Relive every moment of every first team game since the beginning of the 2005/06 season. Our archive of matchday threads originally posted in the General Discussion Forum.
BMLGirl wrote:
Just saw Cresswell in Starbucks, Loughton - heard him saying he should be back for Palace and that Carroll is not far off and may also be back for this game so fingers crossed.
I can see the headlines already...
Aaron Cresswell caught trying to sober up in Starbucks after huge night on the town
In all seriousness that'd be great news - strikes me as the type that won't need another month to get to that mythical "match fit" status either.
Jinx already said, Sakho has been fit for months but is refusing to play [/quote]
I find that hard to believe, if I refused to do my work I would be sacked, also Ex mentioned that Bilic was willing him another go. I'm sure we would have heard a lot more by now if he was refusing to play.
Jinxed also said we had signed Carlos Bacca and that we were going to be taken over by rich investors
I am not saying what he says about Sakho is incorrect, but his word shouldn't be taken as gospel. He has got as many things wrong as he has got right
As i mentioned earlier in this thread, I am intrigued by the communique coming from Bilic about Sakho as that seems to suggest he is still in our plans (although could just be cheese to mask the real issue)
If Cresswell not fit then play Ogbonna left back and Oxford centre half
Tough choice between Kouyate and Noble but Palace are an athletic team so think we need the additional size and strength of Kouyate in this game, plus his ability to break quickly
Would be great news if Cresswell is back but it was a serious knee injury, I would rather we introduced him lightly. Depending on the game, maybe 20 minutes at the end.
Feghouli on the wing, perfect game to play as we did last year away from home catching teams on the break, he is the man for this.
boleyn24 wrote:
I find that hard to believe, if I refused to do my work I would be sacked, also Ex mentioned that Bilic was willing him another go. I'm sure we would have heard a lot more by now if he was refusing to play.
He has refused to play for months, although not sure whether that has remained the case, but up until the beginning of the PL season its definitely the case
My take on it is that the owners will do anything to potentially recoup some kind of transfer fee, so staying silent on this scumbag at least gives a chance of getting a few million back in the next window
I would be absolutely amazed if he ever played for us again. If he does, there will have been an absolutely huge turn around in events and attitude
chalks wrote:
My take on it is that the owners will do anything to potentially recoup some kind of transfer fee, so staying silent on this scumbag at least gives a chance of getting a few million back in the next window
But surely any buying club will know this anyway if true (or could quite easily find out). If the club keep saying he is injured then that will put off prospective buyers anyway??
Crouchend_Hammer wrote:
But surely any buying club will know this anyway if true (or could quite easily find out). If the club keep saying he is injured then that will put off prospective buyers anyway??
I know exactly what you mean but I simply cant think of any other reason why they would be consistently saying he is injured with a bad back, when his only injury is a bad attitude
sharphammer wrote:Lanzini in a defensive midfield role?!?
A deep lying midfielder rather than a defensive player. Though he doesn't tend to get his foot in too often, he is capable of working hard closing down the opposition. But... the reason I'd play him there is because he's capable of carrying the ball forward at pace from a deep position - and more importantly, he tends to make the correct decision at the end of it and not run down blind alleys. For this to work though, you'd need a proper combative defensive midfielder with him, which is why I picked Obiang.
I chose Fernandes for the attacking midfielder as I feel that most of our chances come from high balls into the box - the best ones usually from Payet. With Fernandes being a natural attacking midfielder, and 6 foot 3, he'd be able to get himself into the box to support the striker when the crosses come in. Lanzini is more of a link up player - he's not really a threat from crosses. I think my line-up would help us to build properly from the back instead of resorting to long balls from Reid and Collins, would give us a good delivery from either side of the pitch, and good height in the box.
chalks wrote:I know exactly what you mean but I simply cant think of any other reason why they would be consistently saying he is injured with a bad back, when his only injury is a bad attitude
I have heard that it much more than a bad back. I do find it strange that there never seems to be an official explanation.
An injury is an injury and it then becomes a case of how bad it is. I find the almost total silence on the situation baffling which only leads to rumours taking over.
[/quote]
