Brighton v Palace
-
- Posts: 30616
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11032 times
- Has Liked: 5644 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Brighton v Palace
0-1 Gallagher again
Re: Brighton v Palace
linked with £50m move to PSG
-
- Posts: 30616
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11032 times
- Has Liked: 5644 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: Brighton v Palace
when you consider Wood went for 25 at 30 years old..............
This user liked this post: Cubanforever
-
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1696 times
- Has Liked: 789 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
Great player is Gallagher and on loan to Swansea 2 years ago. The time to have got him is before WBA signed him on loan. Wakey wakey recruitment. Almost identical to Reece James on loan to wigan and Mount on loan to Derby. I would almost work in recruitment for a free season ticket and expenses
This user liked this post: cockneyclaret
Re: Brighton v Palace
Most of this messageboard suggested Gallagher on loan, same with Bowen 2 years before he went to West Ham
Re: Brighton v Palace
Most of this messageboard suggested Gallagher on loan, same with Bowen 2 years before he went to West Ham
Re: Brighton v Palace
Really really good side Brighton, the way they're coached to play, for whatever reason they just can't put the ball in the net on a regular basis.
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: Brighton v Palace
How om earth are Brighton losing this, they've dominated yet are behind.
-
- Posts: 30616
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11032 times
- Has Liked: 5644 times
- Location: clue is in the title
-
- Posts: 30616
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11032 times
- Has Liked: 5644 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: Brighton v Palace
calamitous OG
Re: Brighton v Palace
that Tarique Lamptey is some player no idea why Chelsea let him go
Re: Brighton v Palace
Too young and too creative.
Better off sticking to the safety first approach in a 442.
You don't want any CM breaking the lines or into the box, that effects the "framework"
This user liked this post: cockneyclaret
Re: Brighton v Palace
Gallagher is an excellent player and many people did refer to him. Problem is he wasn't an option for us because he made it clear that he wanted to stay in the South and in doing so turned down Leeds.
-
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1696 times
- Has Liked: 789 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
Would not call West Bromwich the SOUTH.Thats when we should have moved for him, not 12 months later
Re: Brighton v Palace
Agree, they play some excellent football and really control games. To say they went from Hughton’s snore fest 4-4-2 stuff to this is quite impressive from Potter. Quite a low net spend too.
-
- Posts: 6676
- Joined: Sat Jan 23, 2016 7:13 pm
- Been Liked: 1696 times
- Has Liked: 789 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
Really improved since they beat us first game of season. Only lost 4 this season
-
- Posts: 15228
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3155 times
- Has Liked: 6742 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
I'd say they have been improving since they got in the PL.warksclaret wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 10:07 pmReally improved since they beat us first game of season. Only lost 4 this season
Progressive coaching, and i think a better budget.
Re: Brighton v Palace
They've definitely wasted money on some shite but their main core are made up of low budget signings. Sanches, Burn, Lallana, Gross, Moder, March, Mac allister barely cost £10m between them.
-
- Posts: 30616
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11032 times
- Has Liked: 5644 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: Brighton v Palace
Brighton had spent well over 200 million in transfers half between them getting into the PL in 2017 and 2020 https://www.brightonandhoveindependent. ... ed-2546482
Wasted money is an understatement !!
Also the players you listed cost more than 10 million from the fee's I can see online - but still, by today's standards are deffo good buys. Christ knows what their wage bill must be
-
- Posts: 1374
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 am
- Been Liked: 278 times
- Has Liked: 3308 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
And some were shocked they sacked Houghton. Amazing what a change can make
-
- Posts: 25697
- Joined: Sat Jun 24, 2017 9:43 pm
- Been Liked: 4644 times
- Has Liked: 9849 times
- Location: Glasgow
Re: Brighton v Palace
True! however their hardest task could be keeping hold of Graham Potter come the summer.cockneyclaret wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 10:26 pmAnd some were shocked they sacked Houghton. Amazing what a change can make
This user liked this post: cockneyclaret
-
- Posts: 15228
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:47 am
- Been Liked: 3155 times
- Has Liked: 6742 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
i doubt they'd see it as a waste, more an investment in progressing up the league.
-
- Posts: 30616
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11032 times
- Has Liked: 5644 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: Brighton v Palace
our problem is Dyche refusing to play loan players - who in their right mind would send someone on loan to us ? It's annoying and counter productive
This user liked this post: cockneyclaret
-
- Posts: 4955
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:04 pm
- Been Liked: 1007 times
- Has Liked: 725 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
Brighton not spending much money, heard it all now!
These 2 users liked this post: Top Claret cockneyclaret
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
For the 19/20 season, their wage bill was £103 million, 78% of turnover.Vegas Claret wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 10:25 pmBrighton had spent well over 200 million in transfers half between them getting into the PL in 2017 and 2020 https://www.brightonandhoveindependent. ... ed-2546482
Wasted money is an understatement !!
Also the players you listed cost more than 10 million from the fee's I can see online - but still, by today's standards are deffo good buys. Christ knows what their wage bill must be
Their gross debt increased by £26m from £280m to £306m, very largely from owner Tony Bloom in the shape of an interest-free, unsecured loan of £304m (up £32m). Overdraft cut by £6m from £8m to £2m. Since accounts closed, have taken on £37m bank loan against future TV money.
Bloom has also converted £30 million of debt into equity in the past.
Interestingly they're looking at increasing capacity at their ground to 32k and they've got 8k on a waiting list for a season ticket, that's despite them not winning anything, nor appearing in Europe etc.
It would be interesting to find out why they've got such a large waiting list.
Re: Brighton v Palace
Who said they haven't spent much money? can you please point me to the specific sentence where someone said that.
Re: Brighton v Palace
Bolton Wanderers Mark 2 ?GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 11:23 pmFor the 19/20 season, their wage bill was £103 million, 78% of turnover.
Their gross debt increased by £26m from £280m to £306m, very largely from owner Tony Bloom in the shape of an interest-free, unsecured loan of £304m (up £32m). Overdraft cut by £6m from £8m to £2m. Since accounts closed, have taken on £37m bank loan against future TV money.
Bloom has also converted £30 million of debt into equity in the past.
Interestingly they're looking at increasing capacity at their ground to 32k and they've got 8k on a waiting list for a season ticket, that's despite them not winning anything, nor appearing in Europe etc.
It would be interesting to find out why they've got such a large waiting list.
-
- Posts: 14566
- Joined: Thu Feb 01, 2018 9:55 am
- Been Liked: 3435 times
- Has Liked: 6339 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
It would take a major issue with Bloom for that to happen.
He's only 51, so they're fine for a while yet.
I think he's determined to get the A- established and then B- regularly in the top half and Europe.
If he can do that, then he's a better chance of being able to recoup most of the money he's put into the club.
Re: Brighton v Palace
That’s what Bolton thought with their benefactor!
-
- Posts: 30616
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 4:00 am
- Been Liked: 11032 times
- Has Liked: 5644 times
- Location: clue is in the title
Re: Brighton v Palace
thanks for the figures - they are screwed when Bloom goes, proper Jack Walker stuff.GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 11:23 pm
It would be interesting to find out why they've got such a large waiting list.
As for season tickets, that's crazy considering how many empty seats they have
-
- Posts: 4955
- Joined: Fri Jan 22, 2016 6:04 pm
- Been Liked: 1007 times
- Has Liked: 725 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
You can see the post from RV. 'quite a low net spend'.
I guess if we had spent 80m in the 19/20 season we would also be doing as well.
They have done well this season so far but have massively under achieved until now. I'll judge their success after a few years not half a season. They are not a good example to us, just one of many teams that have big pockets who push us down the pecking order. Just like Villa.
Re: Brighton v Palace
Potter has a net transfer spend of under £60m, not bad. My point was to turn the football from the negative rigid stuff of Hughton to the possession based progressive football they can play is quite impressive. They frequently have a high xG, creating chances but probably lack that clinical touch the next wage/transfer bracket brings. I hope one day we can get back to being able to retain the ball and play a better brand of football.superdimitri wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 2:09 amYou can see the post from RV. 'quite a low net spend'.
I guess if we had spent 80m in the 19/20 season we would also be doing as well.
They have done well this season so far but have massively under achieved until now. I'll judge their success after a few years not half a season. They are not a good example to us, just one of many teams that have big pockets who push us down the pecking order. Just like Villa.
-
- Posts: 1374
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 am
- Been Liked: 278 times
- Has Liked: 3308 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
GodIsADeeJay81 wrote: ↑Fri Jan 14, 2022 11:23 pmInterestingly they're looking at increasing capacity at their ground to 32k and they've got 8k on a waiting list for a season ticket, that's despite them not winning anything, nor appearing in Europe etc.
It would be interesting to find out why they've got such a large waiting list.
I work in Brighton and since they went up it seems everyman and there dog here have taken them on a their second team.
It's embarrassing, you have Chelsea, Liverpool, Man Utd fans buying season tickets to watch them.
When questioned they reply "it's Brighton, there my local team"
Just waiting for them to do 50/50 tops, they'll make a killing here
-
- Posts: 4529
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
- Been Liked: 2594 times
- Has Liked: 760 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
Great to see the complete lack of consistency in refereeing again.
Maupay's goal correctly ruled out as Butland had 2 hands on the ball. Could have done with a ref who knew the laws for our game at Newcastle.
Maupay's goal correctly ruled out as Butland had 2 hands on the ball. Could have done with a ref who knew the laws for our game at Newcastle.
Re: Brighton v Palace
The difference surely was that Maupay went to play the ball and knocked it out of his hands into the net, whereas Pope dropped it onto the unbeknown head of the Newcastle player?quoonbeatz wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 9:09 amGreat to see the complete lack of consistency in refereeing again.
Maupay's goal correctly ruled out as Butland had 2 hands on the ball. Could have done with a ref who knew the laws for our game at Newcastle.
-
- Posts: 4529
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
- Been Liked: 2594 times
- Has Liked: 760 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
Nah, doesn't matter. Two hands on the ball means he can't be challenged, accidental or not.
-
- Posts: 9459
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1183 times
- Has Liked: 778 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
It was a joke really after the correct award of the spot kick which was saved & got knocked out for the second corner due to the reason for the award palace players were terrified of touching Brighton players which could have led to the second spot kick, a more accurate comparison to the Newcastle game would be I think krul floored somebody the other night in the West Ham game like he did with vydra & I think he got away with 1 again.
Re: Brighton v Palace
Pope wasn't challengedquoonbeatz wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 9:58 amNah, doesn't matter. Two hands on the ball means he can't be challenged, accidental or not.
-
- Posts: 4529
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
- Been Liked: 2594 times
- Has Liked: 760 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
He wasn't challenged accidentally or otherwise because there was no challenge at all. The Newcastle player had his back to Pope and didn’t move. Pope landed on him which caused him to drop the ball. It was unfortunate for Pope but not an infringement against him. Different scenarios both resulting in the correct decision.
-
- Posts: 9459
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1183 times
- Has Liked: 778 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
If you look back at the incident when the 2nd corner came in it was Brighton who were doing the grappling & palace were frightened to do anything which pretty much led to maupay having the freedom of the box even though the goalquoonbeatz wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 10:19 amHe was. As I said, it doesn't matter if its accidental.
Butland had two hands on the ball and his momentum took him into Maupay. That's why the goal was disallowed. Same situation as with Pope.
was ruled out for direct action with butland. Wouldn’t be surprised if everything overall was taken into account.
-
- Posts: 4529
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
- Been Liked: 2594 times
- Has Liked: 760 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
You're missing the point. If the keeper has the ball in his hands, or between one hand and the ground, the ball is effectively dead. If the keeper drops or releases the ball on their own then fine, there's no infringement. If an opponent is involved, whether intentional or not, it's a foul every time.taio wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 10:24 amHe wasn't challenged accidentally or otherwise because there was no challenge at all. The Newcastle player had his back to Pope and didn’t move. Pope landed on him which caused him to drop the ball. It was unfortunate for Pope but not an infringement against him. Different scenarios both resulting in the correct decision.
Re: Brighton v Palace
I don't believe I am missing the point as my point is in line with the laws of the game. The laws will state something along the lines of it is not permitted for the goalkeeper in control of the ball to be challenged. The Newcastle didn't challenge in any way and Pope dropped and lost control of the ball in unfortunate circumstances.quoonbeatz wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 10:38 amYou're missing the point. If the keeper has the ball in his hands, or between one hand and the ground, the ball is effectively dead. If the keeper drops or releases the ball on their own then fine, there's no infringement. If an opponent is involved, whether intentional or not, it's a foul every time.
-
- Posts: 4529
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
- Been Liked: 2594 times
- Has Liked: 760 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
You've just said there was contact with a Newcastle player. That's a challenge. That's the law. It's one of the simplest ones there is, strange you find it difficult to understand.
Re: Brighton v Palace
Where did I say the contact was initiated by the Newcastle player? I've explitly stated he didn't challenge in any shape or form accidentally or otherwise. The contact was as a result of Pope landing on him. That doesn't constitute a challenge by the opposing player.quoonbeatz wrote: ↑Sat Jan 15, 2022 11:10 amYou've just said there was contact with a Newcastle player. That's a challenge. That's the law. It's one of the simplest ones there is, strange you find it difficult to understand.
I can understand there is an element of interpretation with such an incident in particular, so I won't go down the road of missing the point or finding things difficult to understand. If you want to, let's go "Outside now"
-
- Posts: 4529
- Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 11:03 am
- Been Liked: 2594 times
- Has Liked: 760 times
Re: Brighton v Palace
How many free kicks to you see given where a player just runs into another, where the opponent imply can't get out of the way and there's nothing they can do about it? It's exactly the same, it's still deemed a challenge whether they knew anything about it or not.
Re: Brighton v Palace
That's somewhat abstract - I'm judging based on that specific incident. If I remember right there was a widely held view on here that Pope was not fouled.