Based on the first half we should have been 2 or 3 up and then seen out a win.

Having not done so we are lucky to end up with a point as Palace deserved to get a win, and Sanchez saved us again.

Seeing a lot of negativity from fellow fans, which is understandable but I absolutely don't get the calls to get rid of Maresca. We were not awful today, we were pretty good for large periods and should have scored at least a few more goals than we did and if that happened in the first half, the game is completely different and we likely win.

We are in a poor run now and it shows in the belief the players are playing with. We always knew we had a young team that doesn't manage games well and doesn't have a good defence - the last 4 games have shown us exactly that.

Have faith, my brothers and sisters. We are still a good team and have a lot of room to grow.

42 minutes ago, axman2526 said:

Based on the first half we should have been 2 or 3 up and then seen out a win.

Having not done so we are lucky to end up with a point as Palace deserved to get a win, and Sanchez saved us again.

I get that we dropped 2 points but in what universe did Palace deserve to win that game. Yes we underwhelmed in the second half but we still had control of the game throughout.  Individual errors and inviting pressure on and increasing the atmosphere from the opposition stands is undermining the work that we do but our tactical naivety and mental weakness from the players.

Not a coincidence that this slump has coincided with the loss of Lavia alongside Caicedo. The problem is Maresca doesn’t trust the alternatives. Gallagher was sold to be replaced by KDH who doesn’t get a look in, while Veiga and Casedei are similarly not seen as worth the risk. While Fernandez seems to be at his best playing higher up the pitch.

Which has left Caicedo holding the fort in midfield and getting overrun. You can tell he was out on his feet after 70 mins because he was making uncharacteristic errors and getting caught in possession. It means we’re vulnerable at the back and with Jackson going through a lean spell, we’re not able to see games through the way we were at the beginning of the season. 

15 shots and only 1 on target.

I guess our set pieces coach has been training the attackers of late too.

Surprised it was not mentioned, maybe as we want to protect him on his debut, but Josh Acheampongs header from the corner in the first half was an absolute sitter, and had that been anyone else who missed that they woild have got it in the neck for missing the target.

Best chance we had all game.

Us letting in that goal was pure Ange ball wasn't it?

I don't blame Palmer, or Sanchez for that matter. At one up if Palmer is receiving that ball on the halfway line the ONLY players thar should be advancing should be Sancho, Neto and Guiu. Enzo should be alongside Palmer and Caicedo behind, with the back 4 in position.

No excuses for a fast player like Gusto to be caught our by Eze, even less for Cucurella to allow a slow lump like Mateta past him. Neither of them should be pressing on when Palmer had the ball.

9 hours ago, WhiteWall said:

 

I'd say these were about right.

https://www.goal.com/en/lists/chelsea-player-ratings-crystal-palace-nicolas-jackson-jadon-sancho/blt29fb7dd0196a5458#cs36174164c2934d2e

 

2 hours ago, just said:

I'd say these were about right.

https://www.goal.com/en/lists/chelsea-player-ratings-crystal-palace-nicolas-jackson-jadon-sancho/blt29fb7dd0196a5458#cs36174164c2934d2e

 

Yep, although I am not sure how Gusto warranted a 6 when compared to the ratings of others.

Comparing the narrative and the scores implies that plaudits are not given cheaply which I like.

I thought defensively we looked solid against a physically powerful opposition ( I would personally pick up Jackson and drive him to Selhurst in a swap deal for Mareta). I didn't like the continual misplaced passes from Gusto and the constant turning back and passing backwards, but then I have never really rated him.

Thought Caicedo and Fernandez played very well but were run into the ground.

But, I thought after a good first half Neto either got found out or faded heavily. Sancho looked dangerous throughout. Palmer has that elite element about him but with Jackson being BAU ot, more accurately SAU,  we don't make the most of our superiority so these additional forward players look ineffectual. Jackson frustrated me significantly,  not just because of his poor shooting, but his appalling spatial awareness.  Even the one he dragged past the post with his left foot, Neto was completely unmarked at the back post with an open goal.

I get that Jackson presses and we do need that from our striker, but he is so wasteful and error prone it prevents those other players from flourishing and showing their class.

13 hours ago, Dr. Socrates said:

Not a coincidence that this slump has coincided with the loss of Lavia alongside Caicedo. The problem is Maresca doesn’t trust the alternatives. Gallagher was sold to be replaced by KDH who doesn’t get a look in, while Veiga and Casedei are similarly not seen as worth the risk. While Fernandez seems to be at his best playing higher up the pitch.

Which has left Caicedo holding the fort in midfield and getting overrun. You can tell he was out on his feet after 70 mins because he was making uncharacteristic errors and getting caught in possession. It means we’re vulnerable at the back and with Jackson going through a lean spell, we’re not able to see games through the way we were at the beginning of the season. 

I don't think it has anything to do with Lavia in all honesty. He barely played in any of our games during that good run of form. The only one was the Villa game, the rest were late sub appearances and the Tottenham game he started he went off injured, and we still won. He started the game against City at the start of the season, got injured and then we won 4 of our next 5 league games.

Play Lavia, don't play Lavia, the issues are the still there. We make too many mistakes and lose control of the game too often. It was always going to happen once the attack struggled for goals. We face too many shots and make too many mistakes. Us losing control of games is down to the players not taking their chances and Maresca not reacting when the opposition starts to gain a bit of confidence.

11 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Surprised it was not mentioned, maybe as we want to protect him on his debut, but Josh Acheampongs header from the corner in the first half was an absolute sitter, and had that been anyone else who missed that they woild have got it in the neck for missing the target.

Best chance we had all game.

Palmer, too, missed a sitter from Neto's cross when we were one nil up. Jackson with another two easy chances. I mean I know it's frustrating and people call out for Maresca's head already, but was it really that bad of a performance? We could and should have easily put four past Palace, whereas did Palace ever pose a danger really? Truth is Sanchez was not bothered at all the whole match, apart from that Eze chance at the start of the second half, their only moment of danger was the goal that came from a brainfart moment by Palmer. Although once again, just like in the Fulham match, Sanchez takes the brainless of decisions and passes the ball in the center of the pitch when Cucurella was all alone in the wing and had more options to get rid of the ball if the passing channels were not favourable.

16 minutes ago, petre ispirescu said:

Palmer, too, missed a sitter from Neto's cross when we were one nil up. Jackson with another two easy chances. I mean I know it's frustrating and people call out for Maresca's head already, but was it really that bad of a performance? We could and should have easily put four past Palace, whereas did Palace ever pose a danger really? Truth is Sanchez was not bothered at all the whole match, apart from that Eze chance at the start of the second half, their only moment of danger was the goal that came from a brainfart moment by Palmer. Although once again, just like in the Fulham match, Sanchez takes the brainless of decisions and passes the ball in the center of the pitch when Cucurella was all alone in the wing and had more options to get rid of the ball if the passing channels were not favourable.

Not at all. Just incredibly frustrating that we didn't come away with all three points. We were miles better than in the previous three games, but just couldn't finish off a very tenacious Palace who are themselves on a good run (one defeat in 9/ 10). Our Lavia-less midfield still looks incredibly porous, and we need to accept that a pairing of Caicedo and Fernandez leaves us very vulnerable.

Glad I didn't watch this game. Already lost 270mins previous. Thought I might be a jinx and we still fluffed it.  I cope better when I don't watch us and we fail to impress.

22 hours ago, El regreso said:

Palmer f**ked up big time there lost the ball in the middle of the pitch.

He did, but he has plenty in the bank to be forgiven the odd gaff.

Sanchez should never have played the ball to him like that in the first place, but that's Sanchez for you.

3 minutes ago, Nibs said:

He did, but he has plenty in the bank to be forgiven the odd gaff.

Sanchez should never have played the ball to him like that in the first place, but that's Sanchez for you.

The bigger blame is on Enzo, Caicedo and especially Gusto and Cucurella. The two deeper midfielders should be behind Palmer covering, the full backs should never be beaten to the ball by Eze and slower Mateta, especially.

22 hours ago, Victor90 said:

Once our goals dried up, the problems came back.

We do tend to score our way out of trouble, our defending is just not good enough which is why I laughed at the notion of us being title challengers. 

Jackson doesn't offer enough and if it wasn't for his goals he would be getting bullied more than Morata did for his pitiful performances on the pitch. Now that he's in a draught we're finally seeing how little he offers in the striker role. I don't mind him as a rotational player, but I don't think he's good enough to be our starting striker. Nkunku has completely checked out, Noni appears to be having issues with the manager, Neto and Sancho don't have a lot of goals in their game, we have to rely on Palmer every single game.

I'm worried now, I can't see how we'll turn it around anytime soon. I'm not excited for the return of Lavia, he's an unreliable player, it'll only be another few games of him until he's out again anyway. 

Agree with majority of that Victor. But I think we can easily turn things around IF Maresca stops being so stubborn and gets a bit more proactive. I do think a fit Lavia will improve us massively too.

So 2 pens in fulham Ipswich, one called by VAR.

So I ask, should we have had a pen yesterday on Neto?

Just now, Nibs said:

Agree with majority of that Victor. But I think we can easily turn things around IF Maresca stops being so stubborn and gets a bit more proactive. I do think a fit Lavia will improve us massively too.

Be less Big Ange and more a proper coach.

Coming on 75 minutes you are winning 1 -0, you team has not managed to score a second, shut up shop, make defensive changes, see out fulham and Palace to get 5 more points and things loom a lot more rosey.

But no, play Ange ball and drop the points.

2 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Be less Big Ange and more a proper coach.

Coming on 75 minutes you are winning 1 -0, you team has not managed to score a second, shut up shop, make defensive changes, see out fulham and Palace to get 5 more points and things loom a lot more rosey.

But no, play Ange ball and drop the points.

Our record under Maresca when only scoring 1 goal is pretty pathetic and no matter who plays at the back our defence looks porous. What changes would have the ability to shut up shop? We need better goal scorers because we don’t have a JT, Ivanovic, Laboeuf, Desailly or Cahill sitting on the bench waiting to play the last 15 minutes. 

38 minutes ago, BS66 said:

Our record under Maresca when only scoring 1 goal is pretty pathetic and no matter who plays at the back our defence looks porous. What changes would have the ability to shut up shop? We need better goal scorers because we don’t have a JT, Ivanovic, Laboeuf, Desailly or Cahill sitting on the bench waiting to play the last 15 minutes. 

Veiga for Palmer/Neto/Sancho, James for Gusto.

 

James

Acheampong 

Colwill

Veiga 

Cucurella

 

Caicedo and Enzo ordered to sit, recover, and use passing range for Palmer/Neto/Sancho and Guiu to counter as they commit forward.

Was Palace, and fulham before, we faced, hardly attacking powerhouses, was not Liverpool, Newcastle or Arsenal.

If we cannot add a second, add bodies to make it hard for them to make to find any space.

2 hours ago, axman2526 said:

Veiga for Palmer/Neto/Sancho, James for Gusto.

 

James

Acheampong 

Colwill

Veiga 

Cucurella

 

Caicedo and Enzo ordered to sit, recover, and use passing range for Palmer/Neto/Sancho and Guiu to counter as they commit forward.

Was Palace, and fulham before, we faced, hardly attacking powerhouses, was not Liverpool, Newcastle or Arsenal.

If we cannot add a second, add bodies to make it hard for them to make to find any space.

James and Cucurella are not good defenders and if we are an attacker short they are more likely to go forward. This could leave more room when we have invited the other team to pile on even more than they are trying to do. I’d also say that if those 2 spend too much time in our penalty box there’s a penalty waiting to happen. 

Not adding a second goal isn’t going to cut it in the Prem especially against these bottom half teams. Last season we averaged 2 per game but this season we aren’t there despite a 6, a 5 and two 4’s. Take out our best 6 scores and we’re not averaging a goal a game in 14 which isn’t enough to compete at top 4 level no matter how many bodies there are at the back. We’ve been at least 6 goals short in the last 4 games and we should be getting them now because there might be slim pickings in May. Those will be 4 much harder games. 

1 hour ago, BS66 said:

James and Cucurella are not good defenders and if we are an attacker short they are more likely to go forward. This could leave more room when we have invited the other team to pile on even more than they are trying to do. I’d also say that if those 2 spend too much time in our penalty box there’s a penalty waiting to happen. 

Not adding a second goal isn’t going to cut it in the Prem especially against these bottom half teams. Last season we averaged 2 per game but this season we aren’t there despite a 6, a 5 and two 4’s. Take out our best 6 scores and we’re not averaging a goal a game in 14 which isn’t enough to compete at top 4 level no matter how many bodies there are at the back. We’ve been at least 6 goals short in the last 4 games and we should be getting them now because there might be slim pickings in May. Those will be 4 much harder games. 

Ah come on, I can understand what you are pointing to about Cucu having defensive lapses but Reece is one of the best defenders about. He would have remained disciplined, as he did to stop Newcastle equalizing when we played them at the Bridge.

Extended highlights:

 

How was that not required the ref to go to the monitor over the Neto "foul'?

FROM REF WATCH ON SKY THIS MORNING REGARDING MITCHEL TAKING OUT NETO

DERMOT SAYS: When I first saw it, I didn't think it was a penalty.

On the flight of the ball I thought Mitchell got the ball. But when you slow it down you do see he doesn't actually get the ball.

What I would say, however, is it is far from a clear and obvious error.

Sue Smith on Sky Sports News:

"It's a definite penalty.

"You can understand why the referee has got it wrong because from his angle it looks like Mitchell has got the ball. But from another angle you can see clearly he doesn't touch the ball.

"That's where the officials have to work as a team. VAR has to say the referee has made a mistake and send him over to the screen because there's an angle that shows no touch on the ball."

Stephen Warnock also agreed it should have been given

Is this the first time PGMOL this season have given us a penalty after FT?

Fans of mid-table teams and lower always cry that the traditional 6 benefit from the refs but I don't remember anyone being as shafted as us by the officials.

Edited January 6, 20251 yr by Ledgerson