Scott Parker

[GStar]

maybe he was good, but he was not recognised as world class, until his later years. My point being that just because your playing well when your 31, instead of when you were young doesnt make you not world class. Plenty of players take years to turn into good players

But Parker isn't playing well now, he was at his peak at Charlton. Lost his way at Chelsea, redesigned himself at Newcastle and is now plying his trade with Spurs.

Whilst some, like Drogba, develop late, i don't think Parker has come on leaps and bounds in recent years. He's certainly not world class and should Barry, Lampard and Wilshire be available i think he'd be touch and go to make a squad let alone the team.

 

[Blue Mist]

To be fair to Parker. He does not sit there in an interview, whether its a newspaper or TV and say 'I am world class'. It is the sad, lazy journalist that needs to fill a back page whilst sat in the pub that promotes the likes of Parker into world class status. What has pee'd me off in the past is how the England manager then seems to select his team around polpular opinion, i.e. what the Sun or Mirror write, so journo's say Parker is the new (insert any player in the last 40 years) and the England manager then seemed to pick him irrespective of whether he could fit into the team formation. It is my hope that Hodgson is above that, although his exclision of Richards perhaps shows he isn't only time will tell.
Parkers performances (imo) show he is not good enough to regularly command a place in the team but if you listen to the commentators he is better than Messi and it's their fawning sycophantic shite they spew out that annoys me.

 

[BlueHammer85]

To be fair to Parker. He does not sit there in an interview, whether its a newspaper or TV and say 'I am world class'. It is the sad, lazy journalist that needs to fill a back page whilst sat in the pub that promotes the likes of Parker into world class status. What has pee'd me off in the past is how the England manager then seems to select his team around polpular opinion, i.e. what the Sun or Mirror write, so journo's say Parker is the new (insert any player in the last 40 years) and the England manager then seemed to pick him irrespective of whether he could fit into the team formation. It is my hope that Hodgson is above that, although his exclision of Richards perhaps shows he isn't only time will tell.
Parkers performances (imo) show he is not good enough to regularly command a place in the team but if you listen to the commentators he is better than Messi and it's their fawning sycophantic shite they spew out that annoys me.

The hype is a fair point mate, obviously hes not in the class of Messi ( different players anyway ) but he is a very very good player - 2 player of the season awards for us, Spurs play him every game and they get 4th and England are looking strong and still unbeaten when he plays. Surely he is offering alot more that people cant see or wont give him credit for.

There is certain fans that describe Barry the same way as people describe Parker - ''he's shit'' ''he's slow'' ''he cant beat a player'' etc etc , but as City fans who watch him week in week out you no how wrong these people are.

 

[Blue Mist]

To be fair to Parker. He does not sit there in an interview, whether its a newspaper or TV and say 'I am world class'. It is the sad, lazy journalist that needs to fill a back page whilst sat in the pub that promotes the likes of Parker into world class status. What has pee'd me off in the past is how the England manager then seems to select his team around polpular opinion, i.e. what the Sun or Mirror write, so journo's say Parker is the new (insert any player in the last 40 years) and the England manager then seemed to pick him irrespective of whether he could fit into the team formation. It is my hope that Hodgson is above that, although his exclision of Richards perhaps shows he isn't only time will tell.
Parkers performances (imo) show he is not good enough to regularly command a place in the team but if you listen to the commentators he is better than Messi and it's their fawning sycophantic shite they spew out that annoys me.

The hype is a fair point mate, obviously hes not in the class of Messi ( different players anyway ) but he is a very very good player - 2 player of the season awards for us, Spurs play him every game and they get 4th and England are looking strong and still unbeaten when he plays. Surely he is offering alot more that people cant see or wont give him credit for.

There is certain fans that describe Barry the same way as people describe Parker - ''he's shit'' ''he's slow'' ''he cant beat a player'' etc etc , but as City fans who watch him week in week out you no how wrong these people are.

Reading your reply set me thinking. I wonder if I am judging Parker on his performance or on my reaction to the media hype and perhaps wrongly I am doing the latter. Perhaps I should turn my anger to those I despise, lazy, journalists and I will try and judge Parker for his performance rather than what those no marks write/say about him

 

[Mike D]

If Barry had performed the same as Parker in this tournament there would be zero slagging off

Barry could play 10 times better than Parker has this tournament and he'd still get slagged off.

But then again, he doesn't run around a lot, and look really tired and tackle with his head.

Your just teasing it out of me now, that classic Scotty Parker cliche you here after every game on Talkshite answer machine, they like to throw on every 5 minutes from cockyney Paul the hammers fan. "Yeeah knees up mather brown, Scotty Parker, he throws 'is body on the line"

Even Durham is coming around to see how much better Barry is than Scotty.

 

[Cellarite]

he slipped the other night, then as he tried to get up the ball hit him. the commentator..................fuck it, you know the rest.

 

[The Future's Blue]

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lLCZZAheNSU[/youtube]

 

[ghost305]

Scott Parker is what he is: A ball winner. He knows his limitations as a player. He's one of the better DMs out there. He really gets exposed when he tries to get involve in the attack as his decision making is terrible.

With that said, Michael Carrick would have been a far better option than Parker.

 

[The Future's Blue]

Scott Parker is what he is: A ball winner. He knows his limitations as a player. He's one of the better DMs out there. He really gets exposed when he tries to get involve in the attack as his decision making is terrible.

With that said, Michael Carrick would have been a far better option than Parker.

So, a poor mans Nigel De Jong?

That's how I see him, a specific player for a specific job. I love it when De Jong has a few games under his belt but I can't say the same about Parker for England.

Nige looked totally dis-interested playing for Holland but still did enough to outshine Parker. Please, someone prove me wrong with stats as I really want to like him?

 

[rastus]

Hes done well and given his best, hes the best in that position that England has got. To me that is sad.