Just heard an interview with Kevin Day who said he thinks Hodgson should leave at the end of the season.
Should make for an interesting interview with Hodgson at the end of the season awards if such event takes place.
Kevin Day on occasions interviews the manager at these events.
Mind you he also said we miss Schlupp more than Zaha and that John Terry would me a good managerial candidate.
So judgement is perhaps questionable!

Whoever does this job they can only work with what is available.
One of the most debatable points of the issue regards Palace now, or going forward is the actual quality of the squad.
If anyone want to believe it’s a squad capable of playing attractive football all the way to the top half of the Premier. Then just blame the manager, if it doesn’t , and believe just about anyone else could guide them there.
Everyone goes on about tactics, It’s a good job we have had some, because most games win or lose are strewn with individual basic errors. That shouts lack of quality,. If there is a problem with the manager ,it’s him putting up with it.

Massive double standard, but I'd expect that from the hypocritical supporters of Roy and their contrived arguments packed with excuses for his failings.

It's not personal. The guy is 73 and won't get another job after this one. Coming to Palace was a great opportunity for him to vindicate the Iceland Roy tag a dire period with him at the helm of the England team that resulted in national embarrassments in 2014 and 2016.

Unfortunately, he didn't know when to quit. He could have left with his head held high at the end of 2018 or 19, now he's just hanging on like a delusional, tactically inept despot dictator refusing to admit that they have been beaten.

Complaints about him aren't based on the style of football, nor because we are in the top half. It's based on the 8 game winless run at the end of last season, 7-0 defeats, 3-0 losses to 10 men teams, 3-0 defeats at home to Burnley.

He's been here 4 years, he is responsible for the squad, the tactics, motivation (or lack of), and ensuring each player is performing at the peak of their ability. He fails on all categories.

We've got a much better squad than Pulis or Pardew ever had. Perhaps a bit weaker than the one Allardyce had, but he is performing worse than all of them.

This season we are very very lucky that Southampton and Manchester United only decided to play one friendly each.

Let's get someone in and give them the chance to have a strong finish to this season and build for next year.

Steve Cooper? [Link]

Red and Blue Army!

My two penneth:

Performances aside, age alone means Roy will go either this summer, or at the very latest, next.

Then what? More anti-football? Or do we change direction? Can it even be done?

Asking if Southampton actually get better end results than us is a fair question, as is the response that, if the results are similar anyway, isn't it better to at least enjoy watching your team play?

I would be the first to say 'Yes', even with a 0-9 chucked in every season. In fact, don’t forget that Saints recently managed four top ten finishes, making Europe once. They play better stuff, and get better results than us for what seems a similar budget. I'd swap in a heartbeat.

But we cannot, and should not, aim to play like Southampton for two reasons, both I think get overlooked, particularly when calling for Roy to go:

1. Middling sized clubs can't survive playing decent football. Sadly, Southampton are the exception that proves the rule.

There are just so many clubs our size who played better football than us on their way out of the league, and so, so few to play better stuff and stay up. In fact, there is only one: Southampton.

Norwich, Bournemouth, Wigan, Fulham, Hull, QPR, Swansea, and post-Pulis Stoke etc all went down trying to play, whilst us, Burnley, Brighton (pre-Potter) and Newcastle all stayed up.

Forget about how long we've been in the league now. What matters is how our budget compares to the rest, and that hasn't changed. If you were a hedge fund manager, or a bookie, you'd give a middling sized club a better chance of staying up, by far, if they played anti-football. Sad, but mathematically evident.

2. We can't play a pressing game like Southampton, or a possession game like Brighton without the kind of major overhaul that just isn't possible.

We came up and stayed up playing counter-attacking football. Each new signing has been to replace a part of that particular machine. Team style is dictated by your players, especially your best ones. Just as Villas-Boas failed spectacularly when trying to get Chelsea to play a high line that didn’t suit key players like John Terry and Petr Cech, I see no evidence whatsoever that Zaha or Eze are suited to a pressing game, or to keeping possession for its own sake. Our DNA is the polar opposite.

Southampton came up and stayed up playing positive football. Adkins built them that way in the Championship, and as good as Pochettino, Koeman and Hasenhüttl may or may not be, each inherited a footballing side, with signings made to suit that style. The new man at Palace won’t have that.

We can’t play like Southampton, now, or at any time in the foreseeable future. We will have to get used to highly conservative football as played by Pulis, Allardyce and Hodgson for a good while yet.

At the very least, whatever the style played, it would be nice to see a Palace team that knows why it is out there on the pitch, has a game plan that is executed with commitment, and generally looks as if the players have actually met before! Current performances remind me very much of England's last days under Hodgson - players milling about confusedly with no direction, unable to perform even the most basic tasks which they had no problem with at their respective clubs. The Hodgson effect.

Edited by southnorwoodhill (15 Feb 2021 5.26pm)