Oliver Glasner's Crystal Palace Are Not What They Seem

Watch Crystal Palace for ninety minutes and you'll see a team trying to play out from the back, rotate positions, and press in a 4-2-2-2 shape. Watch them for a season and you'll see a side that concedes goals from counter-attacks at an alarming rate. The problem isn't effort or talent — it's a structural void where a midfield should be.

The History of the 'Double Pivot' Myth

The double pivot has become a lazy shorthand for defensive solidity. Teams like Manchester City use a nominal double pivot that functions as a single creative hub plus a destroyer. But Palace's pairing of Jefferson Lerma and Cheick Doucouré operates as two destroyers with no link to the forwards. In 2023-24, Palace averaged the fewest passes into the final third of any team in the bottom half — 11 per match, down from 16 under Roy Hodgson.

This isn't new. In 2018-19, Fulham's midfield of Kevin McDonald and André-Frank Zambo Anguissa also left a chasm between defence and attack, leading to 84 goals conceded. Palace are repeating that pattern: two defensively minded players who occupy the same space, neither comfortable receiving the ball under pressure.

The Argument: Palace's Shape Is Their Own Worst Enemy

Glasner's 4-2-2-2 sacrifices central penetration for wide overloads. The wingers — usually Eberechi Eze and Michael Olise when fit — drift inside, but the full-backs don't provide width effectively. The two strikers, frequently Jean-Philippe Mateta and Odsonne Edouard, drop deep to receive the ball, leaving no one in the box.

  • Against Liverpool in December 2024, Palace completed 89 passes into the final third — but only 3 into the central zone. The double pivot completed 71% of their passes sideways or backwards.
  • When Doucouré pushes forward, Lerma is left isolated. In transition, the two central defenders are exposed with no screening. Palace conceded 6 goals from counter-attacks in the first 15 games — second most in the league.
  • The lack of a progressive passer means the ball goes wide early. Palace average the second-lowest 'passes into box' per game (8.9) among teams outside the top six.

Counter-Argument and Rebuttal

Some will argue that Dean Henderson's injury and the sales of key players have disrupted cohesion. Others will point to Eze's brilliance as proof the system works. But injuries and individual talent don't explain the structural flaw: a double pivot that fails to link defence and attack. Even with a fully fit squad, Palace's midfield lacks a distributor. The data shows that when teams press Palace's centre-backs, the double pivot drops too deep, creating a 30-yard gap to the strikers. That gap is the void.

Verdict / Prediction

Unless Glasner signs a midfielder with forward passing range in January — think a player like Ryan Gravenberch or Kiernan Dewsbury-Hall — Palace will finish 14th or lower. Their expected goals from midfield (xG of 1.2 per game) indicates a team that creates too little. The structural void will cost them points, and by March, the manager will face questions about his tactical adaptability.

Filed under: Tactical Analysis | LA Premier League Home