PDA

View Full Version : Crystal Palace already had a successful identity before Total Football Experiment


ZOHAR
09-09-2017, 10:08 AM
https://www.standard.co.uk/front/crystal-palace-successful-identity-before-frank-de-boer-total-football-experiment-a3630616.html

Kidofwonder
09-09-2017, 10:12 AM
So successful we've won a sum of ZERO major trophies

Malarkey
09-09-2017, 10:13 AM
"Total football" :D:D:D:D

Georgie Boy
09-09-2017, 10:15 AM
OH MY GOD SHUT THE **** UP. WE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN LIKE THIS!!!

Hambo
09-09-2017, 10:37 AM
It's an interesting argument. My immediate counter argument is that history proves that once the core of the team that gets us up diminishes, we will drop. In modern times the potential effects of that drop can see you move backwards rapidly without an immediate return.

Additionally - fans will not accept the attitude of "we are Palace so we shouldn't have ambition to progress" as the reaction to recent struggles proves. Nobody is saying that they are happy that this is our longest stint in the top division so it's ok if we go down. But if we don't try to do something different then it's likely that's what is coming.

I get the argument that with the right recruitment you could keep the style we had and sustain ourselves longer - but we're always a run of bad form away from a serious struggle.

Ultimately the plan has got off to an awful start and it may prove unsuccessful, but that doesn't mean carrying on as we were would necessarily achieve a different end result. Something people assume but can't possibly know for sure.

CK
09-09-2017, 11:14 AM
That was a good article and I like the tone. Personally I think it's too much too quick. Improve the squad by all means but experiment when comfortable. Unfortunately De Boer is famously stubborn:(

palacemetros
09-09-2017, 11:16 AM
More sh*t stirring b*ll*cks from the media "experts" who have as much idea about football as a 5 year old.

TWELLSEagle
09-09-2017, 11:48 AM
It's an interesting argument. My immediate counter argument is that history proves that once the core of the team that gets us up diminishes, we will drop. In modern times the potential effects of that drop can see you move backwards rapidly without an immediate return.

Additionally - fans will not accept the attitude of "we are Palace so we shouldn't have ambition to progress" as the reaction to recent struggles proves. Nobody is saying that they are happy that this is our longest stint in the top division so it's ok if we go down. But if we don't try to do something different then it's likely that's what is coming.

I get the argument that with the right recruitment you could keep the style we had and sustain ourselves longer - but we're always a run of bad form away from a serious struggle.

Ultimately the plan has got off to an awful start and it may prove unsuccessful, but that doesn't mean carrying on as we were would necessarily achieve a different end result. Something people assume but can't possibly know for sure.

What I thought we were going to get - what was sold to us was evolution; a gradual change, retaining what works well. For me that would mean keeping a back 4 to begin with, certainly keeping wingers, but trying to add another string to our bow with the ability to use the ball through the middle as well. I thought our players would be encouraged to back themselves a bit more. We have the players to do this tbh: Luka, Cabaye and Riedeweld are certainly capable and I think jimmy and punch are no mugs either. In the days of Ledley, KG and Jedi we truly were limited to one plan of attack.

This is why I was cautiously optimistic about de Boer, and this is why I feel a bit like we've been sold a lie. Because this is revolution, inflexibility and throwing out all that was good.

Martin H
09-09-2017, 12:28 PM
I really struggle with this whole DNA or identity thing in terms of it being any sort of factor for future success. I am distinguishing here between it and the challenge of change which is an entirely different thing.

The DNA/identity issue can have no basis in fact. i.e. imagine Pep moved to Selhurst tomorrow and brought his current squad with him. Would he have to change their style to the Palace way (whatever that is) to be successful? It's an extreme to make an obvious point. It's just a convenient cliche for the pundits and journalists to drop. It also smacks to me as another shade of 'know your place' and the football snobbery that we have always been on the wrong end of.

To me we have survived each year this time around by playing Cup football as if we were the underdog. We drop off and have attempted to keep it tight at the back with a bank of 4 and 5 with the CF in the centre circle. Then we rely on breaks (difficult when your winger is often playing FB) and converting set pieces. It's not rocket science because you fill up the spaces but you can defend for most if the match because you simply can't keep the ball. So we rely on winning FKs to get up the pitch (cue Wilf). This is a good way to play the best teams but fails against equals or lesser because there is no real mechanism to build an attack. I think many have selective memories when they say it is great to watch. At times it has completely clicked and it's awesome but quite often it's pretty awful. But we are each year in a mess happy enough if we avoid relegation and we have squeaked enough points each year.

The problem is if you are doing this with a weak keeper and suspect CBs you are asking for trouble. Add to that a less combative midfield and it gets worse. I guess what I am saying is that it's apparently clear to everyone that we don't have players fit for a new formation but do we have players fit for the 'old style'?

I think Wilf papers over the cracks and Sakho (for 8 games) it is just a matter of time because Cup football is like that. So faced with a refresh then surely it makes sense to improve the quality and adapt the formation/tactic. Ironically, the 343 shape does tick the boxes. Strong defence, wingers and crosses and freeing Wilf to play in the real danger areas rather than be an aux fullback. But fans seem to be scared of that altogether and FDB has been pragmatic staring mostly with 5 across the back. The killer blow is the transfer window. I don't think it matters now who manages us as we are woefully short and will be lucky to survive. Similar to Pardew, he has been left short in the window and the next Manager no doubt will 'have funds.' It's a bit like playing Russian roulette and I think this might be one too many spins.

What seems worse right now is that before we have mostly been on the same page as a club. It feels fractured and our reliance on old Palace heads around the place may be nostalgic and might make sense at Liverpool or Arsenal but what success have any of these ever had.

Just opinions. And mine is DNA and identity is b***** and we should not accept knowing our place.

I should add none of the above is a comment on FDB but we should get behind him because he is ours right now.

redeagle
09-09-2017, 01:22 PM
Well written but pretty poorly researched. The description of our existing DNA as a no nonsense style of football roared on by the great atmosphere at Selhurst, completely ignores the fact that it has been our home form that has let us down for years. The arsenal result was a glorious exception to the norm.

Our style is very effective playing away, particularly against bigger teams ( apart from the Manchester ones). But we definitely need some new ideas when it comes to playing teams at home when they sit back and let us have the ball.

CPFC.1990
09-09-2017, 01:32 PM
What a nonsense article. Totally patronising to any fan who supported the club pre-2013.

It's as though our identity has only been created post 2010.

smoll
09-09-2017, 01:36 PM
This article is spot on

orp pisshead1
09-09-2017, 01:55 PM
So successful we've won a sum of ZERO major trophies

Bloody JCL fans:wallbash:
ZDS lad :lux::lux::lux::lux:

orp pisshead1
09-09-2017, 01:57 PM
That was a good article and I like the tone. Personally I think it's too much too quick. Improve the squad by all means but experiment when comfortable. Unfortunately De Boer is famously stubborn:(

Spot on , I posted earlier in summer wait till we're safe then experiment:p

exiledeagle
09-09-2017, 02:14 PM
All i thought we needed was to build on what we had with SA. No radical changes but we have to pass and move better ( well we rarely move ) . No need for system changes but the players have to make them selves available to receive passes .

From the 3 games this season we are not helping ourselves

Huddersfield at home with 3 at back , there was so much space in the right and left wingback position and we were weak in central defence .

Liverpool away , yes we were dogged playing 5 4 1 / 5 3 2 but we were under the cosh and rarely looked like creating much .

Swansea at home , think it was 5 3 2 , we were so slow and placid first half . We have to have more pace and intensity to our play . In trying to retain possession we were passing with no purpose going nowhere .

Hoping FDB has managed to get more of a balance to our play as we really do need to try and get 6 points from next 2 games .

costello
09-09-2017, 03:52 PM
Dreadful article. The idea that what we achieved with Pulis and Allardyce involved playing a brand of English football that we should be proud of is just nonsense. You play that way to get results. It is effective but negative.

Green Bin
09-09-2017, 03:55 PM
Well written but pretty poorly researched. The description of our existing DNA as a no nonsense style of football roared on by the great atmosphere at Selhurst, completely ignores the fact that it has been our home form that has let us down for years. The arsenal result was a glorious exception to the norm.

Our style is very effective playing away, particularly against bigger teams ( apart from the Manchester ones). But we definitely need some new ideas when it comes to playing teams at home when they sit back and let us have the ball.

Yep the most we've won at home since we returned to the premiership was 8, and that was in our first season, since then we have won just 6 in each of the last three seasons. so just 26 games won out of 76 before this season...so arguably our 'great atmosphere' isn't proving to be the '12th man', other than the occasional match against the bigger teams. A bit controversial I'm sure, but if anything it's suggests what we deep down all know, that our defensive counter-attacking style works away (and has probably been the reason why we have stayed up) but it is no good at home, other than against the bigger teams where we are more likely to be up against it anyway.

Pardew realised this, as does Parish, and thus we have been seeking ways of opening up teams at home..... but both last summer and this we have not had completely successful transfer windows, which have left us short of key players. This nearly blew up in our face last year, solved by spending nearly 40m in January.

CK
09-09-2017, 04:00 PM
Dreadful article. The idea that what we achieved with Pulis and Allardyce involved playing a brand of English football that we should be proud of is just nonsense. You play that way to get results. It is effective but negative.


And this is positive then?

Martin H
09-09-2017, 04:04 PM
Yep the most we've won at home since we returned to the premiership was 8, and that was in our first season, since then we have won just 6 in each of the last three seasons. so just 26 games won out of 76 before this season...so arguably our 'great atmosphere' isn't proving to be the '12th man', other than the occasional match against the bigger teams. A bit controversial I'm sure, but if anything it's suggests what we deep down all know, that our defensive counter-attacking style works away (and has probably been the reason why we have stayed up) but it is no good at home, other than against the bigger teams where we are more likely to be up against it anyway.

Pardew realised this, as does Parish, and thus we have been seeking ways of opening up teams at home..... but both last summer and this we have not had completely successful transfer windows, which have left us short of key players. This nearly blew up in our face last year, solved by spending nearly 40m in January.

I agree with this but I simply can't get my head around the lack of investment in this window whatever the constraints and then I can't really understand the purchases. Taking the risk of relegation is crazy as the 'cost' of recovering a Premier League place could well be massive. So unless they really have no options at all to raise more cash then I am bemused they would take such a risk. Even if they don't have the cash - why spend everything they do have on 2 players and fail to move on anyone. It's a bit like lighting matches and throwing them on top of your pile of cash. Sakho is a gamble. A wonderful one but quite a gamble for everyone. I hope it pays off.

New LP
09-09-2017, 04:30 PM
Dreadful article. The idea that what we achieved with Pulis and Allardyce involved playing a brand of English football that we should be proud of is just nonsense. You play that way to get results. It is effective but negative.


Our football under both was good counter attacking football. It was never as bad as people on here now make out.

Neckinger Eagle
09-09-2017, 04:53 PM
Statistically, generally the more teams spend on wages and transfer fees the more successful they become. If you try to play in the same way that teams with more resources play you are going to get beaten.

The way to buck the trend is to do what Pulis does and look to do something different. You may not win competitions if you are not financially doped but as BFS would say, respect the point.

All this progressive football nonsense is so naive. You look at your players' strengths and weaknesses and then you look at the opposition's strengths and weaknesses. Then you develop a plan.

DNA? Nonsense as well. It's football, pure and simple. DNA is something a media guy might come up with to sell the product.

Neckinger Eagle
09-09-2017, 05:04 PM
Our football under both was good counter attacking football. It was never as bad as people on here now make out.

This is true. The best football is winning football irrespective of how you do it.

If you're not going to win then try to bloody the nose of the opponent, die with your boots on. Go toe to toe.

All the poncing about we have had to endure is the worst of both worlds. Not only has it resulted in defeats, even at it's best it is the most mind-numbing football I have ever had to endure at Selhurst. You wouldn't bring a Pal to the Palace to watch this insipid nonsense if you didn't want to be embarrassed. Not even the tedium of a Peter Taylor managed side was as dreary as this.

Ipswich brought their youngest ever team to Selhurst. We had a team mainly of experience professionals from a Division above Ipswich. We outclassed them. Yet in that first half all the mincing about couldn't even get the ball into the Ipswich penalty box. Shameful.

SE5eagle
09-09-2017, 05:25 PM
What a nonsense article. Totally patronising to any fan who supported the club pre-2013.

It's as though our identity has only been created post 2010.

I can understand where you're coming from, but it can't be denied that the fanbase and team were galvanised in the foundry of our last admin.

To all intents and purposes, that was the last time we pulled together and took on the big beasts.

Martin H
09-09-2017, 06:18 PM
I can understand where you're coming from, but it can't be denied that the fanbase and team were galvanised in the foundry of our last admin.

To all intents and purposes, that was the last time we pulled together and took on the big beasts.

Not too sure what you are saying but it sounds as if you think the bulk of the Palace fan base have only been around for 7 years. I would think that's true for the bulk of our overseas fans but very unlikely for UK based fans.

Dorking .Eagle
09-09-2017, 06:33 PM
So successful we've won a sum of ZERO major trophies

I'd say the last 5 years aren't just successful, but a bloody miracle considering the infrastructure which has achieved it

Se9 eagles
09-09-2017, 06:58 PM
I'd say the last 5 years aren't just successful, but a bloody miracle considering the infrastructure which has achieved it

Agreed.I thought the Americans might have made a difference but they haven't.Staying up this season was all about the right manager,a lack of injuries to key players,good signings,getting off to a good start and a bit of luck.None of these have come to pass and Im afraid this season it's our turn....

GorBlimey
09-09-2017, 07:01 PM
The way to buck the trend is to do what Pulis does and look to do something different.

That worked well today.

CPFC.1990
09-09-2017, 08:02 PM
I can understand where you're coming from, but it can't be denied that the fanbase and team were galvanised in the foundry of our last admin.

To all intents and purposes, that was the last time we pulled together and took on the big beasts.

Disagree with that.

I really feel that people forget just how bad Palace have had it before the 2010 admin.

During the 98/99/00 periods we went from having the likes of Lombardo, Jansen and Curcic to Woozley, Martin and Carlisle.

That's when I feel the club was at its very best. Supporting a group of players who weren't good enough for the fourth division to come through and produce a miracle.

smoll
09-09-2017, 08:04 PM
Dreadful article. The idea that what we achieved with Pulis and Allardyce involved playing a brand of English football that we should be proud of is just nonsense. You play that way to get results. It is effective but negative.
Yeah and this possession based, progressive football is going really well isn't it

CharlieCPFC
09-09-2017, 08:21 PM
Shit article but the point they're getting at makes sense.

We had a structured formation of a 4231 which continued from Freedman, Holloway, Pulis, Warnock and even Pardew.

We were so heavily reliant on our wide play to break teams down there was a more focus on being creative through the middle of the park.

Cabaye was meant to be the talisman to allow us to create more from the middle, but really it turns out as good as he's been recently that wasn't exactly what we needed. We were crying out for a real number 10 who could get in between the lines to make things click in the final third. A midfielder who could get 8+ goals a season. As Puncheon is getting older he's become much less effective going forwards as he once did. And it's showing in our play, it's criminal we never got that number 10 just as we never got a backup keeper or another keeper this summer.

We had a great structure in place but our recruitment has let us down big time. We never seem to learn, failure to sign a left back and holding midfielder ensured we had to in January. Why can't we ever get our squad addressed for the season in the summer?

SE5eagle
09-09-2017, 08:35 PM
Disagree with that.

I really feel that people forget just how bad Palace have had it before the 2010 admin.

During the 98/99/00 periods we went from having the likes of Lombardo, Jansen and Curcic to Woozley, Martin and Carlisle.

That's when I feel the club was at its very best. Supporting a group of players who weren't good enough for the fourth division to come through and produce a miracle.

To yourself and Martin H, I haven't explained it well, but this last paragraph is what I mean; it's the last time that kind of thing happened.

It's a bit like people remembering WW2 more than they do WW1.

I'm sleepy, but that's what I'm groping at.

El Aguila
09-09-2017, 08:46 PM
Not too sure what you are saying but it sounds as if you think the bulk of the Palace fan base have only been around for 7 years. I would think that's true for the bulk of our overseas fans but very unlikely for UK based fans.

Hey wot?!?

sheepy
09-09-2017, 08:53 PM
Our priority this summer should have been, sort the GK position and centre of defence and then do what we can with the attack with any money left over. You can focus on ball retention, attacking threat and anything you want after but simply put, you need a solid foundation to build from.

Stoke are a perfect example of team that figured this out and have spent the past 10 years building on it, to the point where they are now a top half premiership team.

They achieved this through having a clear vision about what sorts of players they need to bring in, consistently targeting a similar mould of player in every position, slowing increasing calibre of player they bring in as budgets allow.

Why Parish hasn't figured this sort of stuff out after 5 years is baffling.

Martin H
09-09-2017, 09:19 PM
Hey wot?!?

LOL - made me laugh. Obviously I am referring to the new fans that have only found us since we have been widely televised (globally) in the Premier. As I believe a lot have been added this time around I am pretty sure they outnumber the ex-pats. Bear in mind I was an ex-pat for a while too :) so no dissing from me :)

GorBlimey
09-09-2017, 09:20 PM
Stoke are a perfect example of team that figured this out and have spent the past 10 years building on it, to the point where they are now a top half premiership team.

How bad was their start last year?

No-one was suggesting Hughes should fired after three games.

Grim Reaper
10-09-2017, 06:32 PM
During the 98/99/00 periods we went from having the likes of Lombardo, Jansen and Curcic to Woozley, Martin and Carlisle.

That's when I feel the club was at its very best. Supporting a group of players who weren't good enough for the fourth division to come through and produce a miracle.

Norwich away 1999 and then again in 2000 were Palace fans at their very best and sum your quote up perfectly. Two very fun afternoons :p