Crystal Palace vs Tottenham Hotspur - Match Thread

[MyNameIsNicolaBerti]

I fully agree that we should support any player who puts on the shirt.. But at one point i almost smashed my tv because of Aurier. He was poor and that is being kind. I wont write him off but he has work to do to get to the required level. Eriksen had to cover his area and numerous occasions he just jogged back.

I dont think KWP would have done any worse than Serge to day. He was easily the weakest players on both sides of the pitch.

I agree, but the problem is a catch 22. Don't play him and he doesn't acclimatise and realise our investment. Do play him and maybe a more reliable player is kept out of the side. A tough one for Poch and I think he's gone about it the right way so far by giving him a decent amount of minutes but not playing him all the time.

 

[shelfmonkey]

And we do too.

Not against the shit we don't.

 

[rabbikeane]

We've bought another Kyle Walker, he need time to develop and mature.

 

[theShiznit]

I think Dier pays the price for being Versatile. This is lost on so many supporters. So his positional discipline is often compromised as a result of chopping and and changing from one week to the next.

That's the problem with players that can play multiple roles, they often turn into jacks of all trades.

Eric is young so is still learning in all positions, and LCB is a new position to him and very much different to RCB or right/centre of a three. I think he is better suited to playing CB as he has picked up some poor habits in CM, mainly being overly casual in possession and unaware of impending pressure, but he has all the traits to be a good CM/DCM and CB (not so much RB) for years to come without being labelled a JOAT's

 

[rossdapep]

Not against the shit we don't.

I agree the 90s United used to be pretty much as you say. But 00s United used to scrape by pretty commonly after a bit of am indifferent performance. Remember plenty of 'United got lucky' comments around this time.

 

[Damian99]

We've bought another Kyle Walker, he need time to develop and mature.

And how to take a "throw in" correctly, he'll get there?

 

[ajspurs]

We've bought another Kyle Walker, he need time to develop and mature.

Walker never felt as much a liability as Aurier does now, not in my opinion anyway. Not that I can greatly remember Waker's first few seasons with us so I'll accept if I'm wrong with that in mind. But I agree with the sentiment, Aurier needs time to develop and clean his game up. Its whether he does change and improve that will determine if he has a long term future with us I think.

 

[haxman]

monumental result and that's all we should be worrying about. just massive in the scheme of things.

love the inevitability of us scoring these days, even with a few minutes to go you knew we'd get more chances.

It didn't seem that inevitable on 87 minutes!

 

[davidmatzdorf]

As usual, the comments are 95% about how Spurs played badly. We didn't. We had 75%+ of the ball and Palace only had one real chance (Aurier semi-redeeming himself for his treble-brain-fart at the throw-ins).

It wasn't about us. Palace defended brilliantly. We've had the same experience at least 30 times now over the past 3 seasons and still people here do not learn from it. It is extremely difficult for a good, creative, attacking team to score when a well-drilled opposition declines to attack, sits deep and packs the box. It doesn't matter if you whip in crosses, it doesn't matter if you put on pace, it doesn't matter if you try tricks and flicks and it scarcely matters if you shoot from distance. It is still extremely difficult to score if the opposition are organised and committed and defend in force. Palace also had a fair amount of good fortune with the run of the ball and we missed a few sitters - we always do.

Palace's midfield trio - all of them - spent the entire game in a line directly in front of their back four. That's why they couldn't get the ball to Benteke, despite playing two big, strong, quick attackers to link with each other - they scarcely tried, because their midfield was too far away from them. Hodgson is a vastly-experienced manager who knows how to coach team shape and that's exactly what he's done. But it didn't work, because we're too good and too relentless.

This is the kind of spectacle you get in the modern game when a team digs in to play for a point, especially when they're at home. They make the opposition look blunt and the game look turgid. But it isn't about the opposition [us] playing badly. It's about the defensive team playing well.

And it didn't work. We won. Because we're that good and we have the most mentally-tough striker I can recall seeing play for anyone.

 

[mpickard2087]

My problem with the fullbacks today and in many other games is that almost every time they are receiving the ball in the final third to feet, and stationary at that, when for me they should be running onto/ahead of the ball and attacking all that space. Too many footballers in general though who just cant do that and need it to feet. Attack the space and so with momentum and it would make such a difference.

 

[nightgoat]

Yes we did dominate and 'deserved' the win but all those stonewallers weren't called and all those sitters weren't finished. It felt real nilnil-y. Maybe it was my lack of faith and perhaps I need a new happy clapping lesson.

Hindsight's a wonderful thing when you can just go back and slag people off for posting things that didn't turn out right, right?

 

[Cruyff]

As usual, the comments are 95% about how Spurs played badly. We didn't. We had 75%+ of the ball and Palace only had one real chance (Aurier semi-redeeming himself for his treble-brain-fart at the throw-ins).

It wasn't about us. Palace defended brilliantly. We've had the same experience at least 30 times now over the past 3 seasons and still people here do not learn from it. It is extremely difficult for a good, creative, attacking team to score when a well-drilled opposition declines to attack, sits deep and packs the box. It doesn't matter if you whip in crosses, it doesn't matter if you put on pace, it doesn't matter if you try tricks and flicks and it scarcely matters if you shoot from distance. It is still extremely difficult to score if the opposition are organised and committed and defend in force. Palace also had a fair amount of good fortune with the run of the ball and we missed a few sitters - we always do.

Palace's midfield trio - all of them - spent the entire game in a line directly in front of their back four. That's why they couldn't get the ball to Benteke, despite playing two big, strong, quick attackers to link with each other - they scarcely tried, because their midfield was too far away from them. Hodgson is a vastly-experienced manager who knows how to coach team shape and that's exactly what he's done. But it didn't work, because we're too good and too relentless.

This is the kind of spectacle you get in the modern game when a team digs in to play for a point, especially when they're at home. They make the opposition look blunt and the game look turgid. But it isn't about the opposition [us] playing badly. It's about the defensive team playing well.

And it didn't work. We won. Because we're that good and we have the most mentally-tough striker I can recall seeing play for anyone.

The game is also about us. It takes two to tango. It's about what you do with the possession that counts and I would argue that at times we didn't do as much with it as, say Man City - since those are the levels we should be aiming for. I hope that many (95%?) of comments would still be about performance even if we had won 4-0 or 5-0 which is a realistic scoreline given the chances. The number of players not performing (not just a few) and thus the overall performance was concerning. Whilst acknowledging Palace's and our efforts, there is no harm in people on here focusing on targets. That's how we will get better.

 

[14/04/91]

Echo davidmatzdorf’s thoughts.

Just bear in mind how tough it is to break down a well-drilled premier league team. We plugged away and got our rewards.
We didn’t play badly (let alone ‘shite’ or ‘diabolically’) and if one of the earlier chances/missed open goals go in, we probably win 3-0.

 

[Thewobbler]

Man utd are awful atm.

 

[markiespurs]

Really don't understand what people were expecting from today's game

We came up against a Palace side, coached by Roy Hodgeson, who had 15 days between games in which to prepare and practice parking the bus, which they largely did to good effect.

We continued to chip away though and in the end got the goal that our dominance deserved. Yes we missed some good chances, but that happens to all teams, that's football.

 

[longtimespur]

How did City do at Palace.... was it 1-0 win or am I not remembering correctly

Thanks to those replying it was 0-0 so we did better than they.
Not bad for such a shite/crap/poor or whatever performance against a well drilled side.

 

[Sweetsman]

The refereeing in the EPL is a joke.

 

[Bobbins]

Agree, but they played alot better than we did today 90% of those games.

I'm not sure that they did - I remember hating the fact that they used to win every week even though a good chunk of their performances were pretty poor overall.

Of course, they were often faced with the same problem we are now - entrenched teams sitting in their own box. It's very difficult to play well against that kind of set up.

It's the ability to keep going and keep the pressure on whilst remaining rock solid at the back which wins titles.

 

[The Apprentice]

Kane missed a couple of sitters that he'd normally score in his sleep. I don't see the entire board jumping down his throat though.

Aurier will be fine. The miss was atrocious and his crossing abysmal today. But the talent is there. Poch will mold him into a world class RB given time.

What’s the talent? Genuine question?

 

[Sweetsman]

How did City do at Palace.... was it 1-0 win or am I not remembering correctly

I think that if they get Zaha back, they could pose a threat to other teams.