Scotty Parker

[Guest s0ftcore]

We could play both of them. Play the 451/433 which isn't favoured among most of the peeps here but it's logical thing to do because you can have Butt sitting, Parker doing his box-to-box and Emre doing his free role. Let's just compare to Chelsea's 'previous system'.

 

Butt and Makelele - both sit

Parker and Essein - high energy box-to-box players who can not only offer themselves offensively and defensively, but can win balls

 

Only difference is Emre will give a more 'creative' influence than Lampard (but probably wouldnt score as much considering the playing style)

 

It is playing to their strengths after all but I think Parker should just play DM, don't see why he cant be better than Butt at it. Roeder's plan to turn him into our "Gerrard" wasn't too bad initially - but as we all can see, it fails because we lack balance. So cmon Roed, do the right thing!  blueyes.gif

[Nobody]

We could play both of them. Play the 451/433 which isn't favoured among most of the peeps here but it's logical thing to do because you can have Butt sitting, Parker doing his box-to-box and Emre doing his free role. Let's just compare to Chelsea's 'previous system'.

 

Butt and Makelele - both sit

Parker and Essein - high energy box-to-box players who can not only offer themselves offensively and defensively, but can win balls

 

Only difference is Emre will give a more 'creative' influence than Lampard (but probably wouldnt score as much considering the playing style)

 

It is playing to their strengths after all but I think Parker should just play DM, don't see why he cant be better than Butt at it. Roeder's plan to turn him into our "Gerrard" wasn't too bad initially - but as we all can see, it fails because we lack balance. So cmon Roed, do the right thing!  blueyes.gif

Could work when Owen is fit. Dyer and Zoggy as the "wingers". Only problem is that there would be no place for Martins in this formation.

[WhatTheFunk]

We could play both of them. Play the 451/433 which isn't favoured among most of the peeps here but it's logical thing to do because you can have Butt sitting, Parker doing his box-to-box and Emre doing his free role. Let's just compare to Chelsea's 'previous system'.

 

Butt and Makelele - both sit

Parker and Essein - high energy box-to-box players who can not only offer themselves offensively and defensively, but can win balls

 

Only difference is Emre will give a more 'creative' influence than Lampard (but probably wouldnt score as much considering the playing style)

 

It is playing to their strengths after all but I think Parker should just play DM, don't see why he cant be better than Butt at it. Roeder's plan to turn him into our "Gerrard" wasn't too bad initially - but as we all can see, it fails because we lack balance. So cmon Roed, do the right thing!  blueyes.gif

 

Parker does not have the same passing range and quickness of thought as Butt. Butt will cut out a ball, or win a challenge, and immediately its out from his feet and sprayed somewhere. Most of the time it's effective as well, and gets us attacking immediately.

 

When Parker wins a ball, he has to turn around 3 full circles before deciding to give it back to Bramble or Moore, who consequently have to hoof it upfield as they see no options in front of them.

 

Sorry, but Nicky Butt does the holding job perfectly, and is 10 times the player Parker is in that position.

 

I would keep Parker as cover, and give him time to work it out in his head which position he wants to play, and focus on. At this time, he is not ready for the first team, let alone be club captain. Would he accept sitting on the bench? I doubt it. For that I say we should get rid.

[Guest s0ftcore]

Ah fair enough. Thanks for pointing that out. The reason I chose Parker over Butt was mainly due to work-rate and that he could offer more in attack. Instead of being our "Gerrard" he should be our "Keane" who just sat, did the dirty work and scored once in a while

 

Towelie - I think Martins could be used on the flank for the 433 if Owen's fit and can be used as the main forward as well. If we play with alot of width we could not only stretch them, I think we'd be able to dismantle them with such pace  bluedead.gif

 

Of course, that would work theoretically but doubt it'll be tried anytime soon.

[Geordie Boot Boy]

Ah fair enough. Thanks for pointing that out. The reason I chose Parker over Butt was mainly due to work-rate and that he could offer more in attack. Instead of being our "Gerrard" he should be our "Keane" who just sat, did the dirty work and scored once in a while

 

Given that Roy Keane was a better player than Steven Gerrard, I'd say that's a good thing.

[Howaythelads]

We could play both of them. Play the 451/433 which isn't favoured among most of the peeps here but it's logical thing to do because you can have Butt sitting, Parker doing his box-to-box and Emre doing his free role. Let's just compare to Chelsea's 'previous system'.

 

Butt and Makelele - both sit

Parker and Essein - high energy box-to-box players who can not only offer themselves offensively and defensively, but can win balls

 

Only difference is Emre will give a more 'creative' influence than Lampard (but probably wouldnt score as much considering the playing style)

 

It is playing to their strengths after all but I think Parker should just play DM, don't see why he cant be better than Butt at it. Roeder's plan to turn him into our "Gerrard" wasn't too bad initially - but as we all can see, it fails because we lack balance. So cmon Roed, do the right thing!  blueyes.gif

 

Parker does not have the same passing range and quickness of thought as Butt. Butt will cut out a ball, or win a challenge, and immediately its out from his feet and sprayed somewhere. Most of the time it's effective as well, and gets us attacking immediately.

 

 

When Parker wins a ball, he has to turn around 3 full circles before deciding to give it back to Bramble or Moore, who consequently have to hoof it upfield as they see no options in front of them.

 

Sorry, but Nicky Butt does the holding job perfectly, and is 10 times the player Parker is in that position.

 

I would keep Parker as cover, and give him time to work it out in his head which position he wants to play, and focus on. At this time, he is not ready for the first team, let alone be club captain. Would he accept sitting on the bench? I doubt it. For that I say we should get rid.

 

EXACTLY.

 

Sorry mate, I made my last post before reading what you'd posted, which sums up Parker perfectly. 

 

I deleted it because you covered most of my points. Apologises to TT, who quoted it in a reply already.

[Dokko]

 

So some claim Parker is a box to box midfielder, others think he's a defensive midfielder and still others think he's an attacking midfielder. Imo he's none of those things of good enough quality for where we want to be.

 

As a defensive/holding midfielder he can't do better than Butt because Parker is shite at it, why are people claiming he *should* be better than Butt at this role? He's done nowt to show he can do the job. I wonder whether people understand the attributes needed to be a good player in this role, it takes more than running around a lot and diving into tackles. He spends huge portions of the match on his arse, or doing twirls, taking 3 times as long to release the ball than a quality DM needs and using the ball well is vital in this role.

 

Rather than some people believing having pace in the team will help Parker, the fact is he's going to be an even bigger problem with pace around him. He's going to have to release the ball a long quicker than he does and it's going to become even more obvious when he doesn't do that. He can't just be told to do it either, it takes ability that he just doesn't have.

 

Raised some issues there that i have with him as well.

 

 

 

 

[Guest alex]

Trouble is, Roeder has hung his hat on Parker by making him captain so, has he got the balls to leave him out. I quite like Parker btw and it's going to take a while to convince me Emre is the man for the job but Butt is the best player we have in the holding position. I also agree with some of the points raised about Parker, especially about holding onto the ball too long at times. In any case, Emre and Parker have never looked like a good partnership and, on the evidence of yesterday, it should be Butt with one of the others ahead of him (or at least this should be tried for a few games).

[Howaythelads]

Trouble is, Roeder has hung his hat on Parker by making him captain so, has he got the balls to leave him out. I quite like Parker btw and it's going to take a while to convince me Emre is the man for the job but Butt is the best player we have in the holding position. I also agree with some of the points raised about Parker, especially about holding onto the ball too long at times. In any case, Emre and Parker have never looked like a good partnership and, on the evidence of yesterday, it should be Butt with one of the others ahead of him (or at least this should be tried for a few games).

 

So, how do you feel about Butt/Dyer in the CM, Alex?

 

I've never been keen on Dyer in the centre, I believe he lacks discipline by making runs all the time, but in our current setup I think it would give us a good balance.

[Guest alex]

Trouble is, Roeder has hung his hat on Parker by making him captain so, has he got the balls to leave him out. I quite like Parker btw and it's going to take a while to convince me Emre is the man for the job but Butt is the best player we have in the holding position. I also agree with some of the points raised about Parker, especially about holding onto the ball too long at times. In any case, Emre and Parker have never looked like a good partnership and, on the evidence of yesterday, it should be Butt with one of the others ahead of him (or at least this should be tried for a few games).

 

So, how do you feel about Butt/Dyer in the CM, Alex?

 

I've never been keen on Dyer in the centre, I believe he lacks discipline by making runs all the time, but in our current setup I think it would give us a good balance.

I like Dyer but I agree, even though his graft is top notch, he leaves you lightweight in the middle because he tries to make those killer runs all the time (even if we're winning 2-0). Still though, I would like to see him and Butt in there, especially at home, as Butt is quite the opposite and very disciplined in terms of staying in front of the back four. I think Dyer's ideal position though is either playing as a second striker or having a free role behind one or two strikers in a five-man midfield.

[WhatTheFunk]

Trouble is, Roeder has hung his hat on Parker by making him captain so, has he got the balls to leave him out. I quite like Parker btw and it's going to take a while to convince me Emre is the man for the job but Butt is the best player we have in the holding position. I also agree with some of the points raised about Parker, especially about holding onto the ball too long at times. In any case, Emre and Parker have never looked like a good partnership and, on the evidence of yesterday, it should be Butt with one of the others ahead of him (or at least this should be tried for a few games).

 

So, how do you feel about Butt/Dyer in the CM, Alex?

 

I've never been keen on Dyer in the centre, I believe he lacks discipline by making runs all the time, but in our current setup I think it would give us a good balance.

 

What did you think of Emre yesterday HTL? I thought the only thing missing from his performance (if one is to turn a blind eye to his shite set pieces in the first half) was a goal, and he should have had one.

 

I thought Emre was tremendous yesterday, and showed that he can indeed be an immense attacking threat. He runs with the ball well, is a combative little c***, and his left foot shot is ferocious. I think if given time to play in the center with Butt, the pairing will start to work like a dream. One thing I noticed yesterday was that Emre and Butt didnt bloody hold hands, as opposed to when Emre plays there with Parker. They each seemed to know what they had to do, and both are equally good passers of the ball, and with one touch can set the ball rolling in a dangerous position.

 

To be honest, and I know I keep raving about Butt especially...I was very glad to see those first time passes to our pacey players, which got attacks going. It's no use having pace in the side with no space to run into. Pace players need to get the move going using the space provided to them by the opposition getting pulled out of shape. Now the way I see this working is when the other team attacks, it assumes an attacking shape. With good combative and intelligent shield players like Butt (and Emre), we could get our attack moving before the opposition has regained defensive shape.

 

IMO we do not have the personnel who can hold the opposition hostage in their half, and dominate a possession game. I think for us to get through this season unscathed, and finish in a respectable position, we will have to use our counter-attack...EVEN AT HOME.

[Howaythelads]

Trouble is, Roeder has hung his hat on Parker by making him captain so, has he got the balls to leave him out. I quite like Parker btw and it's going to take a while to convince me Emre is the man for the job but Butt is the best player we have in the holding position. I also agree with some of the points raised about Parker, especially about holding onto the ball too long at times. In any case, Emre and Parker have never looked like a good partnership and, on the evidence of yesterday, it should be Butt with one of the others ahead of him (or at least this should be tried for a few games).

 

So, how do you feel about Butt/Dyer in the CM, Alex?

 

I've never been keen on Dyer in the centre, I believe he lacks discipline by making runs all the time, but in our current setup I think it would give us a good balance.

 

What did you think of Emre yesterday HTL? I thought the only thing missing from his performance (if one is to turn a blind eye to his shite set pieces in the first half) was a goal, and he should have had one.

 

I thought Emre was tremendous yesterday, and showed that he can indeed be an immense attacking threat. He runs with the ball well, is a combative little c***, and his left foot shot is ferocious. I think if given time to play in the center with Butt, the pairing will start to work like a dream. One thing I noticed yesterday was that Emre and Butt didnt bloody hold hands, as opposed to when Emre plays there with Parker. They each seemed to know what they had to do, and both are equally good passers of the ball, and with one touch can set the ball rolling in a dangerous position.

 

Emre had an excellent game, yes. I think it could work too, I'm just looking for a bit more energy through the centre as we struggle for goals. With a pairing up front of Owen/Martins for example, I can see a midfield of Dyer, Emre, Butt, Zog working well too. Dyer and  Zog wouldn't be expected to hug the lines, but to vary their game by sometimes giving us width but sometimes drifting inside. Sibierski would be available to change it and give other options if it's not working out, but that kind of setup looks nicely balanced to me.

[Parky]

"I can see a midfield of Dyer, Emre, Butt, Zog working well too." HTL blueyes.gif

 

I agree. The thing is let Parker and Butt interchange the DM role depending on the opposition.

[toptoon]

Don't rush back Scotty, we're better off without you.

 

Stupid comment tbh

 

He got clattered played on as long as he could and went off in the 24th minute (i think).

 

He and Given have been our players of the season this year (again), we'd be screwed without them!

[Howaythelads]

Don't rush back Scotty, we're better off without you.

 

Stupid comment tbh

 

He got clattered played on as long as he could and went off in the 24th minute (i think).

 

He and Given have been our players of the season this year (again), we'd be screwed without them!

 

bluelaugh.gif

 

[Guest Alex20]

We could play both of them. Play the 451/433 which isn't favoured among most of the peeps here but it's logical thing to do because you can have Butt sitting, Parker doing his box-to-box and Emre doing his free role. Let's just compare to Chelsea's 'previous system'.

 

Butt and Makelele - both sit

Parker and Essein - high energy box-to-box players who can not only offer themselves offensively and defensively, but can win balls

 

Only difference is Emre will give a more 'creative' influence than Lampard (but probably wouldnt score as much considering the playing style)

 

It is playing to their strengths after all but I think Parker should just play DM, don't see why he cant be better than Butt at it. Roeder's plan to turn him into our "Gerrard" wasn't too bad initially - but as we all can see, it fails because we lack balance. So cmon Roed, do the right thing!  blueyes.gif

 

Parker does not have the same passing range and quickness of thought as Butt. Butt will cut out a ball, or win a challenge, and immediately its out from his feet and sprayed somewhere. Most of the time it's effective as well, and gets us attacking immediately.

 

When Parker wins a ball, he has to turn around 3 full circles before deciding to give it back to Bramble or Moore, who consequently have to hoof it upfield as they see no options in front of them.

 

Sorry, but Nicky Butt does the holding job perfectly, and is 10 times the player Parker is in that position.

 

I would keep Parker as cover, and give him time to work it out in his head which position he wants to play, and focus on. At this time, he is not ready for the first team, let alone be club captain. Would he accept sitting on the bench? I doubt it. For that I say we should get rid.

 

I absolutely agree with you. I love scottie, an excellent DMC. But his style doesn't fit in with the others.

When parker has the ball, it takes ages before we can build upfront, he passes it back and possession gets lost.

This damages emre's game, he needs technically gifted players among him so he can do his thing.

When butt was on, as you mentioned, his passing range is quite good, and he does it fast and effective

that emre is relaxed and can concentrate on other things. It was a job to watch our team yesterday.

And I haven't seen emre play like this in a long time, for us that is.  We need to build on a pacy, technically gifted midfield.

 

[Keefaz]

Basically, I think this is all bollocks and I think Parker will prove all his doubters wrong. IMO, if Emre had played against Arsenal, we would've lost.

[toptoon]

Don't rush back Scotty, we're better off without you.

 

Stupid comment tbh

 

He got clattered played on as long as he could and went off in the 24th minute (i think).

 

He and Given have been our players of the season this year (again), we'd be screwed without them!

 

bluelaugh.gif

 

 

Other than arguably Given who, is then clever dick?

[Skirge]

If he played as an out and out holding player he would need close support, so he could lay the ball off with a short pass, he can cover ground quick and reads the game well but he DOES hold onto the ball for to long at times, this can cuase us to lose the inisutive and our counter attack peeters  out.

Or he can be a box to box player, getting forward when we have the ball helping out the attack, thenr acing back to help out with defensive duties, this is where I think Parker is best, he does it better than Emre and Butt should be the out and out holding player.

 

In a 4-4-2

Milner---Parker---Butt----Zoggy

 

-----------Dyer

--------------------Martins

 

OR

---------------------Butt

 

----Milner---------Parker----------Emre

 

 

-------------Dyer--------Martins

 

If you use Butt as an out and out holding player to sit infront of the back four with a line of three infront of him,  then you need Emre and not Zoggy, Zog is fine on the end of a line of ffour ,but with only three you need a harder working player like Emre. Thing is with Butt sitting there infront of the back four he has to make sure not to sit to far back and pinn our own back four, right back to the edge of our area.

[Howaythelads]

Basically, I think this is all bollocks and I think Parker will prove all his doubters wrong. IMO, if Emre had played against Arsenal, we would've lost.

 

You really do have a simplistic way of looking at things, mate.

[WhatTheFunk]

Basically, I think this is all bollocks and I think Parker will prove all his doubters wrong. IMO, if Emre had played against Arsenal, we would've lost.

 

No. We didn't lose because Butt was playing

[Keefaz]

Basically, I think this is all bollocks and I think Parker will prove all his doubters wrong. IMO, if Emre had played against Arsenal, we would've lost.

 

You really do have a simplistic way of looking at things, mate.

 

I think you just have a simplistic way of interpreting what I write. If Emre had played his regular game against Arsenal, regardless of who was alongside him, I think we would've lost. He's too clumsy in posession, his passing is usually poor, his tackling is lightweight, he runs into player and gives up the ball too often, his set-pieces have usually been tame or inaccurate. He's played one good game against a shit team, what does that prove?

[Howaythelads]

Basically, I think this is all bollocks and I think Parker will prove all his doubters wrong. IMO, if Emre had played against Arsenal, we would've lost.

 

You really do have a simplistic way of looking at things, mate.

 

I think you just have a simplistic way of interpreting what I write. If Emre had played his regular game against Arsenal, regardless of who was alongside him, I think we would've lost. He's too clumsy in posession, his passing is usually poor, his tackling is lightweight, he runs into player and gives up the ball too often, his set-pieces have usually been tame or inaccurate. He's played one good game against a shit team, what does that prove?

 

I actually don't give a shit about any comparison between Parker and Emre.  Emre being shite in your opinion doesn't improve Parker as a footballer.

 

By the way, what did you think of the team performances and the results during the latter part of last season when Parker was absent? Do you understand it is a team game and that the team generally performs better without Parker in that team?

[STM]

What annoys me is that every one is speaking like this:

 

Wanker no1: " Emre's shite man!"

 

Wanker no2: "No man Parkers the shit one, we only ever win when he leaves the pitch!"

 

The truth is neither Parker nor Emre are shit, it's about balance in midfield. Picking the players is the easy bit, finding the correct formula is the hardest task.

 

When Butt and Emre have played together we have improved but not becasue of Parkers absence in the talent sense but because Nicky Butt has played in defensive midfield. Where as Parker and Emre were playing on top of each other. I feel should we play Parker in defensive midfield we would have the same outcome.

 

 

[Keefaz]

Basically, I think this is all bollocks and I think Parker will prove all his doubters wrong. IMO, if Emre had played against Arsenal, we would've lost.

 

You really do have a simplistic way of looking at things, mate.

 

I think you just have a simplistic way of interpreting what I write. If Emre had played his regular game against Arsenal, regardless of who was alongside him, I think we would've lost. He's too clumsy in posession, his passing is usually poor, his tackling is lightweight, he runs into player and gives up the ball too often, his set-pieces have usually been tame or inaccurate. He's played one good game against a shit team, what does that prove?

 

I actually don't give a shit about any comparison between Parker and Emre.  Emre being shite in your opinion doesn't improve Parker as a footballer.

 

By the way, what did you think of the team performances and the results during the latter part of last season when Parker was absent? Do you understand it is a team game and that the team generally performs better without Parker in that team?

 

Myth, tbh. We won matches with Parker in the side and without. The one common factor when we started winning was the absence of Souness. After he'd fucked off we won our first five or six matches (with Parker in the team, btw) until we went to Old Trafford.