As Pierre Sage lifted the Coupe de France trophy last May, he asked his staff, “Do you realise where we are?”
He had just delivered Lens their maiden French Cup and steered them to a joint‑best second‑place finish in Ligue 1 – all in his debut season.
With only 56 professional games under his belt before Lens, he became French football’s overnight sensation.
Six months later, the 47‑year‑old might wish he’d savoured those triumphs a little longer.
The Premier League’s allure saw him in the Palace dugout in July, but he now sits second‑favourite for the next top‑flight sacking as the Eagles linger in the relegation zone with the league’s weakest defence.
Three straight league defeats, nine goals conceded and no goals scored have left his job hanging by a thread before he’s even hit ten games in England.
Even after the 2‑0 loss at Tottenham, the away crowd stayed calm – they know Sage inherited a mess that will outlast his tenure.
Missing Ismaila Sarr after his 21‑goal haul, a waning Adam Wharton and Jean‑Philippe Mateta’s red card on his second start have only deepened Palace’s woes.
Sage would do well to avoid any more bad luck, and the club must ask why they thought he fit their roster in the first place.
The first blow came in January when Marc Guehi left for Manchester City without a replacement, leaving Palace to leak 26 goals in 16 games.
A rebuild was inevitable after cashing in on Guehi and Eze, especially following the exits of Munoz and Lacroix.
Director of football Matt Hobbs faced his first real test, and the results have been, at best, uneven.
Anan Khalaili creates chances at half Munoz’s rate, while loanee Axel Disasi wins just 54 % of aerial duels, contributing to five set‑piece goals – a record only Chelsea can beat.
Swapping out Eze, Guehi, Munoz, Lacroix and Olise was a massive task, and apart from Jeremy Pino, no newcomer has matched their impact.
Sarr’s recurring groin injury has robbed Palace of its most lethal attacker, the man who netted 21 in 45 games last season.
Without Sarr, Palace’s scoring fell to 0.71 per game; Mateta still managed 12 league goals, yet both have logged only 183 minutes together under Sage.
Wharton could be Palace’s standout, but Sarr’s absence and Munoz’s exit have left him without early outlets, stifling his creativity.
His rhythm has slipped, and his defensive work rate has dropped from over three recoveries per game to just above one.
At 22, he would have thrived in Sage’s Lens system, which prized high turnovers and rapid transitions – a stark contrast to today’s Palace.
But the philosophy remains unchanged; after the Newcastle loss Sage said, “The best defence is possession, because you can’t concede then.”
He inherited a side that held 42 % possession or less in 19 games last season, contributing to seven wins; under Sage Palace have owned the ball only twice.
Sage is undeniably talented – he even attracted Liverpool’s interest – but the 3‑4‑2‑1 he used at Lens relied on pressure and tempo, not the counter‑attack Palace now embodies.
For my money, Sage’s tactics simply don’t match Palace’s squad, and the team has produced the fewest high‑turnover shots in the Premier League this season.
Beyond tactics, the bigger question is whether he’s the right coach at the wrong time, his demands echoing those of Iraola, whom Palace chased before he headed to Liverpool.
If the slump persists, it may not be Sage’s fault; perhaps Palace simply isn’t the right club for him.