No....players and managers are there to do a job and get paid extremely well to do that job. The sentiment in football is generated by us the fans who give our clubs unconditional devotion.

Not with the first team no.

For the fans yes.

There should be sentiment for the club in helping players and business connected with the club...Youth players for example....Helping the ones who don't make it....ie being a 'family club'.....Yes.....It's the right thing to do and it actually helps the club out in the long run in terms of reputation and cohesion.

'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen)

I was listening to something akin to this on Talksh1te a few days back and it was being said that modern day football has no room for sentimentalism, the fan was far lower down the priority list now than ever before and that big, modern clubs were more a brand and advertising cash cow than anything else.

Winning is everything, financially more so than ever and just becasue Billy is really happy that he's been at No Hope FC for the alst 20 years should be no reason to keep him if Carlos Lob-a-ball can come in , generate interest and revenue and do the same job. Blimey, look at Berbatov for example.

Clinton is Clinton. I have known him for a long time, I know his mother... Simon Jordan

I think there is room for a tiny bit of sentiment. I genuinely think some of the banter between Moritz, Delaney and Ramage in the promotion season had a genuine bearing on their performance on the pitch. It might seem a strange thing to say, but when they all grew moustaches for Movember and were taking the mickey out of each other it seemed to coincide with one of their best runs of form (if I remember correctly).

Of course I am not dumb enough to attribute all of our success to off pitch camaraderie but I think it helped. So whilst some players might not quite be up to the standard of first XI, as squad players they actually could provide something to the overall team morale. Ramage, for me, seemed to give the impression of being a key component of the winning mentality we had and I don't think would be SO far off the Premier League standard that he couldn't cut it as a squad player on that basis.

By the way, not advocating really pants players staying in the squad just to keep the spirits high. Just ones who are around about good enough.

Edited by Part Time James (07 Feb 2014 11.51am)

Surely it is a two - way street. The times when a player would stay at a club for loyalty have long gone (except possibly the odd exception like Jules?). If the players are going to expect to be able to move on to bigger and better things if they get the opportunity - or at the other extreme cynically sit on a big salary and not bother to keep up fitness so they can actually play (and we have had a few of those), can the clubs equally not expect, if they can, to move on to better players than they have? Several of that squad must have known the likelihood was that they would not be playing in the PL so it wouldn't have been that much of a shock.

All credit to Rambo for his efforts last year and for the fact that he went out on loan rather than sitting at CPFC getting paid for not playing but that is just the way it works now.

Edited by trapperjohn (07 Feb 2014 1.02pm)

I got vision, and the rest of the world wears bifocals.

I think we're too soft at Palace to the detriment of our progress over the years. I don't mind as I love the club just as it is but if you compare Spurs and Chelsea as comparisons, both who have a history of churning and burning young players without a care, it's obvious to see who has been more successful as a result.

"We love you Palace, we f@cking hate Man U, We love you Palace, we hate the brighton too, We love you Palace we play in red 'n' blue, so f@ck you, and you ...