It says it all. When trying to change something we just bring on an even bigger version of the striker who was doing nothing anyway.

Shocking that 20 years after we were pursuing him hes the option we are resorting to change things in the premier league.

To put it in perspective its like signing Lansbury in 2035.

5 seasons in this league. 7th last season. And thats the option we have.

Big questions need asking even if we do stay up.

Zero ambition or creativity on and off the field.

Blame the recruitment, its been a shambles for years

Joke

The way we were playing Crouch was the only option, at least laid a few useful balls off.
If only we'd put on Vydra instead of ...
hindsight...pff

The Crouch ‘experiment’ has proven to be as pointless as I and most others expected.

He doesn’t offer a threat or even win a header much these days. Ridiculous decision to day to utilise him, especially so early on.

Vydra needs to get a start - Wood or Barnes can easily be replaced.

Just cos they score the odd goal here and there, we're lacking pace. We're just hoofing the ball up and hoping for the knock down to react on

we need to have some investment in better players and ship out the championship standard players

It's an illustration of Dyche's tactics. Long ball not working? Right, stick Crouch on and playing it LONGER and HIGHER.

theroyaldyche wrote:Vydra needs to get a start - Wood or Barnes can easily be replaced.

Just cos they score the odd goal here and there, we're lacking pace. We're just hoofing the ball up and hoping for the knock down to react on

we need to have some investment in better players and ship out the championship standard players

Problem is we needed 3 or 4 last year. Never mind this one.

You can't blame the board, we've frozen season tickets AGAIN.

What more do you want?

There's not many clubs better ran than ours that can turn over huge profits 3 seasons on the spin and are totally s3lf sufficient.

If you dont like the product then don't buy it, simple really with being the customer..

A comedy signing

Nothing more nothing less

Very simple when you play like that you get relegated.

jedi_master wrote:The Crouch ‘experiment’ has proven to be as pointless as I and most others expected.

He doesn’t offer a threat or even win a header much these days. Ridiculous decision to day to utilise him, especially so early on.

We had a cracking Jan window remember

Offers a lot less than what Vokes offers but we got cash as well so makes it a good deal for some.

claretcarrot93 wrote:Offers a lot less than what Vokes offers but we got cash as well so makes it a good deal for some.

Dont. The thought that we got rid of vokes still pisses me right off.

Sunday league stuff throwing on Crouch to try and change a game. Vydra has every right to be royally ****** off.

cricketfieldclarets wrote:Dont. The thought that we got rid of vokes still pisses me right off.

It was a crazy piece of business for a team in a relegation battle considering it was our only piece of business. Madness

Sort of game where you needed the ball played on the deck but we only put Vydra on in injury time

MACCA wrote:You can't blame the board, we've frozen season tickets AGAIN.

What more do you want?

There's not many clubs better ran than ours that can turn over huge profits 3 seasons on the spin and are totally s3lf sufficient.

I'll tell you what i want. To buy some players that can have am actual impact on the first team. Gibson, Vydra, Hart and Crouch cost 30 million in fees and countless millions in wages and have all contributed four fifths of **** all.
Our recruitment team and Dyche have let us down.

TV chaps happy to point out he limits our options because at least Wood still has a little bit in his legs and could turn a man. Crouch is just there for the nod down.

When he came on today Dyche evened the sides up,10/10 he offers nothing.

Nowhere near good enough for this level. As said above a comedy signing. At least he’s good for the dressing room and the lads are having a laugh.

Braindead wrote:I'll tell you what i want. To buy some players that can have am actual impact on the first team. Gibson, Vydra, Hart and Crouch cost 30 million in fees and countless millions in wages and have all contributed four fifths of **** all.
Our recruitment team and Dyche have let us down.

Gibson and Vydra could be good enough to improve us though, it's just Dyche has refused to give them a chance.

It would help if our wide outs would get a cross in first time instead of waiting until the defence has marked all the gaps. It would then help, even more, if they could land that cross in the penalty area.
Everything we do is so effing slow and poor. We take all the pace out of attacks by making the widemen come back to collect a lazy pass, again giving the defence time to get organised.
Everytime any of our back 4 gets closed down their head goes and they get themselves in trouble.
The square balls across our back 4 are so slow and meaningless. The good teams do it to create space and opportunities. We look as though we do it because we have no other option.
They are like strangers.Every player who receives the ball has to look and think what they have to do next. Do they not train together?

Cant be many other Premier League sides would sell a striker to a Championship club for £7m and take their 38 year old benchwarmer in part ex and then trumpet it as being a succesful window

Braindead wrote:I'll tell you what i want. To buy some players that can have am actual impact on the first team. Gibson, Vydra, Hart and Crouch cost 30 million in fees and countless millions in wages and have all contributed four fifths of **** all.
Our recruitment team and Dyche have let us down.

Well you're one of very few.
The board are giving us what we want apparently.

That's top flight football, cheap tickets and record profits.

All the rest doesn't matter

MACCA wrote:Well you're one of very few.
The board are giving us what we want apparently.

That's top flight football, cheap tickets and record profits.

All the rest doesn't matter

Two of those things will soon be disappearing

Maybe all three ....yea all three will be gone

randomclaret2 wrote:Cant be many other Premier League sides would sell a striker to a Championship club for £7m and take their 38 year old benchwarmer in part ex and then trumpet it as being a succesful window

Where the club statement saying it was a successful window? Especially one zealous enough to be called trumpeting.

They do nothing but try to temper expectations so not sure why people are surprised.

Crouch still creates havoc - worth having.
The defence is the problem - error- prone.

Steve1956 wrote:Maybe all three ....yea all three will be gone

Yeah but we can look back and remember the great European nights, the trips all over Europe, the fantastic players on display, the mouth watering football we witnessed, the great cup runs and the vast amounts of profit we made.

There’s no room for sentiment in football and Dyche sold Vokes and signed Crouch purely because they’re mates.

It could prove far more costly than the £9m quid we banked at the time.

MACCA wrote:Yeah but we can look back and remember the great European nights, the trips all over Europe, the fantastic players on display, the mouth watering football we witnessed, the great cup runs and the vast amounts of profit we made.

I can't wait.

BurnleyFC wrote:There’s no room for sentiment in football and Dyche sold Vokes and signed Crouch purely because they’re mates.

It could prove far more costly than the £9m quid we banked at the time.

Dyche and Crouch are mates that's a new one.

jrgbfc wrote:Gibson and Vydra could be good enough to improve us though, it's just Dyche has refused to give them a chance.

I think the same, time to make people compete for their place in the squad instead of being shoe-ins week in and week out, no matter how they perform.

Steve1956 wrote:Dyche and Crouch are mates that's a new one.

It’s not a new one - it’s a known fact.

BurnleyFC wrote:It’s not a new one - it’s a known fact.

What a *****ing odd ball couple

basil6345789 wrote:Crouch still creates havoc - worth having.
The defence is the problem - error- prone.

Both points correct.
Crouch not really the answer, but we looked more dangerous with him up top, and although we may not have managed a result at Anfield (in any event), we gave away all 4 goals last week, and both of them today.
Simply not acceptable at PL level.

I feared letting Vokes go and replacing him with Ctouch would weaken our starting squad, and I feel today it showed. I’m not claiming we’d have won, but Vokes would’ve offered something more upfront as a sub than Crouch, today.

Dyche and Crouch are good mates and have the same taste in music (apparently) and have attended the same concerts.

Problem is the rest of the team are tone deaf.

Stoke only paid £3 million for Vokes, the rest was paid for us to take Peter Crouch

On a more serious note, people keep saying we banked all the money from the deal. Didn't Wolves get a decent amount from the transfer? I remember reading at the time, that they would be due 25% of the transfer fee..

Crouch won 2 or 3 headers, putting the ball in the box and won his flicks. He is not the blame today

Why not bring him in for the first half and make the most of our hoof ball? That way if we manage to make it work we can sub off the front two for extra defenders.

Crouch did more in his brief spell than Wood did today.

The focus on Crouch is hurting us, pure and simple.

I can't understand why we appear to view him as our substitutional saviour. With the weather as it has been for the last three matches, leaning towards a tactic that emphasises crosses is ridiculous.

This is play it on the deck weather and we should have started with Hendrick on the right and then brought Vydra on as our first forward substitution. You know the set up that was working very well for us during our run and the "keep the ball on the ground" strategy that Liverpool used against us to great effect in the last match.

Maybe we are hoping that scoring a goal will allow Crouch to win the crowd and that will justify our poor Winter transfer business.

Whatever the reason for persisting with him, to the point where our substitutes and game plan are predictable, we need to drop him like a dead weight. He hasn't done enough to win the shirt. At this point in time if someone offered me a player like Vokes as a cheap £5m replacement for him (which is probably what selling him earned us) I would bite their hand off.

Vydra ahead of Crouch in the pecking order for me. In the last few games he has shown more in less time and he should be given a better opportunity to win the shirt. I'm not sure how long this weather is going to last, but Crouch was never the answer. Sticking with him, and tailoring our tactical approach to him, has probably cost us points.

Crouch is a very limited use player and emphasising his usage limits our tactical options. When we take into account his wages he is something of an expensive luxury, which is probably why Stoke got rid.

He came to the club, we gave him a chance, but he can move on in the Summer for me. We play best as a team and at the moment we appear to be pandering towards making an individual shine.

The only problem is that we would then require two new 90 minute strikers and I suspect that we will be hard pressed to bring in one quality striker during the next window. However, on the basis of our performance today we could easily find ourselves back in the Championship at this rate and that would have a big impact on our transfer dealings.

kentonclaret wrote:Dyche and Crouch are good mates and have the same taste in music (apparently) and have attended the same concerts.

Let me guess. Phil Collins, Jimmy Nail, James Blunt?

Some absolute bollo*ks on this thread and elsewhere about Crouch this evening, and his apparent role in our demise. Not just about Crouch though it must be said, there's bolloc*s flying all over the forum.

CombatClaret wrote:Where the club statement saying it was a successful window? Especially one zealous enough to be called trumpeting.

They do nothing but try to temper expectations so not sure why people are surprised.

I think he is referring to this ridiculous "lipstick on a pig" tripe that was released last week. It seemed to pass under the radar, but it really got my heckles up.

Burnley's Technical Director Mike Rigg believes the Clarets can be pleased with their January transfer business.

https://www.lancashiretelegraph.co.uk/s ... -business/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Either Rigg is completely delusional or he is living under the mistaken impression that taking people for simple minded fools will endear him towards them.

Selling a striker (to bring in money you can't immediately spend) who is comfortable playing for 90 minutes and bringing in a new bloke that can't will weaken you. Paying substantial wages to a bit part player, instead of spending them on a player who can make a bigger overall contribution weakens you.

More importantly, not doing anything in a league of fine margins (after a bad window) could weaken you. The club must have had a good idea that Lennon would be out for a awhile and the prognosis for Defour playing a part in the remainder of this season didn't look good. If we lose Cork or Westwood then Hendrick will move across and we will be down to one man on the right. The emergence of Dwight was like finding a quid down the back of the sofa, just as the electric meter was going to run out, but it didn't solve all our problems.

In terms of squad depth we are running on vapours in a couple of areas. Should anything happpen to Wood or Barnes we would be down to a rusty Vydra and a less than 90 minute Crouch. Not strengthening at all, even if it was only a couple of loans, has placed us at a greater level of risk and that has made us weaker. If we get away with it, fine, but if we don't it could prove very costly.

Bringing in a player who can "influence players in the Academy" isn't a card you can really play when you release a large number of academy players in the same week. In fact it can make you look a bit like a "left hand doesn't know what the right hand is doing" clown. Although if we decided not to move many players up into the U23's, so that we can add a few quality players tot he U23 roster through transfers, I can see that making sense.

All of the other clubs would only be interested in our better players, and they spent the bulk of their transfer funds in the Summer window. More importantly, we are in a financial position that allows us to turn down offers. Highlighting the fact that we "haven't lost anyone" (apart from Vokes who I would class as a loss) is scraping the barrel for a positive.

My biggest problem with the article was the summary statement "the Clarets were in the market for plenty of players during the Winter window". If this is true, and all of the previous press releases that indicated Sean and Mike were still getting a feel for each other, we are in very big trouble.

Chasing after lots of players and missing out on every single one of them is not the hallmark of success. It should be viewed as an admission of failure.

So we have three possible outlooks

We chased after a lot of players in the last window and we missed out because we decided to target players who were unlikely to come here. This would indicate that we have a big problem identifying valid targets, which can only lead to wasted time and effort.

The targets that we identified were open to coming here and their clubs were open to moving them on, but we couldn't get them over the line. This would indicate we can't seal the deals, which is a sad admission for a head of recruitment to make.

Or finally, we've hired a Technical Director who thinks he can bull**** us by dressing up the truth. We don't ask for much, but over the last few years we have come to expect a degree of honesty from all of the people associated with the club.

A person who is perfectly comfortable talking about how they have done a good job, after doing a relatively bad job, is either delusional or deceitful. In either case they are a bad fit for us.

It's not Crouch the person it's Crouch the well past it couldn't get in a relegated championship team footballer that sums us up as a club.

Long Time Lurker wrote: The targets that we identified were open to coming here and their clubs were open to moving them on, but we couldn't get them over the line.

Does getting players over the line include paying over the odds and/or more than we think they're worth.

Was it £20million Birmingham wanted?!

CombatClaret wrote:Does getting players over the line include paying over the odds and/or more than we think they're worth.

Was it £20million Birmingham wanted?!

Nope, but identifying suitable targets means not chasing after players who are only going to leave their clubs for silly money.

It means identifying players who can be signed for respectable amounts and in some cases low amounts.

Despite repeated protestations from our club value for money players are still available in the current market. You just need people who can find them. When the person tasked with finding such players is compaining about how difficult it is, despite people in similar positions at other clubs succeeding, what they are actually saying is that they aren't up to the job.

If football is a result driven environment then it should apply to everyone. If a striker gets 10 chances on goal and they miss every one of them questions are asked. If a keeper gives up 10 goals in return for 10 attempts questions are asked.

So when our recruitment guy alludes to missing out on lots of players and he admits that finding players is a struggle for him then I don't think being concerned is entirely unwarranted. He was hired to perform and in a results based business a failure to perform is worrying.

If the chasing of multiple targets is made up nonsense then a lack of honesty is even more worrying.