Ashley17 Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 Parker had a very good game last night I'm not complaining about his performance as a whole, I just think it was fucking stupid to pass back to the keeper from kick off. People will probably be protecting that no doubt, but seriously, why do it especially when Shay has been struggling to kick with his injury. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jambo_T Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 While we are at it we might aswell blame taylor for blocking givens view. Why are we blaming anyone, no-one can blame Parker for passing to Shay Given who blootered it to the opposing team who played it up, Ronaldo laid it back scholes smashed it, given didnt see it and dived unnecessarily. God, if he knew that would happen he wouldn't be playing for Newcastle United, give it a rest. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gallowgate Toon Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 Shay didn't have to boot it, he was under no pressure and could have just passed it but it was a stupid idea/tactic in the first place, we should be alot more positive, but why was Parker at the kick off anyway he is meant to be a DM and why wasn't Oba with Sib and Dyer for the kick off? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ashley17 Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 What don't people get. Parker = captain = responsible Given = Slightly hampered kicking Responsible captain SHOULD think "let's not wear Shay out un-necessarily" and it's from the kick off, he had a choice of 10 others to pass to. If Parker passes to anybody else the clearance will more than likely go over half way due to not being in our own 18 yard box. This means the ball and subsequently Man utd's players are further away and who knows, we might not end up with 3 people around the ball blocking the keeper's view. Is it pedantic? Hell yes. I like Parker, he's committed and does a good job and he didn't do too many (if any) twirls on the ball yesterday. A captain should make better decisions than that, IMO, and yes it might not have led to a goal and you can't really blame him as such, but surely the biggest Parker fan in the world can see he made the wrong decision. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Jambo_T Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 Shay didn't have to boot it, he was under no pressure and could have just passed it but it was a stupid idea/tactic in the first place, we should be alot more positive, but why was Parker at the kick off anyway he is meant to be a DM and why wasn't Oba with Sib and Dyer for the kick off? When I seen that I thought Oba had been injured somehow, i was shitting myself. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incognito Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 Shut up, of course it was Parker's fault. It's Parker's fault we're in this position. In fact, it's Parker's fault we were beaten to the title in 96. Parker's fault for the demise of the old Empire also,and John Lennons assassination.Seriously he played a captains role ,i thought he was very good. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ujpest doza Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 It was Dyer's fault, he was marking Scholes and when the ball went wide, he followed the ball, despite there being two of our men there to try and deal with it. Once played back to Scholes he was free to aim and shoot, Dyer basically made up the mind of the Man Utd player on the ball (to pass to the unmarked Scholes) and Scholes himself (to shoot). We kicked off man ffs. Parker played it back to Given who then kicked it out surrendering possession to them. What happened at the point of Ronaldo passing to Scholes was irrelavent, we kicked off and should not have surrendered possession from our own kick off so quickly and cheaply. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baggio Posted January 2, 2007 Share Posted January 2, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Monkey Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any fucking clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. Which in a nutshell is what I've been saying about the Parker/Emre partnership since day one, except even when Butt was on loan we looked better and more threatening with Bowyer in the side, or Clark, or even with Faye, all players who despite overall quality issues can all play with some discipline and keep the team shape when we don't have the ball. Somehow that's been interpreted by a few people that I think Butt is a world beater.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any fucking clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. To play as a DM you need discipline though. I don't mind Dyer running around because he is suppose to be 'floating around'. I also don't mind it when he's playing in the AM position because it shouldn't affect the way we defend that much if the rest of our midfielders are disciplined (which they clearly aren't btw - Emre can't even stay on the left when he's supposed to, Parker doesn't understand the word 'controlled aggression' etc.). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest alex Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 *Laughs* Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bovril Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 The second manc goal was down to shay booting the ball to them and loosing possesion. Parker should never of played that ball back to Shay, to do that from kick off is the ultimate display of weakness imo, reminded me of the cup game against arsenal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Northern Monkey Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. To play as a DM you need discipline though. I don't mind Dyer running around because he is suppose to be 'floating around'. I also don't mind it when he's playing in the AM position because it shouldn't affect the way we defend that much if the rest of our midfielders are disciplined (which they clearly aren't btw - Emre can't even stay on the left when he's supposed to, Parker doesn't understand the word 'controlled aggression' etc.). Parker isn't REALLY a DM though, is he. As for Dyer, his inability to stay in the vague area he is supposed to is one of the reasons we commonly lose our shape when he plays. And neither he nor most of the rest of the team are good enough to react to that and change things - we just end up with Dyer and Parker chasing the ball like schoolkids, and the defence being left under pressure they are ill-equiped to cope with. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. To play as a DM you need discipline though. I don't mind Dyer running around because he is suppose to be 'floating around'. I also don't mind it when he's playing in the AM position because it shouldn't affect the way we defend that much if the rest of our midfielders are disciplined (which they clearly aren't btw - Emre can't even stay on the left when he's supposed to, Parker doesn't understand the word 'controlled aggression' etc.). Parker isn't REALLY a DM though, is he. As for Dyer, his inability to stay in the vague area he is supposed to is one of the reasons we commonly lose our shape when he plays. And neither he nor most of the rest of the team are good enough to react to that and change things - we just end up with Dyer and Parker chasing the ball like schoolkids, and the defence being left under pressure they are ill-equiped to cope with. No, he isn't, which should call into question the idea from quite a few people that he should be used in that role. It's seems he's a favourite despite not having the attributes, it's without doubt down to the 100% graft you get from him. I'm not a great fan of Dyer mate, but tbh as an attacking midfielder he offers far more than Parker does. He makes things happen, he frightens the opposition and effects the way they set out against us. Even on a bad day they know he's always got the potential to do something. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfmag Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. PARKER WANDERS AROUND??? Was anyone here at the Spurs game? Or the MANU game for that matter. Actually, I wish I knew just how many times Ronaldo lost the ball, failed to beat his man, missed a pass, shot miles wide etc etc the other night. I guess none of that begins to compare with the sariousness of Parker passing back to Shay from kick-off.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. PARKER WANDERS AROUND??? Was anyone here at the Spurs game? Or the MANU game for that matter. Actually, I wish I knew just how many times Ronaldo lost the ball, failed to beat his man, missed a pass, shot miles wide etc etc the other night. I guess none of that begins to compare with the sariousness of Parker passing back to Shay from kick-off.... I suggest you start thinking of more than one or two games and a couple of incidents. Think Big Picture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfmag Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. The Big Picture is that if the sort of view on this board spreads and eventually drives Parker out of Newcastle and to a (probably biugger) club that appreciates him, then there will have been only one winner. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. PARKER WANDERS AROUND??? Was anyone here at the Spurs game? Or the MANU game for that matter. Actually, I wish I knew just how many times Ronaldo lost the ball, failed to beat his man, missed a pass, shot miles wide etc etc the other night. I guess none of that begins to compare with the sariousness of Parker passing back to Shay from kick-off.... I suggest you start thinking of more than one or two games and a couple of incidents. Think Big Picture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedudeabides Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. PARKER WANDERS AROUND??? Was anyone here at the Spurs game? Or the MANU game for that matter. Actually, I wish I knew just how many times Ronaldo lost the ball, failed to beat his man, missed a pass, shot miles wide etc etc the other night. I guess none of that begins to compare with the sariousness of Parker passing back to Shay from kick-off.... I suggest you start thinking of more than one or two games and a couple of incidents. Think Big Picture. What, like last season where Parker was our best outfield player by a country mile? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Howaythelads Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. PARKER WANDERS AROUND??? Was anyone here at the Spurs game? Or the MANU game for that matter. Actually, I wish I knew just how many times Ronaldo lost the ball, failed to beat his man, missed a pass, shot miles wide etc etc the other night. I guess none of that begins to compare with the sariousness of Parker passing back to Shay from kick-off.... I suggest you start thinking of more than one or two games and a couple of incidents. Think Big Picture. What, like last season where Parker was our best outfield player by a country mile? OMG. Graft and sweat. That's all he was last season too. Not much point in me posting about Parker anymore. Some of us can see the reality and others can't. I expect a load of u-turns when he eventually leaves, as we saw when Jenas left. Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Taylor Swift Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. PARKER WANDERS AROUND??? Was anyone here at the Spurs game? Or the MANU game for that matter. Actually, I wish I knew just how many times Ronaldo lost the ball, failed to beat his man, missed a pass, shot miles wide etc etc the other night. I guess none of that begins to compare with the sariousness of Parker passing back to Shay from kick-off.... I suggest you start thinking of more than one or two games and a couple of incidents. Think Big Picture. What, like last season where Parker was our best outfield player by a country mile? Yea, the season where we were headed towards relegation, couldn't score goals and played the worst football this club has seen since the Dalglish era. That must be the season you're talking about, right? It surely can't be the second half of the season where we went on a run because Parker had glandular fever and our central midfield pairing was Emre/Faye/Bowyer/Dyer (for a couple of games). Mate, I was a Parker fan. I lauded his contributions and thought he was the only player consistently showing heart. I've always thought this of him and thought that if we were to lose him, we'd be in big trouble. However, during the times that we did lose him (like the end of last season and the recent run we had), we played better football, scored more goals and last season, sneaked into Europe. Now I'm not saying Parker's shite because all that harrying and hustling is a good quality however, it's just not a positive for the team, and the only thing we should all really care about is the team. Our central midfield lose shape because of Parker's lack of discipline, and because of the incompatibility between Emre and Parker, the attack is not supported with quality or consistency from the central midfield spots. His passing is also below average, which is why you rarely see a forward pass from him - he also doesn't have the vision needed. Emre does, but the opportunities to utilize this vision is limited because he has defensive duties, something which an attacking midfielder shouldn't have much of. Since last season, I've seen more and more evidence that we are better off without Parker in the center of midfield and recent results have supported this theory. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bellers Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Generally agree, you can't doubt Parker's effort and determination, but he generally seems to unbalance the side. Like I've stated before when we play Butt and Emre in the middle of the park they both have a specific role, Butt shields the back four and Emre pulls the attacking strings. When these two play we look very effective and generally well balanced. However when Parker plays he'll try and do more than his job, he'll go chasing round the park hunting round the ball which is sometimes a good thing, but when weare caught on the break it leaves a massive gap in the midfield. This seems to unbalance the team, when Parker plays with Butt we seem to lack cutting edge. When he plays with Emre, Emre doesn't seem to know whether he's on his head or his arse, which isn't brilliant when we're on the defensive. Regarding his "negative play", I do think this is slightly exaggerated. Frequently his back passes build a platform from which attacks are built from, after all I'd much rather he kept the ball than gave it away. However I do wish he wouldn't dwell on the ball as much as he tends to do. The second goal we conceded against the mancs was just generally bad play across the park. The ball should have been closed down before it reached Ronaldo and when it did too many players where sucked in leaving their most dangerous attacking midfielder with all the space in the world. If we're being hyper critical Given didn't exactly cover himself in glory either. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedudeabides Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. PARKER WANDERS AROUND??? Was anyone here at the Spurs game? Or the MANU game for that matter. Actually, I wish I knew just how many times Ronaldo lost the ball, failed to beat his man, missed a pass, shot miles wide etc etc the other night. I guess none of that begins to compare with the sariousness of Parker passing back to Shay from kick-off.... I suggest you start thinking of more than one or two games and a couple of incidents. Think Big Picture. What, like last season where Parker was our best outfield player by a country mile? OMG. Graft and sweat. That's all he was last season too. Not much point in me posting about Parker anymore. Some of us can see the reality and others can't. I expect a load of u-turns when he eventually leaves, as we saw when Jenas left. Cheers Okay Mr Patronising. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thedudeabides Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Parker couldn't hold his position if his life depended on it, it's like when you see people kicking a ball around in the park with their dog, he just runs after everything without putting any thought into it whatsoever, their first goal is a good example of that. He does. As does Dyer. Neither of them have any f***ing clue about playing in position. That, for me, is why Emre and Parker never look good together (another lesser reason being Emre's obvious deficiencies). Parker wanders around, and Emre isn't disciplined enough to cover it. When Emre plays with Butt, a player who knows how to play in a position, Emre looks a lot better. PARKER WANDERS AROUND??? Was anyone here at the Spurs game? Or the MANU game for that matter. Actually, I wish I knew just how many times Ronaldo lost the ball, failed to beat his man, missed a pass, shot miles wide etc etc the other night. I guess none of that begins to compare with the sariousness of Parker passing back to Shay from kick-off.... I suggest you start thinking of more than one or two games and a couple of incidents. Think Big Picture. What, like last season where Parker was our best outfield player by a country mile? Yea, the season where we were headed towards relegation, couldn't score goals and played the worst football this club has seen since the Dalglish era. That must be the season you're talking about, right? It surely can't be the second half of the season where we went on a run because Parker had glandular fever and our central midfield pairing was Emre/Faye/Bowyer/Dyer (for a couple of games). Mate, I was a Parker fan. I lauded his contributions and thought he was the only player consistently showing heart. I've always thought this of him and thought that if we were to lose him, we'd be in big trouble. However, during the times that we did lose him (like the end of last season and the recent run we had), we played better football, scored more goals and last season, sneaked into Europe. Now I'm not saying Parker's shite because all that harrying and hustling is a good quality however, it's just not a positive for the team, and the only thing we should all really care about is the team. Our central midfield lose shape because of Parker's lack of discipline, and because of the incompatibility between Emre and Parker, the attack is not supported with quality or consistency from the central midfield spots. His passing is also below average, which is why you rarely see a forward pass from him - he also doesn't have the vision needed. Emre does, but the opportunities to utilize this vision is limited because he has defensive duties, something which an attacking midfielder shouldn't have much of. Since last season, I've seen more and more evidence that we are better off without Parker in the center of midfield and recent results have supported this theory. Apart from Tottenham (where Bowyer had his only decent game for the club) and Chelsea (who played their reserves), 3 of those games were against the relegated teams and there was also victories against a piss poor Boro team and a fading Wigan at home.......not exactly conclusive evidence that his absence turned our season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zero Posted January 3, 2007 Share Posted January 3, 2007 Generally agree, you can't doubt Parker's effort and determination, but he generally seems to unbalance the side. Like I've stated before when we play Butt and Emre in the middle of the park they both have a specific role, Butt shields the back four and Emre pulls the attacking strings. When these two play we look very effective and generally well balanced. However when Parker plays he'll try and do more than his job, he'll go chasing round the park hunting round the ball which is sometimes a good thing, but when weare caught on the break it leaves a massive gap in the midfield. This seems to unbalance the team, when Parker plays with Butt we seem to lack cutting edge. When he plays with Emre, Emre doesn't seem to know whether he's on his head or his arse, which isn't brilliant when we're on the defensive. Regarding his "negative play", I do think this is slightly exaggerated. Frequently his back passes build a platform from which attacks are built from, after all I'd much rather he kept the ball than gave it away. However I do wish he wouldn't dwell on the ball as much as he tends to do. The second goal we conceded against the mancs was just generally bad play across the park. The ball should have been closed down before it reached Ronaldo and when it did too many players where sucked in leaving their most dangerous attacking midfielder with all the space in the world. If we're being hyper critical Given didn't exactly cover himself in glory either. Spot on. Where the problem exactly lies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now