Guest TheOrder Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Ashton sounds quite posh, and Parkers eyebrow keeps moving when he talks. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest elbee909 Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 bit oF A bitch for the reported fee to go from £8.5m to £6.5m, though that is a much fairer reflection of his worth. Was excluding VAT, mind. Add that back in and you get 7.6 mill Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrenBartonCentrePartin Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Ashton sounds quite posh, and Parkers eyebrow keeps moving when he talks. Parker has immediately dropped back into thick-sounding cockney mode now he is back in Landan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest TheOrder Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 me owd mucka! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
WarrenBartonCentrePartin Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 nar its the bloody annoying use of "we was" instead of "we were" that boils my piss its basic fucking english! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Alan Pardew is the worst for that. Can't stand him. Useless pr*ck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dokko Posted June 7, 2007 Share Posted June 7, 2007 Parker being professional until the bitter end. You could see he wanted to say something about the move, back at us, but he kept his head and brushed it all off. I honestly thought he was slightly sad at leaving, maybe he was nudged in the end, i dont think he was pushed though, i think he may have wanted the move before all the takeover stuff happened. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
EthiGeordie Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 I always think we should keep this fella. He would have been a good player for us right now. One of bad Big Sam's mistake. You just can't sell you captian's He just sign a new 4 years contract with the hammers this afternoon. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 No better than Guthrie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 No better than Guthrie. Parker is lot better than Guthrie. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AyeDubbleYoo Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Players always look better when you don't have to watch them every week. See James Milner... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 No better than Guthrie. Parker is lot better than Guthrie. He wasn't when he played here. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 No better than Guthrie. Parker is lot better than Guthrie. He wasn't when he played here. Parker in his first season here was miles better, his 2nd only a lot better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thespence Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Players always look better when you don't have to watch them every week. See James Milner... Is that why Guthrie looks average at best. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 No better than Guthrie. Parker is lot better than Guthrie. He wasn't when he played here. Parker in his first season here was miles better, his 2nd only a lot better. Parker in his first season was very poor with the odd exception (Arsenal at home the obvious). His distribution was very poor, he didn't get forward and he couldn't form a partnership with any of the other central midfielders. He didn't look comfortable being the one to get forward more (alongside Butt) or the more defensively minded (alongside Emre). He looked clueless the majority of the time, and it was no surprise that we massively improved as a team when he was out with glandular fever in the second half of the season. He wasn't without his attributes, he could time his tackling pretty well and had a lot of energy, but his reading of the game was hopeless (2-2 with ManU at home he was twice dragged out of position trying to play the hero and ultimately leaving Scholes free to score). He also had very little creativity - the majority of his passes seemed to go to the left back after endless pirouettes - and posed little to no goal threat. From what I've seen of Guthrie he offers a similar amount on the pitch to what I saw from Parker, only he looks to have more potential. Parker may well have improved at West Ham, can't say I've watched them much this season, but I don't remember him looking up to much when we lost 3-1 at the Boleyn Ground. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 No better than Guthrie. Parker is lot better than Guthrie. He wasn't when he played here. Parker in his first season here was miles better, his 2nd only a lot better. Parker in his first season was very poor with the odd exception (Arsenal at home the obvious). His distribution was very poor, he didn't get forward and he couldn't form a partnership with any of the other central midfielders. He didn't look comfortable being the one to get forward more (alongside Butt) or the more defensively minded (alongside Emre). He looked clueless the majority of the time, and it was no surprise that we massively improved as a team when he was out with glandular fever in the second half of the season. He wasn't without his attributes, he could time his tackling pretty well and had a lot of energy, but his reading of the game was hopeless (2-2 with ManU at home he was twice dragged out of position trying to play the hero and ultimately leaving Scholes free to score). He also had very little creativity - the majority of his passes seemed to go to the left back after endless pirouettes - and posed little to no goal threat. From what I've seen of Guthrie he offers a similar amount on the pitch to what I saw from Parker, only he looks to have more potential. Parker may well have improved at West Ham, can't say I've watched them much this season, but I don't remember him looking up to much when we lost 3-1 at the Boleyn Ground. False. Everything you're referring to was in his second season under Roeder when he was captain surely? In his first season he was effective in linking the defence with attack and particularly good at breaking down the oppositions play. Second season he was ineffective and looked out of his depth as captain. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenny Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Parker was outstanding in his first season for us IMO. It's only when Roeder decided he wanted to try and fix something that wasn't broken by making him an attacking midfielder that his performances dropped. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
TRon Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Parker is a jack of all trades player who might have been ok playing ins Butt's position instead of alongside him. Decent water carrier as Cantona would put it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 If Parker was so outstanding in our first season, why were we an awful team that only got better once Roeder came in and Parker wasn't playing any more? Why did we look much more capable of playing the ball through the middle and liking play between defence and attack once he wasn't playing anymore? He looked the best of a bad bunch because he put big slide tackles in, but he really wasn't. I wish HTL was here, he'd back me up Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mowen Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 Parker is a jack of all trades player who might have been ok playing ins Butt's position instead of alongside him. Decent water carrier as Cantona would put it. Was at his worst alongside Emre imo. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest firetotheworks Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 If Parker was so outstanding in our first season, why were we an awful team that only got better once Roeder came in and Parker wasn't playing any more? Why did we look much more capable of playing the ball through the middle and liking play between defence and attack once he wasn't playing anymore? He looked the best of a bad bunch because he put big slide tackles in, but he really wasn't. I wish HTL was here, he'd back me up This coincided with Souness leaving, nothing to do with Parker in that season. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lenny Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 You can't pin the circumstances of a season on one player. Parker and Given were probably the only decent things to come out of Souness' season with us. Roeder then came in and tried to change the way Parker played. The team may have improved (aguable), but because he wasn't being effectively used, Parker's performances dropped. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
quayside Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 No better than Guthrie. Parker is lot better than Guthrie. He wasn't when he played here. Parker in his first season here was miles better, his 2nd only a lot better. Parker in his first season was very poor with the odd exception (Arsenal at home the obvious). His distribution was very poor, he didn't get forward and he couldn't form a partnership with any of the other central midfielders. He didn't look comfortable being the one to get forward more (alongside Butt) or the more defensively minded (alongside Emre). He looked clueless the majority of the time, and it was no surprise that we massively improved as a team when he was out with glandular fever in the second half of the season. He wasn't without his attributes, he could time his tackling pretty well and had a lot of energy, but his reading of the game was hopeless (2-2 with ManU at home he was twice dragged out of position trying to play the hero and ultimately leaving Scholes free to score). He also had very little creativity - the majority of his passes seemed to go to the left back after endless pirouettes - and posed little to no goal threat. From what I've seen of Guthrie he offers a similar amount on the pitch to what I saw from Parker, only he looks to have more potential. Parker may well have improved at West Ham, can't say I've watched them much this season, but I don't remember him looking up to much when we lost 3-1 at the Boleyn Ground. False. Everything you're referring to was in his second season under Roeder when he was captain surely? In his first season he was effective in linking the defence with attack and particularly good at breaking down the oppositions play. Second season he was ineffective and looked out of his depth as captain. Agree with that. It was in his second season when Roeder tried to use him as an attacking midfielder that it all went wrong. And Mowen's criticism of Parker not linking with Butt in Parker's first season is bollox as Butt was on loan at Birmingham then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dave Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 When I've watched West Ham this season he's looked exactly the same as he did for us. Utterly average, he just works hard. He's getting plaudits at the moment because his team are getting results; don't confuse that with him suddenly being any better. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldtype Posted February 13, 2009 Share Posted February 13, 2009 When I've watched West Ham this season he's looked exactly the same as he did for us. Utterly average, he just works hard. He's getting plaudits at the moment because his team are getting results; don't confuse that with him suddenly being any better. I was at Upton Park a few months ago and there was this hilarious deja vu moment where a West Ham fan next to me stood up and screamed at him to "stop doing those f***ing pirouette turn things." He's always been a pretty decent player with a couple notable flaws, even when he was at his worst for us. It isn't that he's suddenly gotten any better it's just that both the manager and the fans had some pretty unreasonable expectations for him in his last year here. I'd certainly have him back, especially after two years of Butt as first choice CM. 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