Camilo Zúñiga questions Daniel Muñoz’s Crystal Palace stay, sparking backlash

Crystal Palace are no strangers to disrespect, and the latest remarks from Colombia have done little to change that narrative. Former international Camilo Zúñiga has publicly questioned why Daniel Muñoz is still at Selhurst Park, throwing thinly veiled insults at Palace while encouraging the defender to move on to a so-called “bigger club”.

Speaking to Caracol Radio, Zúñiga praised Muñoz’s performances but made it clear he believes the 29-year-old should already have left Palace behind.

“Dani is having a spectacular season, not just now, but ever since he arrived in England. I honestly don’t know why he’s still at that club. With all due respect, God’s timing is perfect, and in due time he’ll reach a bigger club.”

The comments reflect a broader trend Crystal Palace have dealt with for years: any success automatically triggers speculation that their best players must move on, as though staying is not even a realistic option. The assumption often sidelines the club’s ambitions, their progress under Oliver Glasner and the role they now play in Premier League competition.

Muñoz has been one of Palace’s most important players since arriving from Genk for €8 million in January 2024. Operating as a right wing-back in Glasner’s system, he has combined defensive reliability with standout attacking output.

His form has inevitably brought attention. Reports in Spain and England claim:

While Muñoz has openly expressed ambition — which is natural for a player approaching 30 — none of that diminishes his value to Palace or the strides the club have taken under Glasner.

For clubs outside the traditional “big six”, there is a long-standing assumption that their standout players must eventually move on in order to fulfil their potential. Success is acknowledged, but often with the expectation that it will push a talent toward a supposedly bigger club. Zúñiga’s comments fall neatly into that mindset, portraying Crystal Palace as nothing more than a stepping stone instead of recognising the genuine progress the club has made under Oliver Glasner.

Palace have built a clear tactical identity, strengthened their recruitment, increased their consistency and established themselves as an attractive project for ambitious players. Daniel Muñoz has been a significant part of that evolution, not a misplaced talent waiting to be saved, and his performances reflect a player thriving within a well-structured system rather than one who has outgrown it.

In our view, Zúñiga’s comments say less about Muñoz and more about a lingering prejudice toward mid-table Premier League clubs. It ignores the reality that Palace are no longer the fragile, inconsistent side of previous years.

Glasner has elevated the project, the squad is stronger, and the club is now competitive against the league’s top half. Muñoz is not “too good” for Palace — he is one of the reasons Palace are improving.

Ambition is natural, and future moves will depend on form, contract situation and opportunity, but dismissing Palace’s status entirely is unfair and outdated.

Crystal Palace continue their strong campaign under Glasner, while Muñoz remains essential on the right flank. Transfer speculation will follow him into 2026, but Palace are in a far stronger position to retain or command a premium than in previous years.

👉 Palace fans — do Zúñiga’s comments irritate you, or do you simply see them as part of the wider bias against non-top-six clubs?