Lacroix

I’m delighted Wharton, and for that matter Mitchell, were not selected.
A full summer off with their batteries fully recharged.

In the words of Monty Python, what has the World Cup ever given us?

Pino and Riad carrying injuries, an overworked Sarr, Kamada, Munoz and Lerma who will return late to training along with Larsen and Henderson and a disappointed Mateta and Lacroix with a truncated time to resolve their futures which in turn affects Palace plans.

No thanks.
 
It would appear if Chelsea make an enquiry about a player the norm seems to be “ah it’s Chelsea let’s double our valuation” I sincerely hope Steve Parish follows suite if and when Chelsea open negotiations for Lacroix.
 
esox lucius said:
It would appear if Chelsea make an enquiry about a player the norm seems to be “ah it’s Chelsea let’s double our valuation” I sincerely hope Steve Parish follows suite if and when Chelsea open negotiations for Lacroix.
Click to expand...
Chelsea have agreed to pay £117 m for Morgan Rogers. Not particularly relevant for La Croix except an indicator of how much they're willing, or able, to pay.
 
With a bit of luck Chelsea (and reputedly Arsenal) will be having second thoughts.
Lacroix has been part of a woeful French defence that is 4 nil down to England.
 
PatrickA said:
With a bit of luck Chelsea (and reputedly Arsenal) will be having second thoughts.
Lacroix has been part of a woeful French defence that is 4 nil down to England.
Click to expand...
I'm going to stick my neck out here: He's overrated.

Hear me out.

Palace play conservatively, which is to say, deep and compact. Ask any central defender if they prefer playing high up the pitch with their full backs off on the attack, with all that space either side of them and behind them, or would they rather play on the edge of the box with no space behind them, and teammates close on either side? You've got a good chance of playing well in our team as a centre back.

Then, ask any central defender what position and formation they'd pick for themselves if they could pick one to look good. If you've ever played at all you will know it's the middle of a back three/five. You're almost a spare man. The guys left and right of you tend to be the ones to get drawn in like man markers. Often, if they do their job well, the ball will be played into the space behind them, which you can majestically stride over into and clear up.

I'm not saying he's not a very good player, but he doesn't have to defend 1v1 high up the pitch for us like he would at a top club. He'd be more exposed. Palace is as good a platform for him as he could dream of. He's got caught out a few times for France this world cup.
 
TheBigToePunt said:
I'm going to stick my neck out here: He's overrated.

I'm not saying he's not a very good player, but he doesn't have to defend 1v1 high up the pitch for us like he would at a top club. He'd be more exposed. Palace is as good a platform for him as he could dream of. He's got caught out a few times for France this world cup.
Click to expand...
He’ll be less exposed at a top club than he is for us surely?? Plus he’s only played twice for France this competition hasn’t he? and you can’t judge him on yesterdays free for all, they won the other game comfortably

Deano let 4 in yesterday, can you judge him on that game?
 
The BBC this morning are talking Lacroix at £70m, how much of that is just because its Chelsea who are (allegedly) interested is anyone's guess - still much better than the 47m that was being talked about on here just a few weeks ago.

I certainly don't want to lose him but if its certain he is going then getting a decent price helps soften the blow.

For sure - Steve Parish, when he / the club is talking to potential replacements / new signings, has certainly got a decent selling story to tell - in terms of, we bought x for x, got him into the national team, won this trophy with him, sold him for y to whoever (top 6) & this guy we did this with & that guy we did that with - Damn, if you are an up and coming "star in the making" Palace 100% must be the stand out club to be part of your journey.
 
I still haven’t seen an actual offer by Chelsea for Lacroix and with him still contracted for another 3 years the fee has got to be way north of 60 million pounds. If Van Hecke went from Brighton to Spurs for 52 million, Max is a much better player than him.

Steve Parish will not be bullied by Chelsea, but I can see a player plus cash as a way forward with Chalobah coming this way. Personally I would prefer him to stay another season, to lose him Guehi, Eze and Olise over the course of 2 seasons is ridiculous ……
 
BromleyMonkey said:
He’ll be less exposed at a top club than he is for us surely?? Plus he’s only played twice for France this competition hasn’t he? and you can’t judge him on yesterdays free for all, they won the other game comfortably

Deano let 4 in yesterday, can you judge him on that game?
Click to expand...
I think he'd defend less at a big club, but be expected to do it in isolation more often than he's used to, or has proved he can do

Henderson let in four, yes, but none of them were his error and without him we'd have let in seven. He played pretty well. Lacroix didn't, really. In the semi final he lost Porro for the crucial Spanish goal.

I'm not saying he's anything other than very good. I really hope he stays. I'm just a bit less concerned about cashing in on him than some others.
 
Gary St.Andrews said:
I still haven’t seen an actual offer by Chelsea for Lacroix and with him still contracted for another 3 years the fee has got to be way north of 60 million pounds. If Van Hecke went from Brighton to Spurs for 52 million, Max is a much better player than him.

Steve Parish will not be bullied by Chelsea, but I can see a player plus cash as a way forward with Chalobah coming this way. Personally I would prefer him to stay another season, to lose him Guehi, Eze and Olise over the course of 2 seasons is ridiculous ……
Click to expand...
Isn't Challobah going to Como? There was a story last month that Chelsea were offering him as part of a deal for La Croix but Sage didn't want him with Cresswell being his preference. Doesn't look as though that's happening - maybe Matsima from Augsburg?
 
BromleyMonkey said:
He’ll be less exposed at a top club than he is for us surely?? Plus he’s only played twice for France this competition hasn’t he? and you can’t judge him on yesterdays free for all, they won the other game comfortably

Deano let 4 in yesterday, can you judge him on that game?
Click to expand...
I think one of those Dean let in was saveable but it would have taken a worldy.

The others, no chance any keeper.
 
TheBigToePunt said:
I think he'd defend less at a big club, but be expected to do it in isolation more often than he's used to, or has proved he can do

Henderson let in four, yes, but none of them were his error and without him we'd have let in seven. He played pretty well. Lacroix didn't, really. In the semi final he lost Porro for the crucial Spanish goal.

I'm not saying he's anything other than very good. I really hope he stays. I'm just a bit less concerned about cashing in on him than some others.
Click to expand...
I'd like him to stay too, but if, as may be the case, we need to sell a so-called star this window to keep within SCR/raise funds to strengthen the squad, then Lacroix for £60-70m would be my choice.
 
doombear said:
I'd like him to stay too, but if, as may be the case, we need to sell a so-called star this window to keep within SCR/raise funds to strengthen the squad, then Lacroix for £60-70m would be my choice.
Click to expand...
He was a favourite of Glasner's, and we could well see a bid from that direction,together with Liverpool,who are apparently also interested.
 
If my theory about it being easier to play well in the middle of a back three is correct, and if Sage moves to a back four, it's even possible that Lacroix is at peak value right now.

Again, I think he's great. Not saying he's easy to replace, either as a player or person.
 
If we have to sell a key asset in Lacroix to fund our splurge in January on Johnson and Larsen then that on the face of it doesn't look like good business.

Yes, there were mitigating circumstances in January as the club thought Mateta was going so a replacement was needed and Larsen was available. Furthermore, Glasner wanted another player to run in behind as we were so reliant on Sarr and Johnson was the one who happened to be available.

I could be wrong but am not convinced by either of these players, particularly taking into account the players we have been selling.
The quality of the squad is being eroded.

I'm not suggesting it's easy.
For example, I doubt the players Villa bring in will be equivalent to Rogers, Teulemans and Martinez (if he goes).
If the odds are stacked against clubs like Villa and Newcastle, who also have turned into a selling club, what hope is there for us?
 
This time last year we were basking in our FA Cup win, looking forward to our first European campaign and hoping to push for a top 6 finish as our team was packed with talent.

I wonder how fans would have felt back then if they had been informed that in a short 12 months we would have lost Glasner, Eze, Guehi, Lacroix and possibly Mateta.

It may well be that some of this is outside the club's control, but it's very difficult to put a positive spin on this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

Holmesdale Online Shop

Back
Top