in certain scenarios he will do a good job for us without bankrupting us. His game has never revolved around pace so not concerned about his age. Another rocket Ron maybe.

Is he ****

Maybe if you are Accy Stanley

If crouch wins us one game he will be worth it

I wouldn’t mind so much if he wasn’t our ONLY signing.

He's going to score the winner at Anfield.

Right_winger wrote:Is he ****

Maybe if you are Accy Stanley

Or Bury..

Agree with original post
Will do just as good a job from bench as Sam would do
7 million for Sam plus add ons
Crouch free and just to end of season.
I think it is a great piece of business

When we signed Ron Futcher we were in the 4th Division. And we stayed in the 4th Division - he wasn’t that good anyway.

You’re right in one respect though. Our ability in the transfer market doesn’t seem to have developed much since those days.

I’m not against Crouch as a stop gap and think he could prove useful. It’s the risk of him being required for more than the odd cameo, and the lack of midfield back up, that are my main gripes. Gambles that perhaps we shouldn’t be taking.

Hopefully the signing is a Dyche masterstroke.

same clueless fans on here as at beginning of season that thought we should go full tilt in europe. Crouch will intimidate many defenders in this league with his aerial presence. perish the thought might even draw a penalty. tons of experience and if his addition gets us a point or 2 here and there it is good business. Can see him coming on when we are behind and us playing 3 up top. Him and Barnes will be nasty and ugly and Wood might pick up the pieces. For the money a good call.

scouseclaret wrote:When we signed Ron Futcher we were in the 4th Division. And we stayed in the 4th Division - he wasn’t that good anyway.

You’re right in one respect though. Our ability in the transfer market doesn’t seem to have developed much since those days.

25 goals in 57 .. how many should he have scored to have been 'that good' .. if our manager had shown some more daring away from home we'd have walked the League in 90-91.

Let's have it right, this is an utterly abject signing that has left us with a significantly weaker squad.

A total and utter waste of money, some decrepit old target man from Stoke is categorically everything we should have been looking to avoid this window.

It feels like a joke signing, to be honest, only it's not funny.

All Burnley fans would be happy with Vokes here for the next 18/24 months.

Crouch? No.

I think we have to remember that the only person whose opinion really mattered on this one is Dyche. Vokes doesn't leave without his say so, and nor does Crouch arrive.

I presume the thinking is that even if one of Barnes or Wood gets injured, we wouldn't bring on Vokes as a like for like replacement for either. We'd either bring in Vydra, or go 4-5-1 ( perhaps with McNeil as the number 10). Which sort of makes sense as Barnes and Vokes was never a partnership and Vokes isn't as effective as Barnes at playing as the second striker and dropping into midfield.

Which effectively makes the question whether Vokes or Crouch is the better option as an impact sub, which isn't perhaps quite as clear cut a question.

If course, this logic assumes we've got enough depth across midfield to field 5 of our midfield options on any given occasion, which may perhaps be where the flaw is.

Crouch

Rocket Ron was a god. Was it Northampton when he swivelled as slow as a double decker bus turning and tapped in? I remember being behind the goal and going nuts.

He scored a great goal at Stockport one night (on debut?), but managed to miss a last minute sitter from 6 inches at Lincoln once when we lost 1-0!!!! And it still makes me angry!! (Got to let it go.......)

claretspice wrote:I think we have to remember that the only person whose opinion really mattered on this one is Dyche. Vokes doesn't leave without his say so, and nor does Crouch arrive.

I presume the thinking is that even if one of Barnes or Wood gets injured, we wouldn't bring on Vokes as a like for like replacement for either. We'd either bring in Vydra, or go 4-5-1 ( perhaps with McNeil as the number 10). Which sort of makes sense as Barnes and Vokes was never a partnership and Vokes isn't as effective as Barnes at playing as the second striker and dropping into midfield.

Which effectively makes the question whether Vokes or Crouch is the better option as an impact sub, which isn't perhaps quite as clear cut a question.

If course, this logic assumes we've got enough depth across midfield to field 5 of our midfield options on any given occasion, which may perhaps be where the flaw is.

You think there may perhaps be a flaw with our transfers?

Well bugger me sideways, I'd never have guessed.

I can see him coming on after 65 minutes. As the opposition players and fans burst out laughing and before they have cleared the tears from their eyes mcneil sprints down wing, Crouch ambles into box and nods home mcneils cross on the back post. job done.

The signing Video has already been viewed over a Million times

randomclaret2 wrote:The signing Video has already been viewed over a Million times

That'll bring in some much-needed revenue for the club

Whoever came up with the idea might just have bought us another week or so of existence

ksrclaret wrote:You think there may perhaps be a flaw with our transfers?

Well bugger me sideways, I'd never have guessed.

Well we shall find out if it's a flaw in due course. It probably depends in part on how confident the club are in the medium term fitness or Brady and Defour, and how soon Lennon will be back, which none of us csn rewlly know.

I do know that I reckon McNeil will end up playing "in the hole". He's a top talent on the wing but his attributes seem to me even more suited to playing off a striker.

claretspice wrote:Well we shall find out if it's a flaw in due course. It probably depends in part on how confident the club are in the medium term fitness or Brady and Defour, and how soon Lennon will be back, which none of us csn rewlly know.

I do know that I reckon McNeil will end up playing "in the hole". He's a top talent on the wing but his attributes seem to me even more suited to playing off a striker.

good point claretspice. only the club know that.

claretspice wrote:Well we shall find out if it's a flaw in due course. It probably depends in part on how confident the club are in the medium term fitness or Brady and Defour, and how soon Lennon will be back, which none of us csn rewlly know.

I do know that I reckon McNeil will end up playing "in the hole". He's a top talent on the wing but his attributes seem to me even more suited to playing off a striker.

Definitely looks like he could be very effective in a central role. Probably not quite ready for that yet though, I’d suggest.

He wont play

I think the Crouch signing is an embarrassment. We are becoming a laughing stock in the PL.

No one obviously remembers Ashley westwoods free kick the other night, He was obviously warming up for the arrival of the tall one. It makes it seem like the perfect delivery now.

bfcmatt wrote:No one obviously remembers Ashley westwoods free kick the other nite, He was obviously warming up for the arrival of the tall one. It ,makes it seem like the perfect delivery now.

I remember it. Crouch would have had to jump for that one

Genuine question, in what way is Vokes better than Crouch? Coming on for the last 20 mins for example...

I think it's a good, risk-free signing on the face of it. +cash, even better

For all we know Vokes might have wanted to leave in order to play. I think Crouch's experience could help improve our other forwards. And if he comes on and scores (or helps us defend against late set pieces)

Dark Cloud wrote:He scored a great goal at Stockport one night (on debut?), but managed to miss a last minute sitter from 6 inches at Lincoln once when we lost 1-0!!!! And it still makes me angry!! (Got to let it go.......)

GGGGGGRRRRRR!!! Me and StAlbansClaret witnessed that, the culmination of a miserable afternoon which commenced with being menaced by turnip munching locals. We too are still deeply scarred by the thought of that miss; I can picture it now, the great dolt!

Vino blanco wrote:I think the Crouch signing is an embarrassment. We are becoming a laughing stock in the PL.

Are we?

Vokes wasnt quick enough for prem and isnt as good a target man or as good on the ground as Crouch. when you consider we now have perhaps 30 to 50 percent the price of a new striker after sams sale then its great business.

I'll get round to his famous podcast when Audible reduce the price.......

When I wake up tomorrow its going to hit me that Vokes has gone....

Welcome to Burnley Peter - hope you enjoy it.

JellyBaby wrote:Genuine question, in what way is Vokes better than Crouch? Coming on for the last 20 mins for example...

I think it's a good, risk-free signing on the face of it. +cash, even better

Could not agree more

Crouch is a change. Vokes is like for like

Sam has been my favourite player for years now but I have come to accept that Barnes and Wood ( when on his game) are better.

Thanks Sam , you’ve been a star and will always be remembered fondly. 14x 15 min cameos from the beanpole offers something different and might work

If he gains us a few points Dyche will be called a genius

He's not been scoring in a league with worse players but he'll score goals for us in a league with the best defenders in the World playing?

Yeah, somehow I can't see that happening. We've had a mare.

**** off op

As an impact sub he’s very similar to Andy Carroll - ideally suited to how we play when we’re losing. A good partner to Vydra as well

For non ageist fans - this is a good signing

But - if only we’d had a proper plan as to how to invest the Vokes money where needed - then this window would have been so much better

Do we now have the tallest and shortest Prem players - Crouch 6'7'', Lennon 4'7'' ??

Garnerssoap wrote:**** off op

reciprocated if you know the meaning. come back at the end of the season and tell me that

We’ve just made news at 10. He’ll do for me
Business is business.
UTC

Garnerssoap wrote:**** off op

What a well constructed reply. Would you like to expand on your thesis in a less long winded fashion so that the majority of us can understand your complex message .

Or

Just shut up

You can **** off an all

Down_Rover wrote:What a well constructed reply. Would you like to expand on your thesis in a less long winded fashion so that the majority of us can understand your complex message .

Or

Just shut up

...
that went right over his head down-rover
take a look at his other posts elsewhere and you will get the drift

SalisburyClaret wrote:As an impact sub he’s very similar to Andy Carroll - ideally suited to how we play when we’re losing. A good partner to Vydra as well

For non ageist fans - this is a good signing

But - if only we’d had a proper plan as to how to invest the Vokes money where needed - then this window would have been so much better

Ahh Impact Sub.

That’s going to surprise the opposition defenders having just belted it up to Barnes and Wood for 80 minutes what possibly could we be doing with Crouch?

claretspice wrote:I think we have to remember that the only person whose opinion really mattered on this one is Dyche. Vokes doesn't leave without his say so, and nor does Crouch arrive.

I presume the thinking is that even if one of Barnes or Wood gets injured, we wouldn't bring on Vokes as a like for like replacement for either. We'd either bring in Vydra, or go 4-5-1 ( perhaps with McNeil as the number 10). Which sort of makes sense as Barnes and Vokes was never a partnership and Vokes isn't as effective as Barnes at playing as the second striker and dropping into midfield.

Which effectively makes the question whether Vokes or Crouch is the better option as an impact sub, which isn't perhaps quite as clear cut a question.

If course, this logic assumes we've got enough depth across midfield to field 5 of our midfield options on any given occasion, which may perhaps be where the flaw is.

Spice, I completely disagree. This season we have played combinations of all of the above, and Sam on his own, so don't think that replacing either Barnes or Wood with Sam would be an issue.

The signing is a poor one. No matter which way we dres it up. 15 years (yes, that long) we'd have all been giddy with excitement. Not today. Today I am ******* annoyed.

Dyched wrote:Ahh Impact Sub.

That’s going to surprise the opposition defenders having just belted it up to Barnes and Wood for 80 minutes what possibly could we be doing with Crouch?

Crouch has never been a surprise but always awkward to play against.

Edit. Words fail me

Garnerssoap wrote:You can **** off an all

Fascinating how angry some people can get over something ultimately so trivial.

DAVETHEVICAR wrote:Agree with original post
Will do just as good a job from bench as Sam would do
7 million for Sam plus add ons
Crouch free and just to end of season.
I think it is a great piece of business

I see your point. I didn’t at first but now I do. I’d see it better if the £7m for SV had been used properly tho. That money will be nice and dry now keeping the rest of the store happy.

How many offers did we make in the end for Che?