Worst ever Palace transfer dealings

[Levski]

Which of the above were the worst pieces of business we've done as a club?

I'd have to go for Akinbiyi. At least when Ismail was signed we actually needed a defender. The Akinbiyi deal was just totally unnecessary and barmy in the extreme.

[DennisUphill]

As your brief list demonstrates there's no end to the poxy things

[Elusive]

Ismael I think. Was really highly rated when he arrived but was young. Never really seemed to gel into the team and cost a packet. He's been playing quite well in France since then I believe.

Dyer wasn't that bad.

That fellow from Israel Zohar now he was poor. Not sure how much we paid though.

[Benzhiyi]

Why is Dyer on that list?!!!! He was nowhere near as bad as some people want to make out.

[Tor]

Has to be Akinbiyi. A truckload of cash in a rapidly falling transfer market, when we didn't really need another striker.

[Curry]

Don't think Bruce Dyer should be on the list and I'm not a fan!
Zohar definitely should be.
Close call between Akinbiyi and Gabbiadini for worst deal.
At least Ismael played a reasonable amount of games for us, Carl Leaburn aside.
Gabbiadinni just nicks it because we blew all the money from the Ian Wright transfer on this deal and £1.8 million then could of bought a lot more than £2.2 million when the Akinibiyi deal was done.
Also, a lot of the Akinbiyi deal depended on appearances and goals scored so, although it was not a great deal, it wasn't that bad.

[brighton_eagle]

Has to be Akinbiyi for a multitude of reasons including:

1) his arrival disrupted the most lethal striking partnership we've had since Wright and Bright.

2) We paid too much for him.

3) He was low on confidence after a terrible season.

4) We bought him just before the collapse of the ITV digital deal which changed the face of football's finances for ever. If only it could have been several months later.

5) We had to sell our best striker and most natural finisher partly to offset the losses incurred on Akinbiyi.

6) We are still suffering for it now.

[Ouch that Hurt!]

Rubins was good, just never had the chances, and had too many spots.

Dyer was ok.

Akinbiyi must win it with Valerian Ismael a close second.

[Levski]

Yeah, Dyer shouldn't be on there. I knocked this up in about 5 minutes. I should replace him with Zohar. Itzhak Zohar was 1 million. Coppell then terminated his contract and said 'Blame me, it was a my own bad call.'

[917L]

Originally posted by brighton_eagle
Has to be Akinbiyi for a multitude of reasons including:

1) his arrival disrupted the most lethal striking partnership we've had since Wright and Bright.

2) We paid too much for him.

3) He was low on confidence after a terrible season.

4) We bought him just before the collapse of the ITV digital deal which changed the face of football's finances for ever. If only it could have been several months later.

5) We had to sell our best striker and most natural finisher partly to offset the losses incurred on Akinbiyi.

6) We are still suffering for it now.

Potentially a first but I agree with everything that BE says above.

Dyer shouldnt be on the list at all.

Gabbiadini was a victim of circumstance and a far better player than AA.

Taylor, agreed was rubbish.

Ismael at least looked like a footballer now and again.

Whilst we're at it how much I believe Padavano cost us 1.7 mil played 8 times and scored once now thats pretty poor value!

Or

Neil Emblen?? 2 mil.

Lee Bradbury 1.5mil?

[Curry]

Forgot about Padovano.
Does anybody know of a club with a worse transfer record than ours???

[Psychokiller]

Ismail and Taylor were in fact Noades signings

[Scroatey]

Can't be Akinbiyi, although it was all fanfares and "look how much we paid" we never did. As observed here it was based on appearances and goals - OK we messed up on wages and it was a bad signing, but I think Valerian Ismael was all hype, and mucho cash up front!

Ismael it is, and I hear he's doing well back on the continent.

[Raggy]

Originally posted by Curry
Forgot about Padovano.
Does anybody know of a club with a worse transfer record than ours???

Manchester City were always famous for bad buys, but they are better these days.

Tottenham are pretty bad (Sheringham out for £3m, Les ferdinand in as replacement for £6m)

But the worst in recent years I reckon is Liverpool (Jamie Redknapp, Anelka let go for nothing, Diouf and Heskey both costing £10m+)

[Curry]

or thinking about it, Leeds!!!!

[Psychokiller]

Hmm, Man City! Didn't they pay £3m for Bradbury???

[Elusive]

Originally posted by Levski
Itzhak Zohar was 1 million. Coppell then terminated his contract and said 'Blame me, it was a my own bad call.'

Ouch. Didn't he miss a penalty in one of his few games aswell. We have a winner

[Elusive]

Originally posted by Raggy

But the worst in recent years I reckon is Liverpool (Jamie Redknapp, Anelka let go for nothing, Diouf and Heskey both costing £10m+)

Anelka was on loan I believe. They didn't buy him. Although Dioud and dioa don't look that good for millions. Baros?

[limited_edition]

Ismael was our record signing. And a prize dud at that. Taylor was an awful signing, too. He was a stand in striker at Bristol Rovers when we signed him. He was originally a defender. Thanks a lot, Rocket Ron.

Neil Emblen was such an anonymous player at Palace, I'd forgotten about him already. £2m for an injury prone player with little or no Premiership experience. Ouch. Only Palace are big enough mugs to fall for it.

[brighton_eagle]

Ismeal didnt look too bad to start off with, but a particularly bad game against Wimbledon I think and it all went pear shaped rather quickly.

Padavano maybe a candidate, but he did show the odd glimpse of class on the rare occasion he was fit enough to play.

Dyer certainly shouldn't be on the list.

Rubins could be up there.

But in terms of the negative impact it had overall on the club, Akinbiyi must win it.