Jump to content


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by skadupuk

  1. 3 minutes ago, dr_manhattan^ said:

    I guess it's easier to swallow when it's not costing you every three games.


    They need to continue with it being shit for consistency, annoying and terrible as it is they can't change mid-season. 


    Palace were given a goal at West Ham where Ayew was onside by a ball hair, I can't therefore be pissed about this disallowment.


    Doesn't mean I like/support VAR, just that I am depressingly accepting of it's shiteness this year.

  2. As a Palace fan:


    Wasn't a penalty, he poked the ball with his toe before the contact with Zaha's legs.


    Offside is offside, we've had a few go our way similarly so can't complain.


    I still hate both decisions. 

  3. Even the commentator is discussing how not a single Palace player can claim to have had a good game.


    It's important not to get in the mindset that Palace should be performing at a much higher level (that's been the downfall of many a team, see Charlton re. Curbishly), but there is nothing this season to suggest we are getting any better at the basic and glaring holes in our performances (basic passing for one).


    30 goals in 35 games just isn't good enough, and the players seem to give zero fucks as the squad gets older and older.


    There's no plan B when things aren't going our way either.


    Looking like we are going to lose 8 on the bounce to finish off the season.





  4. 11 minutes ago, skadupuk said:

    Expect a substitution around the 80th minute where he brings on James McCarthy for James McArthur, to ensure the blandness continues (and to mildly confuse the commentators)


    It's happened early! (James McArthur is injured)

  5. Palace have been shite just as we have been for a large chunk of the season, I can't wait for Roy's post game presser which will ignore the dreadful passing and the fact that he's playing three DM's against a Villa team that's shipping in the goals this season.


    Expect a substitution around the 80th minute where he brings on James McCarthy for James McArthur, to ensure the blandness continues (and to mildly confuse the commentators)

  6. 5 minutes ago, hercules said:

    Week in week out, they do not have a clue. How many replays do they need and still get it wrong. Where do they actually think your shoulders are? 


    And you just know that if that part of his body was offside it'd be called as being part of the body that can play the ball.

  7. 25 minutes ago, BabelRich said:

    Massively  high I would say when you look at the line up again. 

    Benteke is starting for Palace so he will of course suddenly look like he did when he played for us. 


    I really think you've got no worries on the Benteke front in terms of goals, he still offers something to the team but he's not magically going to find goalscoring form.


    I think you'll have a decent chance to pick up 3 points against us, we've had one half decent performance out of the last 4 and that was against a Chelsea side that even West Ham beat.

  8. 6 hours ago, Gotters said:


    So what we can learn from this list is being Man Utd helps, having a rat diver helps (Vardy, Saha, Hazard, Sterling, Salah), being Wolves or Arsenal doesn't help. The exception to this flawless logic is Spurs, who are full of divers but seem to not get the pens in the league.



    It's Zaha not Saha.


    When Arsenal came to Selhurst earlier this season the ridiculous number of fake head injuries the Arsenal squad pulled to waste time when in the lead were all outside the box (I lost count by the end of the game).


    Maybe the take away from the above is that your boys are just shit at diving in the right place to get penalties?



  9. 24 minutes ago, skadupuk said:


    Don't worry, we've been terrible and our keeper has gifted the opposition another goal after his howler v Burnley (before lock down he was outstanding, noone can work out why he's gone all 'Joe Hart' on us)


    Another Palace error and another gift for Leicester, thank god we got to 42 points already otherwise we'd really be in trouble based on the last 3 games.

  10. 1 hour ago, Stopharage said:

    Was hopeful for our game against Palace. Just seen that Jon Moss is reffing and he always makes abject decisions against us. Concerned.


    Don't worry, we've been terrible and our keeper has gifted the opposition another goal after his howler v Burnley (before lock down he was outstanding, noone can work out why he's gone all 'Joe Hart' on us)

  11. Palace/Burnley tonight for free on Amazon. 


    With both teams staring mid-table  in the face there's not much to play for, it's either going to be an utterly dreadful 0-0 or a moderately more entertaining scrappy 1-0.


    Zaha looks like he's out for us, so I'd stick your money on 1-0 Burnley (90th minute in off someones arse from a poorly delivered corner).



  12. 2 hours ago, rgraves said:

    You're assuming just finishing the season is cost-free - it's not. All those clubs are going to be faced with unfulfilled sponsorship deals, season ticket refunds, TV rights shortfalls etc - stopping now isn't free. Playing on was going to cost more, but it wasn't £500k vs £0k - it was more £500k vs £200-300k. Still cost, but what price the integrity of the whole thing?


    The whole 'football family' thing has been shown to be a total nonsense - when they really needed help, the premier league and the championship just turned a blind eye to something that was, in the grand scheme of things for them, a trivial, tiny amount of money.


    Even using your figures - L1 and L2 - £24m max - that would be just about £1m per premier league club. they drop that on a teenage no-hoper from some dutch league virtually every month. If the EFL could not make an argument that was worthwhile for the premier league, they are useless.


    I can't say 100% either of us is right/wrong, but I do think the clubs have a better view on the financial feasibility and I think only 2 or 3 chose to argue the case to resume in League 1 which is a very small number given the numbers affected in terms of relegation and playoffs. 


    I do completely agree that the entire set up of football stinks, and that it should be possible for clubs further up the chain to fund it (and the leagues below).


    I have one friend who works for a National League South side and another who plays for the same team, both are in real trouble (the player uses the wages to top up his low earnings as a roofing labourer, he has a couple of kids), the money that some Premier League footballers earn in an hour would likely cover both my friends for a month.     

  13. 21 hours ago, rgraves said:

    I never said it would come close - it doesn't have to. At the moment they have zero income, nothing. But they are still paying players, they do still have commitments to sponsors, season ticket holders etc. Playing games behind closed doors would allow them to get some benefit - and it would be cheaper as obviously they don;t have to have the same number of stewards, catering staff etc as they would for a regular matchday.


    I get it's going to cost, but it's not quite as cut and dried as it seems - they are still paying players, they do still have contracts to honour - some of the money they will lsoe from *not* playing matches could have been grabbed back. I think it might have been slightly more expensive to carry on, but not considerably more - and it would have retained the integrity of the whole thing. Tranmere might still have gone down, but would have accepted it no problems if it was decided on the pitch rather than by a very generic formula - I mean, they even decided to use direct PPG rather than any weighted option to take into account home/away for example.


    At the end of the day, the EFL have made a huge mess of all of this - they have multiple leagues that have now all gone about this in different ways - should have been much more consistency - and yet here we are with the Championship about to come back literally days after league 1/2 made out it was impossible to carry on. The finances we're talking about to test (say 500k) should have been trivial to the EFL, they should have self funded that directly with no burden on individual clubs at all. If, as a random example, Spurs can borrow 175m, I think the EFL should have been able to borrow 1m (maybe from the premier league) to avoid this farce and finish off their own competitions.


    They also specifically advised clubs NOT to furlough players early on as "football will be back". If they'd not done that, then chances are clubs would have been in a much better position to actually get going again now when it would have been possible. They've dithered and killed one season, and still have no clue about what happens next.


    You makes some valid points around things that could have been done better, and I'd agree the state of the higher ups is disgusting in terms of the differentiation in support/treatment.


    The estimated costs per an article (from a quote from Gillingham) is "The reality is for us to finish the season would cost between £350,000 and £500,000 for each League One and League Two club." 


    If we accept that the league/EPL isn't going to provide cash to support teams (and at up to £12 million per league it is a big ask) then if that's the investment involved for every club then it's going to be pretty difficult to convince the clubs that may go from 11th to 9th for that outlay that it makes sense when they are already in the shit, it's too narrow a viewpoint to just consider the promotion/relegation sides, integrity for many sides comes second to surviving and the smaller sides are already on the brink.






  14. 4 hours ago, rgraves said:

    As a Posh fan, I'm supporting Pompey all the way in the play-offs - at least they had the guts to vote to carry on playing, unlike Wycombe who voted to stop playing clearly aware that it meant them catapulting up the table and actually having to play (which suddenly they then can miraculously manage). In essence, a couple of clubs in the play-offs have gambled they are going to win by voting to stop playing - had we continued they might have gone up automatically - but they've thrown that option away now - and only one of them is going to make it.


    A lot of clubs appear to think that ending this season is going to fix things - it's not. It's not going to magically make the money start rolling in again. We're not going to see fans back in the grounds any sooner. I suspect we're going to see some clubs go into admin before they kick another ball now. I genuinely think if they'd decided to get games going again, fans would have paid to watch streams, have cut-outs in seats etc - it would have brought some income in at least. Now, they've got nothing.


    I appreciate the frustration, but the infrastructure needing to be put in place in terms of technology and medical support as well as testing would have been a prohibitive cost with no guarantee of coming close to recouping for many clubs.


    The concept of paying for streams, when the product (in terms of presentation, number of cameras etc.) is going to be a distance away from the usual standard of televised/streamed football is also going to limit the amount people will pay, and given one stream covers a household of fans you are limited even further in terms of numbers, it's ultimately not going to come close to replacing match day ticket revenue (and supplemental match day income) which is what keeps many clubs at this level (just about) in the black.

  15. Palace V Bournemouth the first BBC Premier League game ever (one to bank for future pub quizzes, if that's ever a thing again)


    Means Palace should be (with Bournemouth) holders of the record of highest TV viewership of a EPL game (currently 4.04 Million), we will hold that record for precisely the gap between that game and the next, more exciting game on BBC.

  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. Use of this website is subject to our Privacy Policy, Terms of Use, and Guidelines.