I guess it probably doesn't matter in any case. The fact that he is showing his ability or improving now (as you think) or if he's showing the class I always thought he had is irrelevant. The main point is we have a striker we can, hopefully, rely on and that is a key component to our survival. I don't disagree with your view that Murray may not be the long term solution - but I think that a striker in the Murray mould is what we need to bring out the best in Gayle.

Edited by Helmet46 (19 Jan 2015 8.38pm)

The funny thing about Chamakh is that historically, he is exactly what we need. In France, and early on in his Arsenal career he was both strong in the air AND a goalscorer. He adapted to playing a deeper role to suit what we needed last season, not necessarily because it was what he is best at (although he played the role very effectively, as we all know). If we could get back the Chamakh of his first six months at Arsenal, we would not need to discuss buying in a target man! I think we should try him in his traditional role further up the pitch and with a new set of expectations once he's recovered from injury. We may find the player we need is already here.

Sydenham by birth. Selhurst by the Grace of God.

Thank heavens someone else can see see my logic. To those saying 'he doesnt shoot enough' well his goals to shots ratio is pretty impressive. Get him up there with Gayley!

1/6/2010.a new era.we made it everyone!!!lets get the ball rolling for another 105 years of proud history.thank you cpfc2010.

palace forever.eeaaaaaaaaaaaaaggglless!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

All true except for one thing. Chamakh has the attributes we're looking for and, even if it was four years ago, HAS done it at this level. Gestede has the attributes we're looking for and has never done it at this level. That doesn't mean that he won't or can't, but it does mean that until proven otherwise he's more of a risk than Chamakh. Futhermore and in defence of Chamakh, he isn't that old and he hasn't done it for your years not least because he hasn't been given a chance to. We won't know if he still can't until we give him the opportunity. As he's already here and will cost us nothing, it seems sensible to try.

With regard to Murray whatever he did or didn't do last week or the week before, I would say it's fanciful to consider him a better option than a fit Chamakh in either the short or the long term but that, of course, is just my view.

Sydenham by birth. Selhurst by the Grace of God.

But that stack of people appear not to include Warnock or Pardew

Agree - Whilst he is undoubtedly the best finisher we have and certainly I would say can do it as this level without question, his all round game, to be that central striker, especially if we had only one up isn't there yet but given how he has come on I am confident he will be.

As for Gestede I am not convinced totally as he is unproven but as you say, if we can ship out Campbell who we know hasn't cut it, Glenn Murray, who, putting all sentiment aside doesn't look the part either its a calcukated gamble at a net £2m quid or so.

As a big fan of Chammers, our best technical footballer, I would like for the Everton game to see him up front with Gayle and Wilf wide. That for me is a very good front 3

As far as the rules go, it's a website not a democracy - Hambo 3/6/2014