Why do Crystal Palace concede so many late goals?

As Andros Townsend cut inside with seconds of stoppage time remaining, everyone inside Selhurst Park could sense what was about to happen. A trademark whipped cross into the penalty area was met by Cauley Woodrow’s header and the Crystal Palace net bulged.

Palace had allowed Luton Town, whose record of scoring late in games is second only to Liverpool, to equalise in the final minute of stoppage time. It was yet another sucker punch late on to add to a growing collection.

In the Premier League this season, Palace have conceded 10 goals in the 90th minute or later. No other side has conceded more. Of the 87 goals scored in that period of the match across the entire division, 11.5 per cent have been against Palace.

It has become a serious concern, however much the significance of it had been played down previously. There have been 18 points dropped from winning positions this season and 21 goals conceded in the final 15 minutes of games. Four of those have come in the last two matches.

Manager Oliver Glasner acknowledged the issue after the defeat by Tottenham Hotspur last week, in which all three goals Palace conceded came after the 75th minute.

“We have started to work on it,” he said. “I don’t believe in coincidences. If you concede so many goals in the last 15 minutes, we have to work on it and analyse it but it’s not something we can do in two or three days.”

There are several factors that may be behind such a poor record.

Fitness

Palace’s fitness levels are not as high as they need to be and this seems like the most apparent explanation for the problems they are facing late on. There was concern under Roy Hodgson that the intensity of training was insufficient and that it was a factor in conceding late goals.

With matches lasting longer due to the high amount of stoppage time, this becomes a more significant issue. Players become more fatigued, fail to keep the ball as comfortably, are less capable of tracking back and more likely to make mistakes. 

That is not something which can be addressed in a short period under Glasner, with the bulk of the fitness built up over the season. With so many injuries, players will take longer to return to the level of sharpness they had.

A three-week break, in which Palace will travel to Marbella and face Norwegian side Bodo/Glimt in a friendly, should offer an opportunity to work on the issue.

Glasner will have a chance to rectify any fitness problems during Palace’s upcoming break (Sebastian Frej/MB Media/Getty Images)

Not killing off games

Against Luton, particularly, this was a problem. It was not a failure to create opportunities but to take them. An expected goals total of 2.59 suggested Palace ought to have done better in making the most of their opportunities.

Jean-Philippe Mateta’s goal was a moment of brilliant improvisation and skill, and he has improved dramatically overall this season in his all-round game. His five goals equal his best return.

But he should have scored after rounding Thomas Kaminski late in the first half, while the Luton goalkeeper also saved his volley from close range on 75 minutes with Naouirou Ahamada scuffing the rebound wide when he was well placed. Odsonne Edouard hit the bar after good work on the edge of the penalty area in the second half, but there were several occasions where the final moment let Palace down. That has been a familiar story. 

By failing to establish a two or more goal lead, pressure is inevitably invited as the game enters its closing stages. Under Hodgson, Palace often tried to defend their lead rather than focus on searching for another goal and that sometimes backfired as they failed to see games out. There has been a change in approach already under Glasner but it was to no avail on Saturday.

Being too passive

There have been many times this season where Palace have failed to be positive in the way they finish the game. Part of that may be due to the fitness levels, and also the options available to them being relatively weak and inexperienced.

Had Matheus Franca not missed out with a groin injury, he would likely have come on and provided more attacking threat, kept the ball in the opposition half and helped to potentially create something. Against Luton, this was less of a problem than it has been in previous games but Glasner pointed to his side being too passive in the final moment as an issue.

Glasner always prefers to focus on positives. “Don’t talk too much about it,” was his suggestion for one way to help resolve the issue, although he dismissed any suggestion of nervousness from his players.

“Sometimes it’s like a self-fulfilling prophecy. We will analyse why we were passive in this situation but the same situation after 30 minutes will also have been a goal. It was our mistake that we didn’t put more pressure on the ball. It’s not important if it’s the 96th, 97th or the first minute.”

Before this game they had faced nine ‘big chances’ — a situation where a player should reasonably be expected to score — in the 90th minute or later, conceding seven of them. Only three teams have faced fewer than the 21 shots Palace have in that period, so the issue does not appear to be allowing the opposition chances, but the expected goals total of those attempts (4.7) suggests they are of a high quality and therefore the defending has been inadequate to prevent the chance in the first instance.

Another issue is that Palace’s options from the bench are limited in experience and quality with a small squad further hindered by injuries. Ahamada, inexperienced, lost the ball deep in Luton’s half before they counter-attacked to equalise and could have been stronger to hold off the challenge. But he has had little opportunity since signing last January and Eze should have closed down Townsend.

Rectifying these problems completely may take time. Some of the solutions are easier than others, but Palace can’t afford to wait too long to find a fix. That three-week break now seems optimal. 

(Top photo: Paul Harding/Getty Images)