Scott Parker

[90291Spur]

I do rate Parker over Jenas when it comes to tackling and effort. Jenas often seemed to just coast through games.

Parker influenced more games more often than JJ, who only showed his potential in fits and starts (the 5-1 against the Goons being a prime example). While Parker isn't the silkiest of players he added some steel to the side last year and was mostly solid.

 

[onlyme]

Just to repeat..Parker was in our side when we were playing well and when we weren't.

 

[Spurs7891]

I rated Parker higher than Sandro. But Sandro has improved greatly this season that it is almost impossible to drop him now. But still Parker will be a good addition to the squad, maybe covering for the injury-prone Dembele.

 

[scaramanga]

I rated Parker higher than Sandro. But Sandro has improved greatly this season that it is almost impossible to drop him now. But still Parker will be a good addition to the squad, maybe covering for the injury-prone Dembele.

Parker & Sandro in the middle?

I'm off to find an emoticon for someone puking their own eyeballs out because of the ugly football they've just witnessed.

 

[Spurs7891]

Parker & Sandro in the middle?

I'm off to find an emoticon for someone puking their own eyeballs out because of the ugly football they've just witnessed.

Atleast Parker is better to have as cover rather than Hudd or Livermore.

 

[ArcspacE]

Atleast Parker is better to have as cover rather than Hudd or Livermore.

Hudd boasts a decent passing range while Livermore's workrate and physicallity always comes useful.

Difficult to comapre those 3 like-for-like - each offers something different

 

[onlyme]

Hudd boasts a decent passing range while Livermore's workrate and physicallity always comes in useful.

Difficult to compare those 3 like-for-like - each offers something different

Correct. Which is why I am sanguine about Parker staying or going. Parker has zero threat going forward. But I want the guy fit-maybe him coming on in the last 10 minutes would have gained us many points this season. Maybe.

 

[parklane1]

Parker & Sandro in the middle?

I'm off to find an emoticon for someone puking their own eyeballs out because of the ugly football they've just witnessed.

i agree that those two together would be awful to watch and far too defensive, it has to be one or the other for me.

 

[NWND]

Oh FFS if people are seriously putting Livermore in the same bracket as Parker as being an effective premiership midfielder i'm off to find an emoticon that involves sticking knives in my own face.

Parker won so much ball for us both high and low up the pitch last season. He was vital in turning round a terrible start when he came into the side into a title challenge. He was first-choice for England which is something Thudd and Livermore will only ever dream of.

I think Sandro would be very hard to drop but Parker would definately be 3rd in line and is superior to both Thudd and Livermore in terms of what he offers the team across all areas.

 

[onlyme]

IMO he was not vital-useful but not vital. I remember the same stuff being said about Palacios.

 

[Spursalot]

Oh FFS if people are seriously putting Livermore in the same bracket as Parker as being an effective premiership midfielder i'm off to find an emoticon that involves sticking knives in my own face.

Parker won so much ball for us both high and low up the pitch last season. He was vital in turning round a terrible start when he came into the side into a title challenge. He was first-choice for England which is something Thudd and Livermore will only ever dream of.

I think Sandro would be very hard to drop but Parker would definately be 3rd in line and is superior to both Thudd and Livermore in terms of what he offers the team across all areas.

Well that's a load of crap for a start.


Thudd offers creativity and a forward momentum. Parker offers neither of those. Even Livermore offers more going forwards.


I'd also dismiss the 'terrible start' issue. It was Man united and Emirates Marketing Project. Generally speaking i am expecting them to beat us anyway.


The fact that he was first choice for England is more of a downer too, it shows the state of the England side, which is pretty poor. Parker is a good player at what he does, however what he does is extremely limited.

 

[SUIYHA]

Parker & Sandro in the middle?

I'm off to find an emoticon for someone puking their own eyeballs out because of the ugly football they've just witnessed.

This was a good performance http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/15802713

 

[onlyme]

Parker & Sandro in the middle?

I'm off to find an emoticon for someone puking their own eyeballs out because of the ugly football they've just witnessed.

This was a good performance http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/15802713

BBC report says we were "disappointing" in the 1st half and we scored our 2 winning goals after Sandro went off in the 80th minute.


From the match report

"The scoreline flattered Spurs, who were disappointing in the first half and lacked creativity in central areas"

 

[braineclipse]

Oh FFS if people are seriously putting Livermore in the same bracket as Parker as being an effective premiership midfielder i'm off to find an emoticon that involves sticking knives in my own face.

Parker won so much ball for us both high and low up the pitch last season. He was vital in turning round a terrible start when he came into the side into a title challenge. He was first-choice for England which is something Thudd and Livermore will only ever dream of.

I think Sandro would be very hard to drop but Parker would definately be 3rd in line and is superior to both Thudd and Livermore in terms of what he offers the team across all areas.

I agree about the quality of Parker compared to Livermore.

Him being better than Livermore and Huddlestone doesn't automatically make him a better choice to start alongside Sandro though, in my opinion. It does make him the clear cut option to compete with Sandro for the defensive midfielder role in our team.

Parker was vital for us last season, not least because of Sandro's injury problems. But we need to be as ready as we can be to deal with injuries and we need a real option to Sandro for that role. Hence why I think if we do sell Parker it must be because we're bringing in someone else.

 

[africanspurs]

parker was our PLAYER OF THE SEASON last year, was our MOST CONSISTENT guy, was VITAL to our 12 game run of 11 wins and 1 draw. Will give you his best...NOTHING short of that...EVERYTIME he plays. you can rely on him to turn up no matter the opposition

I see absolutely no reason, especially considering the liklehood that we will not recoup al of our money on parker...., that we should sell him. There has got to be a place for a man that did all those things in the first line in our starting 11 let alone squad

the ONLY downside is the fact that goal scoring might be an issue when you take into account dembele's scoring record...but here is the thing......even though it is highly likely , how can we be sure that dembele not scoring for fulham was a just a VERY bad patch in his career? perhaps..(though i have nothing to back it up) he actually has quite a bit of goals in him. he did play up front for a reason in his earlier career ..; though that doesnt mean much due to the fact it was in Holland..but still there you have it

parker could even come in for sandro ...and if we start winning with parker in there ...then sandro will have to wait his turn just like everyone else. although i hope we just move things around and fit sandro in somehow

selling parker is not just wrong, i think it would be pure evil.

 

[Huddy]

I been one to moan in the past about Parker's limitations but playing alongside Modric would make most look average in comparison. Parker is a very good player that will hopefully continue the form he showed last season and we need players like him with desire and determination in abundance. He may not oust Sandro as the first name on the team sheet for the DM role but he's by far the next best option.

 

[Spursalot]

parker was our PLAYER OF THE SEASON last year, was our MOST CONSISTENT guy, was VITAL to our 12 game run of 11 wins and 1 draw. Will give you his best...NOTHING short of that...EVERYTIME he plays. you can rely on him to turn up no matter the opposition

I see absolutely no reason, especially considering the liklehood that we will not recoup al of our money on parker...., that we should sell him. There has got to be a place for a man that did all those things in the first line in our starting 11 let alone squad

the ONLY downside is the fact that goal scoring might be an issue when you take into account dembele's scoring record...but here is the thing......even though it is highly likely , how can we be sure that dembele not scoring for fulham was a just a VERY bad patch in his career? perhaps..(though i have nothing to back it up) he actually has quite a bit of goals in him. he did play up front for a reason in his earlier career ..; though that doesnt mean much due to the fact it was in Holland..but still there you have it

parker could even come in for sandro ...and if we start winning with parker in there ...then sandro will have to wait his turn just like everyone else. although i hope we just move things around and fit sandro in somehow

selling parker is not just wrong, i think it would be pure evil.

Does Parker not have to wait his turn as is? Sandro has been playing extremely well this season and offers slightly more going forward than Parker, though not that much.


After his performances this season it's Sandro's place to lose. Would set a very bad precedent for someone playing well to be replaced as soon as someone else is fit.

 

[Rorschach]

I agree about the quality of Parker compared to Livermore.

Him being better than Livermore and Huddlestone doesn't automatically make him a better choice to start alongside Sandro though, in my opinion. It does make him the clear cut option to compete with Sandro for the defensive midfielder role in our team.

Parker was vital for us last season, not least because of Sandro's injury problems. But we need to be as ready as we can be to deal with injuries and we need a real option to Sandro for that role. Hence why I think if we do sell Parker it must be because we're bringing in someone else.

This. It is one of Sandro/Parker/Livermore and one of Dembele/Thudd/Carroll, and probably in that order. We could however see a switch to a proper 3 man midfield if Moutinho were to appear on the scene.

 

[ArcspacE]

Does Parker not have to wait his turn as is? Sandro has been playing extremely well this season and offers slightly more going forward than Parker, though not that much.

Don't worry, mate - AVB won't drop one of our most consistent peformers this season in order to accommodate a player who offers considerably less to him

 

[africanspurs]

Does Parker not have to wait his turn as is? Sandro has been playing extremely well this season and offers slightly more going forward than Parker, though not that much.


After his performances this season it's Sandro's place to lose. Would set a very bad precedent for someone playing well to be replaced as soon as someone else is fit.

am not saying that parker SHOULD come in for sandro. just that he could come in for him. like an option

last season many here stuck it to harry for not rotating the squad (not me) assuming that these people arent changing thier minds then resting sandro when and if he needs it wouildnt make us lose out to a level that would significantly put us in the losing column


and if parker comes in for a fatigued, injured or off form sandro and we win games while parker plays well. then sandro is just going to have to win his place back.