Relegation 22/23

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Relegation 22/23

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Page 94 of 141 < 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 >

southnorwoodhill 20 Mar 23 8.11am
Let's look at it from another angle. Imagine we beat the drop will the board have learned anything from this season? Perhaps the realisation will come that the PL is a giant sponge that sucks up investor's money, the twist being if you don't contribute you will inevitably drop. I have little faith that the set of investors will invest the amounts necessary to rebuild the side after all the dead wood, fly by night, sick note players have departed. I have much doubt about the academy providing the players to cover those positions. After 10 seasons and £1bn revenue, constant managerial change, what do we have? Does Parish think that by employing FdB and PV our players are suddenly going to run round like Henry, Bergkamp, and Zidane? He wants a nice crisp modern passing game but without paying for it. What goes round comes round, it explains why the tactical approach employed by Pulis and Hodgson was successful, within the parameters set. They understood the limitations and capabilities of the players. The board needs a serious reality check: without proper investment there will no advance, on the contrary, as we have seen this season backward steps have been taken and we are no better off than 10 seasons ago. Relegation looks likely sooner rather than later and at least we can have but learned from this failed experiment, clear the decks, and start again. Edited by southnorwoodhill (20 Mar 2023 8.22am)
Alert a moderator to this post

southnorwoodhill

20 Mar 23 8.11am

Send a Private Message to southnorwoodhill

Let's look at it from another angle. Imagine we beat the drop will the board have learned anything from this season?
Perhaps the realisation will come that the PL is a giant sponge that sucks up investor's money, the twist being if you don't contribute you will inevitably drop.
I have little faith that the set of investors will invest the amounts necessary to rebuild the side after all the dead wood, fly by night, sick note players have departed. I have much doubt about the academy providing the players to cover those positions.
After 10 seasons and £1bn revenue, constant managerial change, what do we have? Does Parish think that by employing FdB and PV our players are suddenly going to run round like Henry, Bergkamp, and Zidane? He wants a nice crisp modern passing game but without paying for it.
What goes round comes round, it explains why the tactical approach employed by Pulis and Hodgson was successful, within the parameters set. They understood the limitations and capabilities of the players.
The board needs a serious reality check: without proper investment there will no advance, on the contrary, as we have seen this season backward steps have been taken and we are no better off than 10 seasons ago. Relegation looks likely sooner rather than later and at least we can have but learned from this failed experiment, clear the decks, and start again.

Edited by southnorwoodhill (20 Mar 2023 8.22am)

Alert a moderator to this post

Davepalace707 Northumberland 20 Mar 23 8.44am
Originally posted by southnorwoodhill Let's look at it from another angle. Imagine we beat the drop will the board have learned anything from this season? Perhaps the realisation will come that the PL is a giant sponge that sucks up investor's money, the twist being if you don't contribute you will inevitably drop. I have little faith that the set of investors will invest the amounts necessary to rebuild the side after all the dead wood, fly by night, sick note players have departed. I have much doubt about the academy providing the players to cover those positions. After 10 seasons and £1bn revenue, constant managerial change, what do we have? Does Parish think that by employing FdB and PV our players are suddenly going to run round like Henry, Bergkamp, and Zidane? He wants a nice crisp modern passing game but without paying for it. What goes round comes round, it explains why the tactical approach employed by Pulis and Hodgson was successful, within the parameters set. They understood the limitations and capabilities of the players. The board needs a serious reality check: without proper investment there will no advance, on the contrary, as we have seen this season backward steps have been taken and we are no better off than 10 seasons ago. Relegation looks likely sooner rather than later and at least we can have but learned from this failed experiment, clear the decks, and start again. Edited by southnorwoodhill (20 Mar 2023 8.22am) Agreed. I wonder if we’d just had a 15 goal striker instead of two no goal strikers, we wouldn’t be in this mess now. But that’s probably the most expensive investment.
Alert a moderator to this post

Davepalace707

Northumberland 20 Mar 23 8.44am

Originally posted by southnorwoodhill

Edited by southnorwoodhill (20 Mar 2023 8.22am)

Agreed. I wonder if we’d just had a 15 goal striker instead of two no goal strikers, we wouldn’t be in this mess now. But that’s probably the most expensive investment.

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 20 Mar 23 8.56am
Originally posted by Davepalace707 Agreed. I wonder if we’d just had a 15 goal striker instead of two no goal strikers, we wouldn’t be in this mess now. But that’s probably the most expensive investment. And of course if we found a more prolific striker how long could we hold on to him? A few years ago 30 goals was a target to aim for!
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

20 Mar 23 8.56am

Originally posted by Davepalace707

Agreed. I wonder if we’d just had a 15 goal striker instead of two no goal strikers, we wouldn’t be in this mess now. But that’s probably the most expensive investment.

And of course if we found a more prolific striker how long could we hold on to him?
A few years ago 30 goals was a target to aim for!

Alert a moderator to this post

fish mitten Chelmsford 20 Mar 23 9.01am
Agree with just about everything you have stated. The reality is that Patrick Vieira was not the entire problem. The lack of investment in the squad, leading to the lack of strength in depth has caused it. The last time it could be addressed was January and once again not enough was done. The Board must have believed we had enough to limp over the line. Sacking the manager and bringing in a new guy, is unlikely to bring in a massive upturn in our fortunes this season. I suspect the die has already been cast. Do we have enough quality to stay up, or are there 3 worse teams than us? Only time will tell. That's why I want us to get a permanent manager now, not a stop gap. If we get a stand in manager, it is showing the Board are making the same mistakes and haven't learned anything. Introducing a new style takes investment, time and belief. If we have to go backwards to move forwards, so be it. Relegation will be painful. But to try and plaster over the cracks with short term thinking means that the Board are far more interested in losing on their investment short term than they are the club moving forward in their playing style and philosophy. The most annoying thing is at the end of last season we were in a great place. The failure to add three or four more quality players to the half a dozen we already had has lead to this. Originally posted by southnorwoodhill Let's look at it from another angle. Imagine we beat the drop will the board have learned anything from this season? Perhaps the realisation will come that the PL is a giant sponge that sucks up investor's money, the twist being if you don't contribute you will inevitably drop. I have little faith that the set of investors will invest the amounts necessary to rebuild the side after all the dead wood, fly by night, sick note players have departed. I have much doubt about the academy providing the players to cover those positions. After 10 seasons and £1bn revenue, constant managerial change, what do we have? Does Parish think that by employing FdB and PV our players are suddenly going to run round like Henry, Bergkamp, and Zidane? He wants a nice crisp modern passing game but without paying for it. What goes round comes round, it explains why the tactical approach employed by Pulis and Hodgson was successful, within the parameters set. They understood the limitations and capabilities of the players. The board needs a serious reality check: without proper investment there will no advance, on the contrary, as we have seen this season backward steps have been taken and we are no better off than 10 seasons ago. Relegation looks likely sooner rather than later and at least we can have but learned from this failed experiment, clear the decks, and start again. Edited by southnorwoodhill (20 Mar 2023 8.22am)
Alert a moderator to this post

fish mitten

Chelmsford 20 Mar 23 9.01am

Agree with just about everything you have stated.

The reality is that Patrick Vieira was not the entire problem. The lack of investment in the squad, leading to the lack of strength in depth has caused it. The last time it could be addressed was January and once again not enough was done. The Board must have believed we had enough to limp over the line. Sacking the manager and bringing in a new guy, is unlikely to bring in a massive upturn in our fortunes this season. I suspect the die has already been cast. Do we have enough quality to stay up, or are there 3 worse teams than us? Only time will tell.

That's why I want us to get a permanent manager now, not a stop gap. If we get a stand in manager, it is showing the Board are making the same mistakes and haven't learned anything. Introducing a new style takes investment, time and belief. If we have to go backwards to move forwards, so be it.

Relegation will be painful. But to try and plaster over the cracks with short term thinking means that the Board are far more interested in losing on their investment short term than they are the club moving forward in their playing style and philosophy.

The most annoying thing is at the end of last season we were in a great place. The failure to add three or four more quality players to the half a dozen we already had has lead to this.

Originally posted by southnorwoodhill

Edited by southnorwoodhill (20 Mar 2023 8.22am)

Alert a moderator to this post

PJEagle London 20 Mar 23 9.01am
Originally posted by Teddy Eagle And of course if we found a more prolific striker how long could we hold on to him? A few years ago 30 goals was a target to aim for! I wonder if Andy Johnson has still got it? Probably more than Edouard or Mateta , sadly
Alert a moderator to this post

PJEagle

London 20 Mar 23 9.01am

Originally posted by Teddy Eagle

And of course if we found a more prolific striker how long could we hold on to him?
A few years ago 30 goals was a target to aim for!

I wonder if Andy Johnson has still got it? Probably more than Edouard or Mateta , sadly

Alert a moderator to this post

MrRobbo Chaldon 20 Mar 23 9.12am
Originally posted by Davepalace707 Agreed. I wonder if we’d just had a 15 goal striker instead of two no goal strikers, we wouldn’t be in this mess now. But that’s probably the most expensive investment. That's not the answer to the problem. Brighton don't have a 15 a goal a season striker and they are doing ok.
Alert a moderator to this post

MrRobbo

Chaldon 20 Mar 23 9.12am

Originally posted by Davepalace707

Agreed. I wonder if we’d just had a 15 goal striker instead of two no goal strikers, we wouldn’t be in this mess now. But that’s probably the most expensive investment.

That's not the answer to the problem. Brighton don't have a 15 a goal a season striker and they are doing ok.

Alert a moderator to this post

fish mitten Chelmsford 20 Mar 23 9.13am
As much as we moaned about Benteke, he was better than the two we have been left with. Why he was never replaced and we were left with only two recognised strikers is another massive issued that wasn't addressed. We have not have the funds to spend loads on a striker, but at least taking a gamble on someone cheaper would have been better than leaving us with just 2. Originally posted by PJEagle I wonder if Andy Johnson has still got it? Probably more than Edouard or Mateta , sadly
Alert a moderator to this post

fish mitten

Chelmsford 20 Mar 23 9.13am

As much as we moaned about Benteke, he was better than the two we have been left with.

Why he was never replaced and we were left with only two recognised strikers is another massive issued that wasn't addressed. We have not have the funds to spend loads on a striker, but at least taking a gamble on someone cheaper would have been better than leaving us with just 2.

Originally posted by PJEagle

I wonder if Andy Johnson has still got it? Probably more than Edouard or Mateta , sadly

Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle 20 Mar 23 9.22am
Originally posted by PJEagle I wonder if Andy Johnson has still got it? Probably more than Edouard or Mateta , sadly He's only 42 - he'd still be good for a few penalties at least. Quite a thought that in 2003/4 he scored 32 while so far this season the whole squad have managed 24.
Alert a moderator to this post

Teddy Eagle

20 Mar 23 9.22am

Originally posted by PJEagle

I wonder if Andy Johnson has still got it? Probably more than Edouard or Mateta , sadly

He's only 42 - he'd still be good for a few penalties at least.
Quite a thought that in 2003/4 he scored 32 while so far this season the whole squad have managed 24.

Alert a moderator to this post

crystal-purley Purley 20 Mar 23 9.25am
Originally posted by fish mitten As much as we moaned about Benteke, he was better than the two we have been left with. Why he was never replaced and we were left with only two recognised strikers is another massive issued that wasn't addressed. We have not have the funds to spend loads on a striker, but at least taking a gamble on someone cheaper would have been better than leaving us with just 2. The real problem up front is not the strikers but the feed. Ever since "we" decided to go with the inverted wingers the feed has dried up for the strikers. Start with the wingers in their (correct) positions and see if that works for a few games and if it doesn't then go back to the inverted wingers again. If it's working then the inverted wingers can switch during the game. Enjoying getting up later and not having someone who knows better than me (apart from the missus of course).
Alert a moderator to this post

crystal-purley

Purley 20 Mar 23 9.25am

Send a Private Message to crystal-purley

Originally posted by fish mitten

As much as we moaned about Benteke, he was better than the two we have been left with.

The real problem up front is not the strikers but the feed. Ever since "we" decided to go with the inverted wingers the feed has dried up for the strikers. Start with the wingers in their (correct) positions and see if that works for a few games and if it doesn't then go back to the inverted wingers again. If it's working then the inverted wingers can switch during the game.

Enjoying getting up later and not having someone who knows better than me (apart from the missus of course).

Alert a moderator to this post

MrRobbo Chaldon 20 Mar 23 9.32am
Originally posted by southnorwoodhill Let's look at it from another angle. Imagine we beat the drop will the board have learned anything from this season? Perhaps the realisation will come that the PL is a giant sponge that sucks up investor's money, the twist being if you don't contribute you will inevitably drop. I have little faith that the set of investors will invest the amounts necessary to rebuild the side after all the dead wood, fly by night, sick note players have departed. I have much doubt about the academy providing the players to cover those positions. After 10 seasons and £1bn revenue, constant managerial change, what do we have? Does Parish think that by employing FdB and PV our players are suddenly going to run round like Henry, Bergkamp, and Zidane? He wants a nice crisp modern passing game but without paying for it. What goes round comes round, it explains why the tactical approach employed by Pulis and Hodgson was successful, within the parameters set. They understood the limitations and capabilities of the players. The board needs a serious reality check: without proper investment there will no advance, on the contrary, as we have seen this season backward steps have been taken and we are no better off than 10 seasons ago. Relegation looks likely sooner rather than later and at least we can have but learned from this failed experiment, clear the decks, and start again. Edited by southnorwoodhill (20 Mar 2023 8.22am) You can only hope so, but I'm not entirely sure. The club is in a tricky period because of close to a decade of poor recruitment. And given our finances we cant afford to make mistakes, or not many. But we are at a point after, as you said, £1bn revenue with a squad that leaves a lot to be desired. 2 sub par full backs, 1 young left back, gaps in midfield, no current senior GK's. Quite laughable given the £1bn figure. Other teams around us, have shown that over time you can build a good squad on modest spend, and build a new progressive footballing philosophy. The board need to hold a mirror up to themselves.... Is there a long term plan? Is there a recruitment strategy? Are personnel good enough? Scouts? Coaches? Dougie? Is Parish surrounding himself with the right people vs friendly faces (Bright, Dougie etc?) What credentials do these people have? Parish has put himself in a tricky position now. Regardless of your thoughts on Vieira, we were navigating a nightmare run of fixtures, tightly, if not excitingly. We now have no manager, and are not an attractive proposition. If we end up with Roy, it completely undermines any sense of long term vision or philosophy. If we get in another 'firefighter' what do we do if they keep us up, offer it to them perm? Again undermining any long termism. I can only hope, and with Palace it is a big hope, that Lucien Favre, (having been an option before) has been sounded out about this. He'd offer a new face, but still inline with a potential long term plan.
Alert a moderator to this post

MrRobbo

Chaldon 20 Mar 23 9.32am

Originally posted by southnorwoodhill

Edited by southnorwoodhill (20 Mar 2023 8.22am)

You can only hope so, but I'm not entirely sure.

The club is in a tricky period because of close to a decade of poor recruitment. And given our finances we cant afford to make mistakes, or not many. But we are at a point after, as you said, £1bn revenue with a squad that leaves a lot to be desired. 2 sub par full backs, 1 young left back, gaps in midfield, no current senior GK's. Quite laughable given the £1bn figure.

Other teams around us, have shown that over time you can build a good squad on modest spend, and build a new progressive footballing philosophy.

The board need to hold a mirror up to themselves....

Is there a long term plan?
Is there a recruitment strategy?
Are personnel good enough? Scouts? Coaches? Dougie?

Is Parish surrounding himself with the right people vs friendly faces (Bright, Dougie etc?) What credentials do these people have?

Parish has put himself in a tricky position now. Regardless of your thoughts on Vieira, we were navigating a nightmare run of fixtures, tightly, if not excitingly. We now have no manager, and are not an attractive proposition.

If we end up with Roy, it completely undermines any sense of long term vision or philosophy. If we get in another 'firefighter' what do we do if they keep us up, offer it to them perm? Again undermining any long termism.

I can only hope, and with Palace it is a big hope, that Lucien Favre, (having been an option before) has been sounded out about this. He'd offer a new face, but still inline with a potential long term plan.

Alert a moderator to this post

fish mitten Chelmsford 20 Mar 23 9.36am
Yes you are right and that has been a problem for years. We had possibly the striker who was best at heading the ball in the Premier League in Benteke and two wingers in Zaha and Townsend, who would cut inside and shoot or try and dribble past ever last defender before putting a ball across on the floor. Most teams seem to play with inverted wingers these days. The days of getting close to the goal line and then crossing seem gone. Even my 14 year old son, who is relatively rapid and right footed plays left wing for his team. I'd prefer it if wingers were swapped over 2-3 times each game, gives the full backs a different problem. Of course strikers are only good if they get chances. If Edouard knows he is only likely to get two in a game it puts a hell of a pressure on him to score. Originally posted by crystal-purley The real problem up front is not the strikers but the feed. Ever since "we" decided to go with the inverted wingers the feed has dried up for the strikers. Start with the wingers in their (correct) positions and see if that works for a few games and if it doesn't then go back to the inverted wingers again. If it's working then the inverted wingers can switch during the game.
Alert a moderator to this post

fish mitten

Chelmsford 20 Mar 23 9.36am

Yes you are right and that has been a problem for years. We had possibly the striker who was best at heading the ball in the Premier League in Benteke and two wingers in Zaha and Townsend, who would cut inside and shoot or try and dribble past ever last defender before putting a ball across on the floor.

Most teams seem to play with inverted wingers these days. The days of getting close to the goal line and then crossing seem gone. Even my 14 year old son, who is relatively rapid and right footed plays left wing for his team.

I'd prefer it if wingers were swapped over 2-3 times each game, gives the full backs a different problem.

Of course strikers are only good if they get chances. If Edouard knows he is only likely to get two in a game it puts a hell of a pressure on him to score.

Originally posted by crystal-purley

Alert a moderator to this post

Zaha127 20 Mar 23 9.45am
Relegation is so hard to call this year. From 12th to 20th can go down. I think it will be between Southampton, Bournemouth, West Ham, Leeds and Forest. I see Dyche getting results at Everton. 2 wins and 6 draws should be enough for Palace to stay up. But a lot of games are against teams fighting for their life which may make it the worst time to play them: Leicester, Leeds, Southampton, Everton, Wolves, West Ham, Bournemouth, Forest. Hopefully Palace do enough maybe formational change can also help something like a 3-4-2-1 or 3-5-2. Relegation would be the worst thing for Palace.
Alert a moderator to this post

Zaha127

20 Mar 23 9.45am

Relegation is so hard to call this year. From 12th to 20th can go down. I think it will be between Southampton, Bournemouth, West Ham, Leeds and Forest. I see Dyche getting results at Everton.

2 wins and 6 draws should be enough for Palace to stay up. But a lot of games are against teams fighting for their life which may make it the worst time to play them: Leicester, Leeds, Southampton, Everton, Wolves, West Ham, Bournemouth, Forest.

Hopefully Palace do enough maybe formational change can also help something like a 3-4-2-1 or 3-5-2. Relegation would be the worst thing for Palace.

Alert a moderator to this post

Page 94 of 141 < 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

Crystal Palace FC Supporters' Website - The Holmesdale Online

Relegation 22/23

Site Map

New users

Existing users

Sponsors