I do not get involved in fantasy football. Neither of them are brilliant, one is hard working and versatile, brings balance and the odd goal while the other player is going downhill, fast.

When a player who's game is based largely on pace starts to lose that edge his decline is usually greater.

I am not trying to score points against you because a lot of what you post is helpful and friendly.

As you get older it becomes easier to say my question was not the best and move on!

Ok, what were the other loads of s***?? If there is so much you can quote, please do so

Here, I'll make it easy for you: [Link]

These are all my threads. Which of these, if any, was a load of s*** in your mind??

Edited by mattteo (15 Sep 2020 9.57am)

Joe, do ypu also use the rawpalace accpunt that I replied to? Or am I misreading your last sentence?

No problem with anyone speaking his mind, but I would have liked some arguments as to why Schlupp was better than Walcott. Surr, he is more fit phisically, but so are a million players, mostly center backs. We are talking about 2 offensive players, one with over 100 goals in his professional career in top competitions and one with a little over 20 goals at top level. Sure, Schlupp has played many times as defender too and he can be a solid left back, but there are no arguments in his favor compared to Walcott playing as winger or attacking midfielder.

And yes, players lose pace over time. They also gain calm and become better with the ball. It happens to everyone.

Maybe Walcott is not what Palace needs, it's justa discussion. I don't mind it being constructive. Maybe the team needs a younger player to get that age down. But someone can't negate Walcott's quality. He needs playing time and I believe he could show it anywhere he will go.

Someone at Palace's board has read this thread's title: )))))

[Link]

[Link]