Bad points from today

[Thracian]

1) Two more home points lost, making 10 in seven we've dropped at home whenwe might well have saved at least six of those.

2) Failing to change our tactics to try an alternative way of winning the game. In the end we were so close to losing.

3) We still lacked any sort of scoring potential from central midfield.

4) Choosing Welsh ahead of Porter made no sense (unless the lad has left the country or something). Welsh didn't beat his man once and invariably lost possession with his final pass.

5) Low too showed once again that he cannot beat his man, doesn't get into the box and is lightweight generally.

6) Sylla wasn't as bad in his brief appearance as I've seen him be but he still failed to generate any pace on the flanks and still looked completely lost in many phases. Couldn't see the point in his selection or his coming on as a substitute.

7) Once again O'Grady and Wesolowski remained idle when we could do with them continuing to be involved. And the team needed it as so many ran out of steam towards the end.

[Simon]

1) Two more home points lost, making 10 in seven we've dropped at home whenwe might well have saved at least six of those.

2) Failing to change our tactics to try an alternative way of winning the game. In the end we were so close to losing.

3) We still lacked any sort of scoring potential from central midfield.

4) Choosing Welsh ahead of Porter made no sense (unless the lad has left the country or something). Welsh didn't beat his man once and invariably lost possession with his final pass.

5) Low too showed once again that he cannot beat his man, doesn't get into the box and is lightweight generally.

6) Sylla wasn't as bad in his brief appearance as I've seen him be but he still failed to generate any pace on the flanks and still looked completely lost in many phases. Couldn't see the point in his selection or his coming on as a substitute.

7) Once again O'Grady and Wesolowski remained idle when we could do with them continuing to be involved. And the team needed it as so many ran out of steam towards the end.

Agree with everything above except for Welsh- I can think of at least twice when he beat his man and he did look a threat going forwards- unlike Low who was useless.

Was again mystified as to why Porter wasn't at least on the bench.

[C-man]

1) Two more home points lost, making 10 in seven we've dropped at home whenwe might well have saved at least six of those.

2) Failing to change our tactics to try an alternative way of winning the game. In the end we were so close to losing.

3) We still lacked any sort of scoring potential from central midfield.

4) Choosing Welsh ahead of Porter made no sense (unless the lad has left the country or something). Welsh didn't beat his man once and invariably lost possession with his final pass.

5) Low too showed once again that he cannot beat his man, doesn't get into the box and is lightweight generally.

6) Sylla wasn't as bad in his brief appearance as I've seen him be but he still failed to generate any pace on the flanks and still looked completely lost in many phases. Couldn't see the point in his selection or his coming on as a substitute.

7) Once again O'Grady and Wesolowski remained idle when we could do with them continuing to be involved. And the team needed it as so many ran out of steam towards the end.

1. Correct.

2. We were creating enough chances we didn't need to change our tactics.

3. When, this season, have we ever had a scoring threat from the centre of midfield?

4. Although Porter is a good talent, he gives us no width, hence us not creating much when he was in the team. Since he's been out, we've created a lot more.

5. Agree, Low is shocking. How many perfect long balls Logan kicked up to him and he failed to head i have no idea.

6. I was shocked at his lack of willing to run.

7. Maybe they should have both come on, but I'm not exactly one to say.

I'll do the supporting, Kelly can do the managing.

[vanfox12]

We gifted them a point through poor defending and if we had lost it would have been through our own ineptitude and not Taylors ability to manage a team. May be we shouldn't be too surprised that we didn't win today after 3 games in a week but then again Palace were poor and their for the taking if only Kelly had tried a few other things such as bringing on O'Grady and as you say playing Porter (or at least having him on the bench). This team is long way off winning every home game but still at least we're not Leeds.

[Micky]

1) Two more home points lost, making 10 in seven we've dropped at home whenwe might well have saved at least six of those.

2) Failing to change our tactics to try an alternative way of winning the game. In the end we were so close to losing.

3) We still lacked any sort of scoring potential from central midfield.

4) Choosing Welsh ahead of Porter made no sense (unless the lad has left the country or something). Welsh didn't beat his man once and invariably lost possession with his final pass.

5) Low too showed once again that he cannot beat his man, doesn't get into the box and is lightweight generally.

6) Sylla wasn't as bad in his brief appearance as I've seen him be but he still failed to generate any pace on the flanks and still looked completely lost in many phases. Couldn't see the point in his selection or his coming on as a substitute.

7) Once again O'Grady and Wesolowski remained idle when we could do with them continuing to be involved. And the team needed it as so many ran out of steam towards the end.

Or you could look at it as follows...

1. We gained a good point considering we had so many players missing and we had players carrying knocks. And we were playing against a team with a stronger squad than us.

2. We kept a good solid formation throughout the match which has served us so well of late. SEVEN games unbeaten - "if it ain't broke...".

3. Welsh was chosen ahead of porter due to the fact that porter lacks experience and of late has found the going a little tough. Welsh has just arrived and is hungry and was given a chance to prove his worth.

4. Sylla came on a did reasonably well considering he has had no first team football for a long time. Sylla wouldn't have been near the first 11 had we not been struggling with injuries.

5. O'grady was idle because the more mobile pairing of hammond and hume would keep the backline of palace on their toes. And O'grady has been found more than wanting of late.

6. Weslowski remained idle because he wasn't fully fit and wasn't worth risking at that stage of the game.

Opinions, opinions......

[Thracian]

Or you could look at it as follows...

1. We gained a good point considering we had so many players missing and we had players carrying knocks. And we were playing against a team with a stronger squad than us.

2. We kept a good solid formation throughout the match which has served us so well of late. SEVEN games unbeaten - "if it ain't broke...".

3. Welsh was chosen ahead of porter due to the fact that porter lacks experience and of late has found the going a little tough. Welsh has just arrived and is hungry and was given a chance to prove his worth.

4. Sylla came on a did reasonably well considering he has had no first team football for a long time. Sylla wouldn't have been near the first 11 had we not been struggling with injuries.

5. O'grady was idle because the more mobile pairing of hammond and hume would keep the backline of palace on their toes. And O'grady has been found more than wanting of late.

6. Weslowski remained idle because he wasn't fully fit and wasn't worth risking at that stage of the game.

Opinions, opinions......

We'll agree to disagree I think.

[Benji]

I think kelly summed it up quite well in his post-match conference. Wrong decisions at the wrong times, numerous times hume or hammond would shoot when there were better passing positions but yet passing when it was perfect for a shot. It cost us at least a goal.

Low was shocking, he doesn't want to be here, he doesn't go for the ball, especially in the air, it's just an aimless leap with no attempt to actually head it.

I really cannot agree about Welsh though, i thought he was easily one of our better players, he made attacking an exciting thing again, the fact that a lot of the crosses met no one was more due to the fact that there was very rarely more than one player that could keep up and get in the box in time.

Our set pieces are disgraceful, they need sorting NOW, is it really that hard to not gift the goalie a simple catch?

[Tommeh]

Totally disagree about welsh and porter. Welsh is far better equiped for the league and never stops running he also isn't pushed off the ball as easily as porter. He made countless breaks down the left and won many corners which we didnt take advantage of. Welsh had a very good game, should be in ahead of porter, who i agree should at least be on the bench. But I'm delighted welsh is back with us.

[Yaxx]

1) Two more home points lost, making 10 in seven we've dropped at home whenwe might well have saved at least six of those.

2) Failing to change our tactics to try an alternative way of winning the game. In the end we were so close to losing.

3) We still lacked any sort of scoring potential from central midfield.

4) Choosing Welsh ahead of Porter made no sense (unless the lad has left the country or something). Welsh didn't beat his man once and invariably lost possession with his final pass.

5) Low too showed once again that he cannot beat his man, doesn't get into the box and is lightweight generally.

6) Sylla wasn't as bad in his brief appearance as I've seen him be but he still failed to generate any pace on the flanks and still looked completely lost in many phases. Couldn't see the point in his selection or his coming on as a substitute.

7) Once again O'Grady and Wesolowski remained idle when we could do with them continuing to be involved. And the team needed it as so many ran out of steam towards the end.

1. I agree. That was what I found so frustrating about the game today. We had the potential to take the game but seemed to lose our way. A win would have put us in the top 10.

2. I agree again. We lost the plot in the second half and Kelly should have acted sooner. And not with Sylla either. That was a nasty hark back to the dark days of Levein.

3. True, but at least Tiatto kept his head and put in a good performance. Unlike some. Midfield is still a very big worry.

4. I disagree. Although I like Porter he is rather lightweight and wouldn't have stood a chance today. Welsh at least gives us alternatives and I thought he did well given his lack of match fitness. He faded badly though and not having Porter on the bench (where is he?) meant we ended up struggling.

5. Low had a terrible game today but i wouldn't write him off just yet. He does at least give us a bit of weight and he has made a number of telling tackles. He can do much better I think.

6. Couldn't agree more.

7. For Kelly not to bring on one or both in the second half was an error of judgement that very nearly cost us the game. He needs to start thinking outside the of the box a bit more if we are to make any significant progress.

Having said all of that, there are some very encouraging signs and it's certainly a far cry from the dross of last season. There are more positives than negatives that's for sure.

[Joe.]

I think it was apoint gained. not two points dropped. Crystal Palace are still a good side with good players, and considering we had a couple of injuries I thought we did alright.

[lildave3]

I think it was apoint gained. not two points dropped. Crystal Palace are still a good side with good players, and considering we had a couple of injuries I thought we did alright.

But they are only a point above us, we could have gone above them. Palace are not up there with the best, and i think that we have players capable of getting into their team.