PALACE V CHELSEA MATCH THREAD

[Palacesince64]

You must of missed it, he clearly said in the second half Munoz was pushed further forward and Sarr came more central, which pushed Palace further forward.
We dont need analysis, we can see ourselves.

I’ve watched it again 4 times looking for the clear statement you refer to and it ain’t there. Murphy was following a script to go with the video review. He fluffed his lines a couple of times and corrected himself but it was all about Chelsea, even when they showed the Palace chances. Lineker did interject with “they were much better second half Palace” to which Murphy quickly replied “Palace changed. They had to” before going back to his Chelsea chat.
You may not need the analysis but some of us lesser mortals do and if the pundits are providing it they should do it properly.

 

[JRW2]

I was at the match and am still relishing that goal moment - not just for the usual reasons but for what went immediately before it. The Chelsea fans had just struck up another tedious chant:
"Is this s a library?
Is this a library?
Is this........?" Whoops, Palace have just scored.

Priceless.

 

[Fanofzhiyi]

If Guehi goes I wonder if Mitchell could replace him on the left of the back three

That is something I wonder too. I’d go as far as to say he is a great left back. He is so impressive defensively, but we play with wing backs and for him to be effective going forward he relies heavily on the attacking left supporting him. He and Zaha were very good, he and an inform Eze were very effective end of last season. This season we struggle down the left. The LWB we bid for looks exciting at Slavia Prague

 

[doombear]

Doesn’t Mitchell have more assists this season than Munoz? He gets so much criticism that I think is unfair. The team as a whole has struggled for goals

Yes - he has 3 assists but then Munoz has scored a couple of goals and, let's face it, without his steal from Palmer yesterday we wouldn't have got that equalizer.

I agree that Mitchell gets a lot of unfair criticism but this is inevitable when people have decided he's no good as a wing back. When people diss a player then the good things they do are conveniently forgotten and only their limitations and failures are focussed on.

 

[Honey Gee]

A good point obtained and if expected this seasons EPL European Places will pay to 8th position, then we remain firmly in the quest to achieve this and bring the continents elite back to the Eagles nest once again during period 25/26 (my 85th year)

Just 11 points is the waistline now between us and 8th. And for those unaware, for comparison, we are 15 points from the other end of the waistline with the Southampton Saints in position 20 on the ladder.

The only thing leaving a sour taste in our mouths yesterday was the official annual EPL fans publication on EPL stadia which saw us slip into 20th position from 19th last year with a damning report on our stadia.

However with many eagles yesterday reporting and uploading some initial construction parts which were visibly noticeable on the original grandstand,L (opened 100 years ago but closed during WW2) we have every reason to remain extremely happy at the moment with the fortunes ongoing around the eagles nest.

A quick glance of Wikipedia confirms that construction started 01/02/25

 

[PatrickA]

Glasner pointed out in a press conference last week that 40% or our goals this season have come from our defenders.
He was pointing this out as a plus in a way, but it's also a bit of an admission about the dearth of goals from the players in front of them.
If they up their contribution, and the defenders maintain their current rate, we should be in a strong position to win more games.

 

[JHB]

Yes - he has 3 assists but then Munoz has scored a couple of goals and, let's face it, without his steal from Palmer yesterday we wouldn't have got that equalizer.

I agree that Mitchell gets a lot of unfair criticism but this is inevitable when people have decided he's no good as a wing back. When people diss a player then the good things they do are conveniently forgotten and only their limitations and failures are focussed on.

Yes Munoz has been really good in the last few games. He struggled in the early part of the season but I think that was as much to do with him and Sarr building an understanding which they now seem to have. With Mitchell he isn’t perfect but one of those players who I think we’d only realise the full value of if he went. Good left backs are very rare (look at the England team). Good wing backs even rarer

 

[Honey Gee]

Yes Munoz has been really good in the last few games. He struggled in the early part of the season but I think that was as much to do with him and Sarr building an understanding which they now seem to have. With Mitchell he isn’t perfect but one of those players who I think we’d only realise the full value of if he went. Good left backs are very rare (look at the England team). Good wing backs even rarer

A good point well aired. The national team have struggled at Defense-Left for consistency as well since Cole A departed the team.

 

[kevlee]

Glasner pointed out in a press conference last week that 40% or our goals this season have come from our defenders.
He was pointing this out as a plus in a way, but it's also a bit of an admission about the dearth of goals from the players in front of them.
If they up their contribution, and the defenders maintain their current rate, we should be in a strong position to win more games.

JPM is a striker - so if he spends his time in the box and the ball is played to him he will score. Simple really!

 

[park the bus]

I must admit I’ve lost track of the number of games we have started poorly this season. It almost takes half a game to work out what is going on with the opposition and we are quite often down before we respond.

Munoz was spectacular second half and I think his performance reflected Glasner’s philosophy that if you are attacking as a wingback then their wingers are forced into doing some defending themselves and you have effectively stifled their game.

The second half was a good watch. Most of the first half was painful. It rather sums up the highs and lows of being a Palace fan in one game.

There is a similarity with Roy Hodgson's side here I think, we often started poorly under him before improving in the second half. No idea what's at the bottom of it.

 

[ASCPFC]

There is a similarity with Roy Hodgson's side here I think, we often started poorly under him before improving in the second half. No idea what's at the bottom of it.

I always thought it's because we have to start trying when we're behind. We seem to need to go behind to take any chances.

 

[Norbury Old Git]

I always thought it's because we have to start trying when we're behind. We seem to need to go behind to take any chances.

The only difference between OG and Roy being that when we equalised there were no defensive changes to “respect the point”. The team really looked like they wanted to press on for the winner.

 

[doombear]

There is a similarity with Roy Hodgson's side here I think, we often started poorly under him before improving in the second half. No idea what's at the bottom of it.

I think it's a mentality thing. Under Hodgson, it was a case of making sure we keep things tight resulting in our allowing the opposition to have the ball and dictate the play. How much of that mentality is still there subconsciously?

Glasner basically touched on it yesterday when he spoke about our fear and passivity in the first 30 minutes. We saw it too against that Sussex lot in the opening 15 minutes or so.

 

[ex hibitionist]

Yes typical Danny Murphy analysis on MOTD who completely failed to analyse why things changed in the second half or to point out that the goal was coming for a while with several similar moves created by the deployment of Munoz, Sarr, Mateta and Eze as a pressing and progressing unit ..fantastic coordinated team play. It’s almost like Murphy had a script and could not address the changes in the game away from that script to explain the result.

When Eze scored that volley v West Ham when we thrashed them last April Murphy said "He's a champions league player, he won't be there next season." They don't like clubs with smaller stadiums and less illustrious histories, so they don't analyse the game properly, maybe something to do with Liverpool - Lawrenson, Souness and Hansen are the same. Jurgen Klopp summed it up: "f*cking Crystal Palace". F*cking Danny Murphy.

 

[dreamwaverider]

If Guehi goes I wonder if Mitchell could replace him on the left of the back three

Way too small.
Plus Im not convinced he reads the game well a propos forward passing. He is good in defence and passing backwards, but ive rarely seen him hit a quick progressive forward through ball from the middle of the field.

 

[Honey Gee]

There is a similarity with Roy Hodgson's side here I think, we often started poorly under him before improving in the second half. No idea what's at the bottom of it.

Maybe we are using the Balboa Theroy by soaking up all the pressure in the early rounds and in doing so, wearing our opponents down as the contest goes on, thus enabling us to take control during the most crucial stages.

I didn't realise how serious this theory was until I read the book and discovered just how much of the Internet is dedicated to using this tactic no matter what we do in life.

 

[ex hibitionist]

You must of missed it, he clearly said in the second half Munoz was pushed further forward and Sarr came more central, which pushed Palace further forward.
We dont need analysis, we can see ourselves.

Ollie explained the change post match, Murphy didn't, he's not sharp enough to have spotted it or is strangely unwilling.

 

[Willo]

When Mateta scored my buttocks never left my seat but I gave out a yelp of delight and clapped my 'Flippers' like a zoo sea lion at feeding time.

 

[PatrickA]

I gave up listening to BBC punditry on MOD some years ago.

The incessant unfunny banter, the unrelenting focus on the top clubs at the expense of smaller clubs, the introduction of a political angle by Lineker on occasions.

I get more sense from the fans sitting around me at Palace.

For example, they picked up on the influence of Palmer in the first half yesterday who was often in yards of space operating unchallenged.
This was corrected by a more intense display in the second half when he was less able to get on the ball and influence proceedings.

The only pundit who seems to go into any meaningful detail with proper illustrated analysis is Carragher on Sky.
I’m not suggesting he’s necessarily likeable, but at least I feel I’m learning something on occasions.

 

[Painter]

Ollie explained the change post match, Murphy didn't, he's not sharp enough to have spotted it or is strangely unwilling.

I knew I heard it, somewhere.

I prefer hearing Glasner talking about tactics, than the MOTD stooges.