Technically two separate entities, despite the connection.

RED AND BLUE ARMY!

Basically; it's in the link posted by the OP, but the first referenced Crystal Palace was an amateur team, who disappeared after a few appearances in some of the first FA Cups.

Fast forward a few years, and after the FA Cup found a home at the Crystal Palace, the owners of the Palace wanted a football team to play there to help build the attractions available to tourists, and thus CPFC was formed. Unless there's documents or a lost link, the two entities share nothing but a name.

RED AND BLUE ARMY!

I read somewhere (years ago, and cant remember in what), that palace were formed by workers, that worked in the crystal palace. As we know, built for the exhibition of 1851. The problem was, was that because they were working class men, the snobby gentry that played football wouldnt recognise us as a proper team.
I guess that would unofficially make us older than notts county.

sorry if its a bit vague, but thats roughly what i read.

a rich man is only a poor man with an obscene amount of money

Given any available information, I can't see any reason why the amateur team should be considered the same club that exists today and was founded in 1905?

RED AND BLUE ARMY!

I'm not saying they shouldn't be linked, I'm saying they are not the same entity, and thus we can't claim to have formed in 1861.

Interestingly, I didn't know that the original Crystal Palace was one of the founders of the FA. It is undeniable that that team had a significant impact on English football and football in and around the Crystal Palace, but they disappear for decades in the history books and are considered defunct by the time the new CPFC are formed in 1905.

RED AND BLUE ARMY!

Not being rude mate, but where are you getting your information if you didn't know we were one of the FA founding members..?

Of course but I think it's fair to say the club was re-formed in 1905.

We weren't, CPFC 1861 were.

I'm digging all over the place at the moment, mainly reaffirming what I already knew/thought. Not being funny, but no one here can recall the gap between the two clubs, so digging around with available information is the best any of us can do. I'm not shamed to say I didn't know that about founding the FA; I don't and won't know everything about this club and never claimed to. I knew they were different entities from word go though, and nothing I can find suggests they should be considered one and the same.

From what you've said, and not wanting to start an argument, there are 2 problems with your research LE:
You're being subjective, not objective.
And you haven't even looked at this sites' History section, otherwise you'd have known about Crystal Palace being founder members of the FA.

Any GCSE History student will tell you there are primary, secondary and tertiary forms of evidence, and without first hand evidence of someone playing for both teams, official team sheets and staff member sheets should be assessed..which I doubt you, or any one else for that matter has done, and without that it's all just conjecture, apart from the 2 Facts we have:

1) There WAS a team by the name of Crystal Palace playing in 'our' area from 1861-1876
2) There IS a team by the name of Crystal Palace playing in 'our' area from 1905-2014

Whether or not there is a solid link between the two would require proper investigation, looking at all original documents, not just a quick google/wiki search.

Other teams, for instance Arsenal, have changed their name (originally Dial Square) numerous times, not to mention location and essentially fan-base, whereas we have stayed in the same area and retained the name.

Tyhe problem is there was never a place called Crystal Palace way back in 1860. It was Upper Norwood and the Hyde Park Exhibition was located there once it was dismantled in about 1852. That was called the national exhibition centre. But it did look like a Cystal Palace and so the name then stuck, as The Crystal Palace. The men who stuck it all together got together to play soccer and asked the football club from where they came from to donate shirts. That was Aston Villa, hence the Claret and Blue, but this works teams played in Upper Norwood. No real connection with a team called Crystal Palace. Pity really as 1905 is a late start for such a great club!

From what you've said, and not wanting to start an argument, there are 2 problems with your research LE:
You're being subjective, not objective.
And you haven't even looked at this sites' History section, otherwise you'd have known about Crystal Palace being founder members of the FA.

Any GCSE History student will tell you there are primary, secondary and tertiary forms of evidence, and without first hand evidence of someone playing for both teams, official team sheets and staff member sheets should be assessed..which I doubt you, or any one else for that matter has done, and without that it's all just conjecture, apart from the 2 Facts we have:

1) There WAS a team by the name of Crystal Palace playing in 'our' area from 1861-1876
2) There IS a team by the name of Crystal Palace playing in 'our' area from 1905-2014

Whether or not there is a solid link between the two would require proper investigation, looking at all original documents, not just a quick google/wiki search.

Other teams, for instance Arsenal, have changed their name (originally Dial Square) numerous times, not to mention location and essentially fan-base, whereas we have stayed in the same area and retained the name.

Surely it's subjective to say that there is a link? There is no objective evidence to link the two clubs as a singular entity, and every single source I looked at regards the 1861 CPFC as being defunct, and CPFC 1905 being founded as a separate club. That are the facts that are presently available, and have been for some time. The FA themselves state there are no known links to the current day club.

What I forgot/didn't know/never noticed is irrelevant. Hell if I was trying to come across as a know-it-all, I wouldn't have innocently admitted to not knowing something, would I? My initial post was that they were separate entities, followed by a brief description of the accepted truths, and my acknowledgment about a piece trivia that has passed me by is irrelevant given that that particular trivia is irrelevant in establishing a link, and doesn't undermine the initial statement. Furthermore, it's entirely off topic and doesn't add anything to the discussion relating to the subject matter. I have no problems holding my hands up and saying I didn't know something, but I never claimed to be some sort sage in the history of the club, and merely offered the OP what is currently recognised.

The gap between the two clubs means it's unlikely that there were players across both clubs (1861's team sheets are a little patchy though), and I don't doubt that their MAY be documentation linking the two, but as of what we know, I stand by the accepted view that the two clubs are separate, and we have no claim to an 1861 founding.

RED AND BLUE ARMY!