Like most people, I have been disappointed with Glasners conduct over the last couple of weeks.
I don't think he's daft enough not to know where Palace sit financially. And I'm sure that there would have been transparency from Parish when he was recruiting Glasner.
When we get to the figures you quote it tells a different story. A net of -£5m spend is more about breaking financially even than backing the manager in the market.
I think you are missing Glasners point when it comes to the sales of Eze and Guehi. His issue is with the timing of those sales not the sales themselves. He said it himself the other day - Guehi will leave when the club receive an acceptable offer. What annoyed him was the fact he was preparing Guehi for the Sunderland game without being told that the transfer had been agreed and that Marc was no longer available.
The young players you mention - Rak-Sakyi and Esse haven't done enough, from what I've seen of them, to merit much more than the opportunities they've had. Jessie Derry hasn't featured for Chelsea despite, according to him, providing a clearer pathway to first team football. Roy used to get criticised for not giving young players a chance.
You say that Glasner had a '' major say '' in signings. Define that - because I read the reports back in August that Parish wanted Pino and Glasner didn't. The fact is that we don't know to what extent Glasner is involved.
Which brings us to Johnson. How much input would there have been from a manager that verbally handed his notice in 3 months ago ? If you were Parish how much value do you place in his opinion ?
In terms of tactics, I dispute that the set piece defending has been bad all season. That it has been of late is undeniable. As for Macclesfield, tactics shouldn't really come into it. We should have been able to put any permutation of our squad out there and won the game.
Ultimately though, I have come to the view that Glasner should go now. But on Palace's terms not his.
I agree with you on the final conclusion, he should go now, but on Palace’s terms, not his.
Where I differ is on the idea that the figures “tell a different story”. A net spend of roughly £5m at a club like Palace is backing the manager in relative terms. We’re not a club that usually reinvests pound for pound. Historically we sell first, then replace cheaply. This time the board largely maintained the squad value and even broke our transfer record. That’s not standing still, it’s the club stretching within its means.
On Eze and Guehi, I do understand Glasner’s point about timing, but this is where his lack of realism frustrates me. At a selling club, timing isn’t always clean or ideal. Deals move fast, especially in January. If he genuinely wasn’t aware, that’s a breakdown in communication, but again, that’s not unique to Palace, and it doesn’t justify the public outbursts.
On youth, I’m not arguing that all of them should be starters. My issue is the complete lack of trust or rotation. Rak-Sakyi and Esse might not be the finished article, but Palace has always given youth exposure, minutes, and a pathway. That’s part of our identity. Roy got criticised for it, yes, but Roy never publicly distanced himself from the club or acted like development was beneath him. Glasner feels very short-term in comparison.
Regarding signings, you’re right that we don’t know the full picture. But Glasner himself has repeatedly said he was involved in recruitment discussions. He can’t on one hand say he wasn’t backed, and on the other absolve himself of responsibility when signings don’t work. Even if Parish pushed certain names, Glasner still accepted the job knowing how recruitment works here.
Johnson is actually a good example of my wider point. If Glasner had mentally checked out months ago, then his continued public criticism becomes even worse. Either he was still involved and therefore partly responsible, or he wasn’t, in which case he should have behaved professionally and kept disputes internal.
On tactics, I’ll slightly concede the set-piece point hasn’t been bad all season, but it’s been poor enough, often enough, to be a clear coaching issue. And with Macclesfield, I agree we should win regardless, but poor organisation and preparation still matters. That performance reflected a team lacking focus and clarity.
England
