Ronaldo Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 how we miss Scott Parker Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 how we miss Scott Parker Yep. Pathetic making him a scapegoat when he was here. A big case of you don't know what you've got til it's gone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nobody Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 I always liked Parker, he's been having a good season with West Ham from what I've seen as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
merlin Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Must be nice having a young, exciting manager who wants to play football the right way in charge. I have a lot of time for Zola. It also helps to have talented players who want to win, rather than a rag-bag bunch of losers.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segun Oluwaniyi Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 West Ham's team isn't vastly superior to ours in anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Heneage Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 how we miss Scott Parker Yep. Pathetic making him a scapegoat when he was here. A big case of you don't know what you've got til it's gone. I beg to differ. I fail to see what he really offers when compared to Guthrie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ronaldo Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 how we miss Scott Parker Yep. Pathetic making him a scapegoat when he was here. A big case of you don't know what you've got til it's gone. I beg to differ. I fail to see what he really offers when compared to Guthrie. completely different players for one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newcastle Fan Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Problem with Parker was that he was never the same after his tackle on Bullard. still shouldn't have sold him though. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yorkie Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Problem with Parker was that he was never the same after his tackle on Bullard. still shouldn't have sold him though. He was, it just took us that long to find him out. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Since the day Parker left there's been a hole in our midfield that's yet to be filled. Our CM is getting ran over week after week cause it's pretty much non existant. Parker was excellent at breaking down other teams attacks, something none of our current CM's can do. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Since the day Parker left there's been a hole in our midfield that's yet to be filled. Our CM is getting ran over week after week cause it's pretty much non existant. Parker was excellent at breaking down other teams attacks, something none of our current CM's can do. We've had ample time to replace him. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 The state of our central midfield is criminal, but to be fair to the club it would be decent with Nolan, Barton and Guthrie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Heneage Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 how we miss Scott Parker Yep. Pathetic making him a scapegoat when he was here. A big case of you don't know what you've got til it's gone. I beg to differ. I fail to see what he really offers when compared to Guthrie. completely different players for one How they, seem exactly the same to me, neither attacking or defensive, your bog standard centre midfielder, the only difference is Guthrie seems to have better technique. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Minhosa Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Parker was being slated by the West Ham fans I know (all season ticket holders) for most of the opening 4 months of the season. He can have the odd game where he dictates play but they're few and far between and he's not great at anything; - Doesn't score - Can't release the ball quickly enough - Doesn't have an eye for a killer pass He is decent at winning possesion back, I'll give him that. I wouldn't pay £6m to have him back, which makes it a good sale in my opinion. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
STM Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Parker was being slated by the West Ham fans I know (all season ticket holders) for most of the opening 4 months of the season. He can have the odd game where he dictates play but they're few and far between and he's not great at anything; - Doesn't score - Can't release the ball quickly enough - Doesn't have an eye for a killer pass He is decent at winning possesion back, I'll give him that. I wouldn't pay £6m to have him back, which makes it a good sale in my opinion. I will never be convinced that Parker is a good footballer. His ability on the ball is terrible but TBF he had a bloody good engine on him. Guthrie has 10x his ability on the ball but lacks a bit in the engine side of things. Still, i know which way i would prefer it. 6m for Parker 1.5m for Guthrie Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 We were 100% right to sell Parker when we did IMO. Just because we now need an energetic holding player doesn't change that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 it wasn't the tackle on Bullard that changed him, it was being made captain. Our midfield was affected more by the loss of Dyer and Solano than Parker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest toonlass Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Harsh on Parker like. He's the best pirouetter in the premiership! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElDiablo Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Since the day Parker left there's been a hole in our midfield that's yet to be filled. Our CM is getting ran over week after week cause it's pretty much non existant. Parker was excellent at breaking down other teams attacks, something none of our current CM's can do. Barton is better than Parker. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Snrub Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Not at breaking down play though. They'd be good together. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Since the day Parker left there's been a hole in our midfield that's yet to be filled. Our CM is getting ran over week after week cause it's pretty much non existant. Parker was excellent at breaking down other teams attacks, something none of our current CM's can do. Barton is better than Parker. In theory, yeah. Parker doesn't get into nearly enough shit as Barton does though and is no way near as injury prone. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ElDiablo Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 He doesn't break down play though, he runs around a lot and gets in people's faces but you'll rarely see him intercept a pass like a Makelele or Carrick who are true defensive midfielders. Barton is just as good as getting in people's faces (haaa) but can use the ball once he gets it. Barton is more injury prone but I thought we were talking about ability? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Trouble is that ability doesn't count for much if you're never in a position to use it. I think we got a very good deal with the money for Parker, but after all the crap that Barton has brought on this club I feel like we've been cockslapped with the 5.8m we paid for him.. it was about that I think? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NG32 Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Trouble is that ability doesn't count for much if you're never in a position to use it. I think we got a very good deal with the money for Parker, but after all the crap that Barton has brought on this club I feel like we've been cockslapped with the 5.8m we paid for him.. it was about that I think? Was it not 6.5, as we had to pay his loyalty bonus as he resfused to leave man city otherwise. I think man city were refusing to pay it due to his "problems". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatwax Posted March 5, 2009 Share Posted March 5, 2009 Trouble is that ability doesn't count for much if you're never in a position to use it. I think we got a very good deal with the money for Parker, but after all the crap that Barton has brought on this club I feel like we've been cockslapped with the 5.8m we paid for him.. it was about that I think? Was it not 6.5, as we had to pay his loyalty bonus as he resfused to leave man city otherwise. I think man city were refusing to pay it due to his "problems". Yeah it was something like that but I can't remember the actual fee. I think he had a release clause but we ended up paying £500k over that to cover the loyalty bonus or something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts