even when NOT on the pitch…google “peter crouch can do anything” for evidence!
I am a fan of Peter Crouch for his ability to score important goals with his head or feet but his major weakness, that has only been touch on, is his poor build up play. He can knock down balls well but his hold up play is woeful, he is slow and he is not good enough with his feet to take on players. Also he does not really have an eye for the pass. In affect the team are playing with a man down and the modern game that is really not an option (more of a plan B). I think thats why Liverpool sold him
I think Liverpool sold him because he didnt work as striker in a 4231 formation.
When playing that position the player has to also be able to turn with the ball and run at the defence. Being a target man that holds the ball up is not enough. He was unable to push that back line back through physicality or pace, and that created very little space for the supporting attacking players.
as usual, so-called “pundits” like redknapp and co talking out of their butts.
I watched Peter for several years at Portsmouth, and a couple of times at QPR. ‘Arry was of the opinion that Crouch should push to the back post, and knock it back across to the quick forward. The story goes that ‘Arry asked Prosinecki to “put the ball on that lad’s head” and Prosinecki replied, “OK, which hair?”
As a holdup player he was rarely asked to turn with the ball. He’d stick his arse out, and hold the ball away Shearer style until a supporting player could check for the pass. If a break developed his lack of pace usually excluded him from it.
His floor skills are average. If he was under six foot he’d be a solid championship player. But that height affords a manager the chance to attack with just two players, and play a more defensive midfield.
His jumping is good, his heading is good. What really lets him down is his agility and balance. This is most evident in how he struggles to jump alongside defenders and concedes fouls from being off-balance.
When he was at Pompey there was a loud clamour for him to put on a lot of weight. The idea being that his lack of balance and agility could be addressed by him just pushing through defenders John Hartson style. I have not seen him play yet this year. Any spurs fans care to comment on his strength?
I love the lad and his work rate. The measure of a great player is their character and not their ability. He’ll always be a Pompey great. Still,we had a nickname for him at Pompey that best summed him up “Bambi on Ice”
Not all headers are the same, the requirements for each can be very different. For me Crouch doesn’t have the ability to transfer any power into his headers. The headers I remember him scoring are generally scored because he has been able to hit the target with a (generally simple) header, although he has also scored some nice positioned headers as well. I can’t remember him ever being able to power a header in.
The statistics show he scores a lot of headers… How many changes he needs to score with a header I wouldn’t like to guess. Hyppia and McGrath are 2 defenders who I always remember winning headers when going up for corners, Hyppia used to get some goals but I don’t think he had a good conversation rate.
Crouch is a good player, my main concern with crouch is that you can normally tell in the first 5 minutes of a game if the ref is going to give him a chance or just penalise him for doing nothing but have a long body, and when ref’s turn against him his hold up play suffers…
Just because he can score headers does not mean he’s good in the air. I love Crouchie but I’ve rarely seen him win a ball in the air. If I remember correctly a lot of his headed goals are from diving headers at the back post where is heigh allows him a lot of reach. Love his bicycle kick goals too.
A ‘myth’ is all we can call this bollocks that Crouch isn’t good in the air. He is good with his feet, but he is quality in the air, as the stats show.
Why he wasn’t picked ahead of Heskey for the World Cup, I will never know. Very underated player in my opinion.
I don’t think he’s either under or over rated. He has never scored many in a Premier League season, and while his international record is good, I think (haven’t checked the stats) a large percentage of these have come against ‘lesser’ nations and in friendlies – anyone recall his hat-trick against Jamaica? Actually I’ve just checked – here’s a list of countries he’s scored against:
Uruguay, Hungary, Jamaica (3), Trinidad and Tpobago, Greece, Andorra (2), Macedonia, Estonia, Austria, Croatia, Ukraine, Belarus, Egypt, Mexico.
Not exactly a world beater – but useful nonetheless. In my opinion he’s the classic ‘plan B’ player, best used as a substitute or against weaker defences who aren’t clever enough to deal with his (almost) unique threat.
Well, to be fair as an English striker he doesn’t get many opportunities to play the big name teams. During the qualification campaigns the majority of opponents are of lesser stature and at the tournament finals England reliably crashes out early.
If you take the stats of Villa, Podolski, etc. up to the World Cup/Euro quarter final only they’ll look quite similar. Podolski in particular is frequently accused of scoring against weak opponents only, something that isn’t true in his case however ( also known as the “San Marino Myth” ).
That’s not to say that Crouch is on the same level as those other strikers mentioned, he isn’t. Just looking at the list of countries he scored against without context can be deceiving though.
Everyone with a good goalscoring record at international level scores against weaker teams because that’s who 90% of games are played against.
OK, point taken. But still, he’s not that good. I stick by my initial statement – that’s he’s good as a ‘different option’, but isn’t going to ever score on consistently.
Not disagreeing there. I’m not trying to hype up Crouch. Statistics are useless without context though, a rather trivial insight of course.
Poor control, very slow to turn, poor passer,weak shot, lacks body strength to hold off challenges; you need to score or assist a lot to compensate for all that which at Spurs Crouch hasn’t done.
He’s a luxery we can’t afford
Two assists for Van de Vaart doesn’t make a summer.
And I’m a Spurs fan.
Agree in principle, though doesn’t this article needs a chance conversion rate for Peter Crouch headers in order to be taken seriously? Crouch works best in a team who boss the width of the pitch as well as giving him an option – 10 yards from Crouch at all times. Gerrard and now Van der Vaart have performed this role well.
I want to underscore something Robbie Jones said. The fact that Crouch has a high ratio of goals scored from the head doesn’t imply that he’s good in the air: if his team mates are instructed to deliver to his head rather than his feet it would be unsurprising that he has that high ratio even if he’s not that good in the air. The data we really need is the percentage of scoring opportunities from the head that he converts, and then we need to compare that to other players.
I’m not arguing that he’s bad in the air, I’m just asking ZM to provide the relevant data when making the argument that he’s good.
BTW *great* website ZM, my fav for footy analysis!
“The fact that Crouch has a high ratio of goals scored from the head doesn’t imply that he’s good in the air”
It most certainly does imply that he is good in the air. You could say that it doesn’t prove that he is good in the air, but it certainly implies he does.
Of course the conversion stats would be terrific, but unless anyone can find them, we don’t really have much else to go on.
But the stats still show that a significant proportion of his goals come from headers, and if a player is put into the England team on the basis of his club performances, it’s not unreasonable to suggest that playing to that players’ apparent strengths would be a decent option.
But the argument was not really that he was good in the air per se, more that he’s not bad.
And thanks for the compliments, much appreciated.
I think ratios can be misleading on some occasions. Take 2 players for example, A and B
A has played 200 career games, scored 100 with his feet and 50 with his head
B has played 100 career games, scored 25 with his feet and 25 with his head
Player B has a higher headed goal ratio, but only because he’s so bad with his feet. In fact, player A is both better with his feet AND his head. Player B has average heading abilities, which are made to look good because his feet are even MORE average.
Ratios don’t tell you how good a particular ability is, they only tell you how good it is in relation to others. A better determinant of Crouch’s heading ability would be his headed goals/game rate.
Cahill – 0.159
Ferguson – 0.130
Crouch – 0.116
Earle – 0.086
Quinn – 0.104
Poyet – 0.118
Dublin – 0.144
Deane – 0.084
Ekoku – 0.106
Armstrong – 0.106
Now this shows that Crouch IS a good header, not among the PL’s best 5 or 6, but immediately below them.
I couldn’t resist a debate about statistics
*That should say B has played 200 career games
Thanks for clarifying, ZM. We don’t actually disagree: I was using “imply” in the logical sense, which is what you mean by “prove”. I agree that your statistic is at least some evidence.
Every side who plays against Crouch will worry about him in the air, in the box…. That says it all really. He is good in the air, but not much better then that. He benefits from his height. There are plenty of players who would have done better the countless times I’ve seen him put a weak header while in a good position straight into the hands of the keeper.
How does his percentages compare to other tall players like Kohler?
fascinating. I’ve always wanted to see the numbers behind all these accusations.
You can also appreciate Crouch’s team work. His work rate is shown in Champions League stats for instance. Look at Matchday 1, he’s the top man in distance covered, being the only player over 13 kilometers. Crouch definitely isn’t only tall mountain as many people believe.
that is very odd to me, because ever since i have known who peter crouch is, the first thing that comes to mind is how he wins just about every header in the box. i honestly just can’t believe that someone would say that is a weak point for him, because every time i watch him, he either scores off of a header, assists with a headed-down ball, or wins a bunch of headers but just gets unlucky and just misses the goal all game. he is an absolute animal in the air.
my little brother, who watches barely any soccer whatsoever past the world cup, even correlates the name peter crouch with headers. he is a force in the air, why would anyone ever say that his weakness?
I’d just like to note that your point about him scoring a header against Trinidad in the 2006 World Cup is somewhat soured by the fact that he actually pulls the defender down by his hair to prevent him challenging for the ball at all. It’s easy to win a header if you’re the only one that can go up for the ball in the first place.
It’s not really soured by it all, considering he put the ball in with his head and the goal stood.
The important point is not whether or not Crouch is dangerous in the air in the box — his height, movement and some level of technical skill make him very dangerous both as goalscorer and indirectly from knockdowns, as the statistics in this article ably the demonstrate.
The problem is that his holdup play is poor, and he doesn’t have the strength to win headers from constested long balls reliably in the way Kevin Davies did when he came on against Montenegro. And yet, successive managers, particularly at international level, continue to use him as a target man in general play, a role he is clearly unsuited to.
my problem with crouch on spurs is that we play differently with him in the lineup than we do with defoe or pav. it seems the belief is that all we need to do is run down the wing and loft a cross in for endless goals, and it makes us entirely predictable and defendable, especially in the League.
Interesting piece. I think Crouch often ‘looks’ weak in the air, because he doesn’t need to outjump more athletic but shorter defenders. According to the stats, however, this is an optical illusion.
I think we can all agree that Crouch tends to use the ball intelligently, whether it comes to his feet or his head. If he looked less awkward, perhaps he would be a more fashionable footballer.
Very nice piece. Crouch winning a header looks very different than say Cannavaro winning a header, maybe that’s maybe where that misperception is coming from.
I was very impressed with his goal against us, and van der Vaart picking up second balls in the space in front of him while Bale is feeding crosses from the wing already causes me nightmares weeks ahead of the second leg!
That’s a quite debatable use of facts, because there’s no ratio between goal attempts and goals scored there. One could argue with similar logic that Defoe has a better ‘’striking” ability than Lamps, since he has scored more goals with his feet, percentage wise, than the latter one. I’m sure no one here can agree with that.
That’s why it’d be absolutely vital to find some facts, which underline the headers/succesfull headers % to support this article’s main argument.
I was sad do see Crouch leave Liverpool, but he must have put at least 10 very very good easy goal scoring chances straight at the keeper… In fact I don’t remember a forward wasting so many good chances with his head. If he was more clinical with his head he would have amazing stats…
Joe Cole, great touch… great feet…. Can’t shoot for toffee… Scored some goals though..
Andrew Cole, great forward, but not always very clinical (although he had his moments)… I too think these stats distort the fact we have all seen him waste very good chances with poor headers… I’d go as far to say i’ve seen him miss more good chances then take hard chances.
Liked this piece. Thanks, ZM.
The question was posed earlier whether one can find any player who is (was) better with a ball passed to his head than to his feet. The list may be long, I don’t know, but to me there is one name that epitomizes that: Horst Hrubesch.
Perhaps too old (and alien) for most of readers here? Anyway.
tim cahill is like 5′11” and is still good with header
Meh, not a bad article but I would have hoped you would have mentioned Crouch’s mind-blowing inconsistency. The problem with Crouch is that yes, he is tall and fairly good in the air, but he does not attack the ball the same way Tim Cahill does, who in my mind, is the best in the Premier League in the air.
He’s not as good in the air as the best Premier League player in the air? OK
Hey, I can’t view your site properly within Opera, I actually hope you look into fixing this.
Hey, something is wrong with your site in Opera, you should check into it.