• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Scott Parker

I want to see Sandro gradually replace Parker as I believe he will eventually have a lot more to offer. In terms of Parker's recent form - apart from the injury, I honestly think he's just looked that bit more tired (no surprise considering his work-rate in previous games). He's had to come further forward recently due to a lot of bus parking by the opposition - it's something he can do but needs more space (so against open teams). That said, he's not the only one to struggle against sides that saturate their 18 yard box.
 
http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/nov/11/xabi-alonso-spain-england-interview

A single English word he returns to that, unpacked, analysed and investigated, explains much. "I don't think tackling is a quality," he says. "It is a recurso, something you have to resort to, not a characteristic of your game. At Liverpool I used to read the matchday programme and you'd read an interview with a lad from the youth team. They'd ask: age, heroes, strong points, etc. He'd reply: 'Shooting and tackling'. I can't get into my head that football development would educate tackling as a quality, something to learn, to teach, a characteristic of your play. How can that be a way of seeing the game? I just don't understand football in those terms. Tackling is a [last] resort, and you will need it, but it isn't a quality to aspire to, a definition. It's hard to change because it's so rooted in the English football culture, but I don't understand it."

The tackle is perhaps the greatest expression of an English conception of the game ÔÇô physical, epic, emotional. By definition, reactive. After every tournament knockout, some respond by moaning that England's players did not feel the shirt, that they lacked passion. Alonso admires the sentiment but does not share it. Spain's experience suggests other flaws; passion is a myth to be debunked. "Passion?" he says. "Of course it's necessary but it's more important to have footballing foundations, certainly when developing players. Passion isn't something you work on. It's more important to construct a good team, to know how you are going to play, how to read the match. You have to truly understand the game."

Less motivation, more preparation, then? "Yes," Alonso says. "And from youth level upwards. From a Spanish perspective, what matters is the ball ÔÇô possession of it, knowing what to do with it and when. The identity is clear. Technique is vital and intelligence is fundamental. You need players who interpret the play, who can adapt and do not just have one concrete skill or characteristic.
 
Tackling itself isn't a skill - tackling with precision timing is the skill. Of course, anyone can attempt a tackle but not everyone is as imppeccible at it as is Mr Scholes...

You can be up against a player who is twice as fast as you, maybe stronger - how else do you take the ball off him? positioning yourself, pre-empting his movement and then timing you tackle. All of that takes something special. It isn't like shooting or dribbling, you miss a shot or lose the ball after taking it past 3 players, not always going to be detrimental to the result. Now mistiming a tackle and you can get sent off and or give away a penalty.

There is a skill in it as much as there is in shooting. Anyone can shoot as too but there's more to it as there is to tackling.

If he wants to make a statement of British footie then he'd be better off talking about grassroots education and where flair or style is frowned upon (well it was in my day)
 
There is no need to tackle if you position yourself well enough for the opposition to pass the ball sideways or backwards. As long as he gains no ground other than by trying a through ball that you by good positioning can intercept, then there is no need to practice tackling. Parker is exceptionally good at positioning, so is Sandro. That's what makes them able to make those tackles we have seen them do in the first place. But often that is because we made an offensive mistake losing the ball high upfield.
 
Yep and that is part of the tackling process IMO (not just the lunge at the ball). In addtion, it's not always one on one - you might have to cover team mates who do not position themselves well and lose a player or the ball (think last ditch tackling). I've played amateur and semi-pro footie in this country for near enough twenty years and we have never practiced tackling - you practice one on ones and occasionally you may have to tackle.

If a pass is made to an opposition player and you are not marking him, with good enough timing, you can go shoulder to shoulder (where he still has the ball). The opposition player is equally fast and strong as you. Now do you carry on running until a teammate helps or do you tackle? Keep in mind, he might go past you or give the ball to a treammate in a better position. I think in this instance, you have to make a decision and a good clean tackle (clearing the ball) can be the best option.

Difficult to explain without diagrams! :)
 
To blame our lack of form (horrible as it is with 1 loss in ?) on Parker is just so over the top it's stupid.

My opinion, Wolves game was not a great game for Parker (completely understandable due to it being his first game back), think Harry should have given him one extra game to recover (Livermore would have been sufficient). I suspect we expected a bit more pressure from Wolves, hence Harry went for safer/proven option.

When Parker & Sandro plays, or when teams defend very deep, Parker will probably get more license/instructions to move up and be less of a pure DM, which might explain some of the chalkboards.

It is january, we are still in with a shot of winning the PL and people are trying to blame one of our candidates of the season for poor form ... wtf?
 
He's just looking tired.

Can't make up what's the problem

- Him pressing 10 yards too high up the pitch

or

- The rest of the team pressing 10 yards too far back
 
i kind of agree with where he is coming from tbh - though not to the extent

last X amount of games Parker has been getting involved further up the pitch than before and it has coincided with a drop in our performance levels IMO. nothing drastic, im not really worried about it and im not even sure the two are linked.

i do however find that Parkers limitations are more apparent in the final third - players in good passing positions fail to get the ball early enough (if at all) and he tends to hold on to the ball far too long - which stifles our attacking play
 
Last edited:
Not sure what you're complaining about, punk.

Earlier in the season, you were adamant that an out-n-out DM, such as Parker, was below us.

Now, you want that "championship clogger" back?

I never said I wanted an out and out DM, I said that I wanted a holder/anchorman rather than a presser/destroyer (or in a derogatory terms a headless chicken). When we started the season he seemed to be doing a lot of leg work for modric in deep areas of the pitch and playing it simple to Modric or the full backs, which I appreciated. But I also noted that his passing wasn't on the same level of Hudd or Modric, and that In a 4-4-2 with traditional wigners both players need to be excellent passers of the ball if you want to break down teams. The opposition can easily stifle the more creative of the two players leaving.

However as of late he has been pushing forward far to much and modric is playing deeper because of it. Ask yourselves this question, who would you rather held and who would you rather got into advance positions out of the two?

Right now Parker seems to be attacking more and I don't think our play is as fluid as before? Livermore played against everton who also wanted to hit us on the break and stick 10 men behind the ball. He provided an excellent platform to build up attacks as he linked the defence and the midfield with some good forward passing to VDV and modric. We also played some really nice football as it allowed modric to be further forward and get involved with the attacking. If parker played his more advanced role with Hudd in the team, there would be better balance as Hudd would sit and act as the creative fulcrum whilst Parker harassing and driving forward would create chances for us. However you do not want to let modric sit and have Parker attack, that is counterproductive.
 
I think parker has to stay where he is, and defend like he started to the season.

Its a bit like bale's freedom, after winning a couple of games players start going where they want. Bale has to stay on the left and parker has to carry on chasing.
 
We'll be thankful for Parker in some of the games coming up. The reason he has been getting further up the pitch of late is because, as others have said, he is playing alongside Sandro or because our opponents are playing for a point. The games we have up until the end of March should give Parker plenty of opportunites to show how important he has been to our fantastic results this season.
 
I never said I wanted an out and out DM, I said that I wanted a holder/anchorman rather than a presser/destroyer (or in a derogatory terms a headless chicken). When we started the season he seemed to be doing a lot of leg work for modric in deep areas of the pitch and playing it simple to Modric or the full backs, which I appreciated.
No you did not. You dismissed it as unnecessary for a team of our calibre.

Now the shoe doesn't fit so you've found another stick to beat him with.

Bale shirking his LW responsibilities, leading to our lack of form?
 
The problem has been not only Parker pushing forward, but also VDV dropping deep to pick up the ball What is that all about? I'm sure opposition teams are not worried about him gaining possession in our back third, or conversely Parker 'bursting' forward'

Gary
 
I agree to be honest... a bit more restraint would be good but there are a few important points

Firstly we play a very high line so naturally those heatmaps are going to make Parker and Modric seem as if they play in some sort of attacking position, when in reality they are deep a lot of the time relative to the other players on the pitch.

Also, the whole point of our game is pass and move. For one of Parker or Modric to pass and break from midfield is what should be happening, especially as everyone always moans VDV is too deep. We need people 25 yards out to give passing options and play through balls, and often this is Parker or Modric. This was especially true against Wolves where we were trying to break down a determined defence and pushing more players forward.

Finally, you compare Parker's heatmap with Modric. I think this is a pretty poor comparison because as we all know Modric runs our game from back to front and thus his passing percentages in the final third are likely to be lower, despite the fact he is still probably making a lot more passes than Parker in this area. Not to mention the type of passes they're playing, the runs they make, etc. Some sort of representation of average positions on the pitch would be more helpful but I'm a firm believer that any statistical analysis is very limited, football cannot be translated into numbers.
 
i'll say it again...micheal brown

Brown was a big reason we didint get relegated and done a fantastic job for us. Parker is much more of a footballer, but both will never get the credit they deserve from some people. Those people are usually the ones who see football as some kind of theoretical equation, where you can work out victory on chalkboard chart, and never, ever consider the fact that there is always an opposition, trying to f#ck things up.

Its the same when a good shot is saved. "He should have buried that..." Ignoring the fact that there is a keeper, doing HIS job too.

I usually find that these idealists have never kicked a ball in their life, in the playground or park, or for their school or pub, let alone Sunday League, at any age or level.

If you can do it with a joystick, it should work in real life to them.
 
Back