Oliver Glasner kumoaa lähtöhuhut Crystal Palace pitää kiinni kapteenista Marc Guéhistä ja torjuu Liverpoolin jättitarjouksen
The end of the transfer window always feels like a soap opera: last-minute deals, panic calls, medicals booked and canceled, and agents circling like hawks. For Crystal Palace, this summer’s drama centered around one man — captain Marc Guéhi.
Rumors swirled that manager Oliver Glasner had threatened to walk away if Palace let their defensive leader go. But over the weekend, the Austrian coach shut that story down quickly. “There was no ultimatum, no threats,” he insisted. Instead, he called it what it was: a tough decision made with the bigger picture in mind.
The Transfer That Nearly Happened
Liverpool came closer than anyone expected to landing Guéhi. The 23-year-old defender had conversations, the clubs were deep in talks, and he even went as far as a medical on deadline day. For a few hours, it looked like Palace might be losing their captain.
And then it all collapsed. Palace couldn’t lock down a replacement in time, and letting their defensive rock leave without cover would have been a massive gamble. So Guéhi boarded the train back to Selhurst Park. The captain’s armband stayed on his sleeve; the move to Anfield slipped away.
Glasner explained the logic calmly: “Had we sold him, we’d have been left with just three central defenders. With the schedule ahead, that was a huge risk. One injury and we’d have been badly exposed. I spoke with the chairman about what that would mean for us on the pitch.”
Gratitude, Not Drama
If you expected fireworks behind the scenes, Glasner set the record straight. He went out of his way to thank Steve Parish, Palace’s chairman, for putting football above finances. Liverpool’s bid was tempting — tens of millions of pounds — but Parish said no. “It wasn’t drama, it wasn’t me pushing with demands,” Glasner explained. “It was an honest discussion. Steve decided stability mattered more than the money.”
He also praised Guéhi for how he handled the uncertainty. Transfer limbo is never fun, but the defender didn’t sulk, didn’t play half-heartedly. “Marc was brilliant,” Glasner smiled. “We spoke openly on the final day of the window. Then you saw him go out and give his all for England, before coming back here with the same focus. He’s our captain, and he leads with maturity.”
Why Keeping Guéhi Matters
To Palace fans, Guéhi is more than just another player. Over the past few seasons, he’s become the cornerstone of their defense — calm on the ball, smart in positioning, a steady voice in organizing the back line. His rapid rise has made him one of England’s most promising defenders and explains Liverpool’s determination to sign him.
For Glasner, aiming to lift Palace from mid-table into something more ambitious, keeping Guéhi was non-negotiable. You don’t rip the spine out of your team midway through building a project. You defend it.
Ripple Effects on Both Clubs
By standing firm, Palace sent out a subtle message: they won’t be pushed around in the market, even by giants like Liverpool. Selling a captain might bring in cash, but keeping him shows belief in the future.
For Liverpool, it’s a different story. They walk away from the window without the defensive reinforcement they were chasing. Manager Jürgen Klopp will have to trust his current center-backs until January rolls around.
The Final Word
So here’s where things stand:
- Glasner isn’t going anywhere — the exit threat rumors were false.
- Guéhi’s big move to Liverpool fell apart at the last moment.
- Steve Parish prioritized stability over a huge payday.
- Guéhi stays captain, carrying Palace’s defensive hopes on his shoulders.
As for what comes next? Palace heads into the new campaign with one of the most intriguing defensive setups in the league. Keeping a leader like Guéhi might just be the spark that pushes South London’s club into a steadier, more competitive future.
👉 What do you think? Did Palace make the right call by refusing Liverpool’s money, or should they have cashed in while they had the chance?
—
Would you like me to also shorten this into a quick, punchy 3-minute “quick read” version of the same story — perfect for a news site or social media feed — alongside this longer magazine-style version?