You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > If a manager plays Kelly and Ward as fullbacks
February 6 2023 7.10am

If a manager plays Kelly and Ward as fullbacks

Previous Topic | Next Topic


Page 4 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

 

View mattteo's Profile mattteo Flag 19 Dec 16 8.20pm Send a Private Message to mattteo Add mattteo as a friend

Originally posted by Username


Gayle? Come on. Benteke has as many goals as Gayle managed in the previous two seasons (in less minutes), and Wickham offers more than Gayle does in open play.

The summer was an unfinished job for sure, but that's definitely been exacerbated by injury.


DUDE! BODY!!!!! Come on!!!!


I think your problem is only counting goals in matches. WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THE TIME SPENT ON THE PITCH! You can't say that a player who is on for 80 minutes and one who came on for 10 minutes both played the same 1 match!! And there are sites specialized which can show EXACTLY how much one has played in the pas few years.

Gayle has had 15 goals and 2 assists in 2.700 minutes in the Premier League. Nevermind the Championship and the Cups, where he rocked.

IN the last 2.800 minutes in the PL Benteke has had 17 goals and 4 assists. That MAY seem better than Gayle, but 3 of his goals were penalty kicks, therefore I only leave him at 14 goals and 4 assists in 2.800 minutes, very much as Gayle.
So why does one cost 50 million and the other 5 million?
And before that he had 12 action goals and 2 assists in 2.400 minutes in the PL, not that satisfying.

Anyway, I WAS RIGHT when I told you Gayle is too good to keep on the bench. Now he's gone, he's the star of the Championship, the goalscorer, on his way up with Newcastle and he's wanted by half the Premier League clubs. Good for him! Who lost in this?


Don't even get me started on Wichkam. The guy has 10 goals and 4 assists in the last 4.000 minutes in the PL.
When will Wickham be as fast as Gayle? When will he be better in open play concerning pressing, winning balls, forcing the opposition to play long balls that can be easily recovered? When in this century will Wickham be able to do on the pitch the things Dwight Gayle is capable of?

Newcastle knew this, you don;t

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View sickboy's Profile sickboy Flag Deal or Croydon 19 Dec 16 8.22pm Send a Private Message to sickboy Add sickboy as a friend

Originally posted by mattteo


DUDE! BODY!!!!! Come on!!!!


I think your problem is only counting goals in matches. WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THE TIME SPENT ON THE PITCH! You can't say that a player who is on for 80 minutes and one who came on for 10 minutes both played the same 1 match!! And there are sites specialized which can show EXACTLY how much one has played in the pas few years.

Gayle has had 15 goals and 2 assists in 2.700 minutes in the Premier League. Nevermind the Championship and the Cups, where he rocked.

IN the last 2.800 minutes in the PL Benteke has had 17 goals and 4 assists. That MAY seem better than Gayle, but 3 of his goals were penalty kicks, therefore I only leave him at 14 goals and 4 assists in 2.800 minutes, very much as Gayle.
So why does one cost 50 million and the other 5 million?
And before that he had 12 action goals and 2 assists in 2.400 minutes in the PL, not that satisfying.

Anyway, I WAS RIGHT when I told you Gayle is too good to keep on the bench. Now he's gone, he's the star of the Championship, the goalscorer, on his way up with Newcastle and he's wanted by half the Premier League clubs. Good for him! Who lost in this?


Don't even get me started on Wichkam. The guy has 10 goals and 4 assists in the last 4.000 minutes in the PL.
When will Wickham be as fast as Gayle? When will he be better in open play concerning pressing, winning balls, forcing the opposition to play long balls that can be easily recovered? When in this century will Wickham be able to do on the pitch the things Dwight Gayle is capable of?

Newcastle knew this, you don;t

Yeah but your favourite player is Andros Townsend.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View ThatPetrolRelation's Profile ThatPetrolRelation Flag Ottawa 19 Dec 16 10.18pm Send a Private Message to ThatPetrolRelation Add ThatPetrolRelation as a friend

Originally posted by sickboy

Yeah but your favourite player is Andros Townsend.

Gayle always seemed fine when he had some time on the ball. You get more time on the ball in the Championship, and I assume he's not a lone striker again top class CBs.

Gayle would have been great to have on the bench, but he didn't want to sit on the bench. He got many opportunities, but he didn't make the most of them.

Next season he'll have the chance to prove he's prem quality, and prove all the managers who saw him as a bench player wrong.

If he bangs in 15 next season, he'll be able to say "I told you so". If not, he'll be like Murray, a legend in the Championship, but just a good player in the Prem.

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View rawpalace05's Profile rawpalace05 Flag Saltdean 19 Dec 16 10.22pm Send a Private Message to rawpalace05 Add rawpalace05 as a friend

Originally posted by Bexley Eagle

In my opinion Kelly was one of our better players yesterday. He was solid in defence and put in 2 or 3 excellent crosses. Ward also looked OK down the left. I have never thought Fryers is perm class but not seen enough of him to judge. Hennessy was at fault for the goal. His position was wrong and should have come for it.

Kelly was excellent

 


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!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View mattteo's Profile mattteo Flag 19 Dec 16 10.44pm Send a Private Message to mattteo Add mattteo as a friend

Originally posted by ThatPetrolRelation

Gayle would have been great to have on the bench, but he didn't want to sit on the bench. He got many opportunities, but he didn't make the most of them.


HOW DID HE NOT MAKE MOST OF THEM??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Read the stats from transfermarkt.com

What would you have wanted him to do?
Statistics don't lie. He was the best English striker after Vardy, Kane, Rooney, Sturridge and Wellbeck, who are all in the national team.

What did he need to do to get recognition?

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View OldFella's Profile OldFella Flag London 19 Dec 16 11.36pm Send a Private Message to OldFella Add OldFella as a friend

Originally posted by mattteo

...he's no manager.

Last time I commented on this site was 6-8 months ago when I begged you guys to support Gayle and push the coach into using him. I don't know how happy you guys are about Benteke, some feel he has started well, but Gayle is a huge loss.
Well, the better for him. He's doing really well in the Championship, he's a beast, both scoring and pressing the defenders, while Palace is doing awful under Pardew.

Now please, listen to me. This guy (Pardew) is impressive at being bad. You can't win many games with Kelly and Ward as full backs. Not even Souare is match winning material, but at least he was a left footed left back. Why in God's name doesn't the team have a left footed backup for the left back position? What was the manager thinking?
And don't tell me defenders only have to defend. I'd rather have them make 10 mistakes but contribute to 15 goals in a season, than make no mistakes and contribute with nothing. 6 wins and 4 loses bring you a lot more points than 10 draws.

And keeping Townsend soo long on the bench in the Chelsea game when Puncheon was soo out of it... The man wasn't even trying to run on the pitch, he had even sustained an injury!! Townsend needs to play as LEFT WING every match. He can cross amazingly fast for the striker. Yet, Pardew kept sending him in as right wing (even in the Chelsea game). Townsend doesn't have the technical ability to play on the opposite side of his favourite foot. All he knows from that position is to cut in and shoot. And Zaha is like that too. Playing Zaha and Townsend as inverted wingers destroys the team. They're not Robben, Messi, Ronaldo, Neymar or Mahrez to be able to do that. They're fast and athletic. Use them to run past defenders and cross!!

I've read some saying that the team played well against Chelsea and that Pardew should stay. Honestly, from an impartial point of view, Palace was awful. It was one of the worst displays of a home side I've seen. You are so scared of Chelsea, but outside of having a good run, that team hasn't got much. They might not finish in the top 4. They only have 3 attacking players (Hazard, Costa and Willian/Pedro), the rest are all defenders.
Crystal Palace is not headed in a good direction and, while I can't say that there is one really good manager in the Premier League, Alan Pardew surely is a lousy one


Edited by mattteo (18 Dec 2016 2.48pm)

On balance, fair to say you haven't been missed...

 


Jackson.. Wan Bissaka.... Sansom.. Nicholas.. Cannon.. Guehi.... Zaha... Thomas.. Byrne... Holton.. Rogers.. that should do it..

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Rudi Hedman's Profile Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 19 Dec 16 11.41pm Send a Private Message to Rudi Hedman Add Rudi Hedman as a friend

Originally posted by mattteo


HOW DID HE NOT MAKE MOST OF THEM??????????????????????????????????????????????????????????? Read the stats from transfermarkt.com

What would you have wanted him to do?
Statistics don't lie. He was the best English striker after Vardy, Kane, Rooney, Sturridge and Wellbeck, who are all in the national team.

What did he need to do to get recognition?

Gayle made little impact in 1st halves of Prem football.

 


COYP

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View james03's Profile james03 Flag Bangkok 20 Dec 16 1.34am Send a Private Message to james03 Add james03 as a friend

Really? People are still going on about Gayle?

The lad can score goals we know that. In the Championship he was always going to get 20+ in a season, especially when he is with the leagues top team.

His problem is that he does nothing else, he does not contribute to the team in any other way thus we were effectively a ten man team when Gayle played - we rarely dominated games so his chances of scoring were limited.

I believe he should have been loaned out to a Championship club two tears ago. The only chance we had was to get him playing regularly and understanding/learning the need to improve his all round game. Remember he only played a handful of games at Championship level when we signed him - before that it was non-league football. Too much too soon.

If Newcastle keep him next season back in the Premier League I can see him losing his place after a couple of months and being on the bench thereafter. That is UNLESS his all round game has improved. We will have to wait and see but keeping banging on about a player who has gone is pointless - we cannot wind back the clock even if we wanted to.

 


The secret of life is honesty and fair dealing. If you can fake that, you've got it made. Groucho Marx

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Username's Profile Username Flag Horsham 20 Dec 16 12.52pm Send a Private Message to Username Add Username as a friend

Originally posted by mattteo


DUDE! BODY!!!!! Come on!!!!


I think your problem is only counting goals in matches. WHAT'S IMPORTANT IS THE TIME SPENT ON THE PITCH! You can't say that a player who is on for 80 minutes and one who came on for 10 minutes both played the same 1 match!! And there are sites specialized which can show EXACTLY how much one has played in the pas few years.

Gayle has had 15 goals and 2 assists in 2.700 minutes in the Premier League. Nevermind the Championship and the Cups, where he rocked.

IN the last 2.800 minutes in the PL Benteke has had 17 goals and 4 assists. That MAY seem better than Gayle, but 3 of his goals were penalty kicks, therefore I only leave him at 14 goals and 4 assists in 2.800 minutes, very much as Gayle.
So why does one cost 50 million and the other 5 million?
And before that he had 12 action goals and 2 assists in 2.400 minutes in the PL, not that satisfying.

Anyway, I WAS RIGHT when I told you Gayle is too good to keep on the bench. Now he's gone, he's the star of the Championship, the goalscorer, on his way up with Newcastle and he's wanted by half the Premier League clubs. Good for him! Who lost in this?


Don't even get me started on Wichkam. The guy has 10 goals and 4 assists in the last 4.000 minutes in the PL.
When will Wickham be as fast as Gayle? When will he be better in open play concerning pressing, winning balls, forcing the opposition to play long balls that can be easily recovered? When in this century will Wickham be able to do on the pitch the things Dwight Gayle is capable of?

Newcastle knew this, you don;t

Did you miss the bit in my post when I stated 'in less minutes'?


Right now.

Wickham can lead the line, he can link play. He's quick and powerful and he can score goals.

Dwight Gayle is quick finisher who never once looked like he could operate as a single striker in the Premier League.

He had his chances. He had plenty of them. He needed to drop down a division and play week in, week out. If he was as good as you say in the Prem, there would have been 6/7 Prem clubs after him.

Edited by Username (20 Dec 2016 12.55pm)

 


Employee of the month is a good example of how someone can be both a winner and a loser at the same time.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Username's Profile Username Flag Horsham 20 Dec 16 12.56pm Send a Private Message to Username Add Username as a friend

Originally posted by Rudi Hedman

Gayle made little impact in 1st halves of Prem football.

Unless that impact was on West Ham players of course...

 


Employee of the month is a good example of how someone can be both a winner and a loser at the same time.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View mattteo's Profile mattteo Flag 20 Dec 16 4.22pm Send a Private Message to mattteo Add mattteo as a friend

Originally posted by james03

Really? People are still going on about Gayle?

The lad can score goals we know that. In the Championship he was always going to get 20+ in a season, especially when he is with the leagues top team.

His problem is that he does nothing else, he does not contribute to the team in any other way thus we were effectively a ten man team when Gayle played - we rarely dominated games so his chances of scoring were limited.

I believe he should have been loaned out to a Championship club two tears ago. The only chance we had was to get him playing regularly and understanding/learning the need to improve his all round game. Remember he only played a handful of games at Championship level when we signed him - before that it was non-league football. Too much too soon.

If Newcastle keep him next season back in the Premier League I can see him losing his place after a couple of months and being on the bench thereafter. That is UNLESS his all round game has improved. We will have to wait and see but keeping banging on about a player who has gone is pointless - we cannot wind back the clock even if we wanted to.

I don't understand what you guys mean by all round game. "He should improve his all round game"

wtf does that mean? Does a tall immobile striker have a better all round game? Modern football is more about running than anything else. That's why we have seen in the last 10 years a trend with the disappearance of the "brute" striker and the using of the "false 9" there. Yes, it's not always good, it doesn't always work. But it worked AT TIMES, FOR SOME TEAMS. Which is astonishingly more than how teams played football in the past, 20, 30, 40 years ago. The tall striker was untouchable, it was a "must".
Now, why did the trend change? Why do teams do this to themselves? Because it brings points!! That's why!! Statically, using faster, more agile strikers has brought more points than using tall ones, who only jump to the ball and use aerial duels. They also need to close in spaces fast and/or press when the team is not in possession, which diminutive strikers do better. Teams who use them receive less goals.

So how on earth could Benteke or Wickham have an all round game better than Gayle??


I've read some really hilarious replies here. That he's only good in the Championship, that he was guaranteed 20+ goals, that he plays for the best team there. He plays for the best team because he makes it the best team!!!
Nobody guarantees you 20+ goals. If you put Benteke in the Championship he will never score that much, even if his value is 10 times than the best striker's there. Heck, if you put Charlie Austin in the Championship, HE WON'T BE TOP SCORER!
Dwight Gayle is something unseen in the Championship since a long time, his goal+assist ratio considering the minutes he played is amazing and is a continuation of his usual ratio.

If a guy like Benteke was publicly promoted, if his value has reached these heights and is a marketing asset as well, it means that he had good managers. He's managed to trick an entire country into thinking he's worth all that. I've known him since before the Aston Villa days, since he was 17. I know what Benteke can do and I'm telling you- there are 50 strikers worth less than what you paid for him who could have offered more.
Gayle may not be regarded highly by you, but it's all about a manager's eye. That's what a good manager does. He sees things before they happen. Gayle proved. If you keep saying he didn't, then you're really out of it

 

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply
View Username's Profile Username Flag Horsham 20 Dec 16 4.34pm Send a Private Message to Username Add Username as a friend

Originally posted by mattteo

I don't understand what you guys mean by all round game. "He should improve his all round game"

wtf does that mean? Does a tall immobile striker have a better all round game? Modern football is more about running than anything else. That's why we have seen in the last 10 years a trend with the disappearance of the "brute" striker and the using of the "false 9" there. Yes, it's not always good, it doesn't always work. But it worked AT TIMES, FOR SOME TEAMS. Which is astonishingly more than how teams played football in the past, 20, 30, 40 years ago. The tall striker was untouchable, it was a "must".
Now, why did the trend change? Why do teams do this to themselves? Because it brings points!! That's why!! Statically, using faster, more agile strikers has brought more points than using tall ones, who only jump to the ball and use aerial duels. They also need to close in spaces fast and/or press when the team is not in possession, which diminutive strikers do better. Teams who use them receive less goals.

So how on earth could Benteke or Wickham have an all round game better than Gayle??


I've read some really hilarious replies here. That he's only good in the Championship, that he was guaranteed 20+ goals, that he plays for the best team there. He plays for the best team because he makes it the best team!!!
Nobody guarantees you 20+ goals. If you put Benteke in the Championship he will never score that much, even if his value is 10 times than the best striker's there. Heck, if you put Charlie Austin in the Championship, HE WON'T BE TOP SCORER!
Dwight Gayle is something unseen in the Championship since a long time, his goal+assist ratio considering the minutes he played is amazing and is a continuation of his usual ratio.

If a guy like Benteke was publicly promoted, if his value has reached these heights and is a marketing asset as well, it means that he had good managers. He's managed to trick an entire country into thinking he's worth all that. I've known him since before the Aston Villa days, since he was 17. I know what Benteke can do and I'm telling you- there are 50 strikers worth less than what you paid for him who could have offered more.
Gayle may not be regarded highly by you, but it's all about a manager's eye. That's what a good manager does. He sees things before they happen. Gayle proved. If you keep saying he didn't, then you're really out of it

Two of the most ridiculous things I've ever read on this forum.

Well done.

 


Employee of the month is a good example of how someone can be both a winner and a loser at the same time.

Alert Alert a moderator to this post Edit this post Quote this post in a reply

 

Page 4 of 6 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

Previous Topic | Next Topic

You are here: Home > Message Board > Palace Talk > If a manager plays Kelly and Ward as fullbacks