The Problem with Parker

[FulhamStu]

I have said this a number of times, but it rarely seems to get discussed, and that is Parker is a major problem for us tactically.

Most fans would have Parker as one of the first names on the team sheet, I agree he is an important player and I would certainly play him and have as our captain, however:

Playing Parker as our defensive Midfield cover is a huge mistake.  Parker is a player who wants to get involved.  He is the heartbeat of the team and does a lot of work covering a lot of ground.  This is not what a defensive Midfield players prioritise should be.   The DMF player needs to hold his position and protect the back 4.  Parker does not and should not do this.

We need a player to will play behind say Parker and LVC,  maybe Hoogland could do this, however he wanders all over the place and does not seem to have a lot of pitch awareness.

I am not saying this is our only problem, clearly we also lack cover to the fullbaks due to our diamond formation.   I am saying that Kit is not the man to take us forward as he has not addressed our defensive problems which are certainly not just down to the keeper and back 4.

Good teams know how to defend, we can't defend for toffees and until this is sorted out we will continue to struggle.

Having a proper DMF player (NOT PARKER) would be a good start !

[Lighthouse]

Well you answer your own question. Who plays instead of Parker? We haven't anybody. Blame Symons for the diamond formation. But then how do we change it? Symons has tinkered here and there. But we haven't the players to play a different formation. We haven't the players to replace Parker.

Other than the problems at full backs and having no wide players and having problems in central midfield. This is a squad of great promise. As long as they promise not to do it again.

[FulhamStu]

Well you answer your own question. Who plays instead of Parker? We haven't anybody. Blame Symons for the diamond formation. But then how do we change it? Symons has tinkered here and there. But we haven't the players to play a different formation. We haven't the players to replace Parker.

Other than the problems at full backs and having no wide players and having problems in central midfield. This is a squad of great promise. As long as they promise not to do it again.

I personally would play Tunnicliffe there and coach him to not wander off. I would play Parker and Guthrie in front and work hard to find 2 wider MF players, potentially one being Kacka.   What I would not do is play Parker as DMF, he will not hold his position and I want him more involved as he is one of our better players.   The argument is similar to saying McCormack should play up front as this is where he is most effective.  You are right however in that our squad is inbalanced with a huge lack of wide MF and Defensive MF ability.  Something that Kit has not addressed.

[Tony]

I have said this a number of times, but it rarely seems to get discussed, and that is Parker is a major problem for us tactically.

Most fans would have Parker as one of the first names on the team sheet, I agree he is an important player and I would certainly play him and have as our captain, however:

Playing Parker as our defensive Midfield cover is a huge mistake.  Parker is a player who wants to get involved.  He is the heartbeat of the team and does a lot of work covering a lot of ground.  This is not what a defensive Midfield players prioritise should be.   The DMF player needs to hold his position and protect the back 4.  Parker does not and should not do this.

We need a player to will play behind say Parker and LVC,  maybe Hoogland could do this, however he wanders all over the place and does not seem to have a lot of pitch awareness.

I am not saying this is our only problem, clearly we also lack cover to the fullbaks due to our diamond formation.   I am saying that Kit is not the man to take us forward as he has not addressed our defensive problems which are certainly not just down to the keeper and back 4.

Good teams know how to defend, we can't defend for toffees and until this is sorted out we will continue to struggle.

Having a proper DMF player (NOT PARKER) would be a good start !

Yes I agree, Parker further forward would use his talents more effectively. If only we could find a young Patrick Viera (sorry if the spelling is wrong but I am sure you know who I mean)
But I am not convinced that Tunnicliffe is suitable for the role. Etuhu may not have been a great footballer, but he did break up attacks and then pass to Murphy - ie he performed the role asked of him very nicely.
How about Bodurov? Now that we have Turner in the back four, I believe we can push Bodurov into that role to help shore up the defence a bit more.

[FulhamStu]

I have said this a number of times, but it rarely seems to get discussed, and that is Parker is a major problem for us tactically.

Most fans would have Parker as one of the first names on the team sheet, I agree he is an important player and I would certainly play him and have as our captain, however:

Playing Parker as our defensive Midfield cover is a huge mistake.  Parker is a player who wants to get involved.  He is the heartbeat of the team and does a lot of work covering a lot of ground.  This is not what a defensive Midfield players prioritise should be.   The DMF player needs to hold his position and protect the back 4.  Parker does not and should not do this.

We need a player to will play behind say Parker and LVC,  maybe Hoogland could do this, however he wanders all over the place and does not seem to have a lot of pitch awareness.

I am not saying this is our only problem, clearly we also lack cover to the fullbaks due to our diamond formation.   I am saying that Kit is not the man to take us forward as he has not addressed our defensive problems which are certainly not just down to the keeper and back 4.

Good teams know how to defend, we can't defend for toffees and until this is sorted out we will continue to struggle.

Having a proper DMF player (NOT PARKER) would be a good start !

Yes I agree, Parker further forward would use his talents more effectively. If only we could find a young Patrick Viera (sorry if the spelling is wrong but I am sure you know who I mean)
But I am not convinced that Tunnicliffe is suitable for the role. Etuhu may not have been a great footballer, but he did break up attacks and then pass to Murphy - ie he performed the role asked of him very nicely.
How about Bodurov? Now that we have Turner in the back four, I believe we can push Bodurov into that role to help shore up the defence a bit more.

Possibly, Bodurov the new Bardiniho

[J.Perkins]

There is a reason it isn't discussed much...

[Whitesideup]

Parker further forward? You are kidding. Yes he has some good moments going forward ...about three a season. If he cannot be a good defensive midfield player (and in answer to another post .. you need to cover huge ground to cover this effectively, especially if you are running into and creating space when the back 4 win the ball ...think Makele ..or indeed Murphy) then what does he bring to the team? He is a hard worker who on his good days breaks up play effectively and moves the ball sensibly ..if slowly. At the moment he is worthy of a place in our team and has had some good games for us. But frankly he is now at best an average championship player. I asked a question some time ago.. Parker ..part of the problem or part of the solution? I am increasingly convinced we will not be a top 6 championship side if we have to rely on Parker as the mainstay of our midfield.

[fulhamben]

Parker further forward? You are kidding. Yes he has some good moments going forward ...about three a season. If he cannot be a good defensive midfield player (and in answer to another post .. you need to cover huge ground to cover this effectively, especially if you are running into and creating space when the back 4 win the ball ...think Makele ..or indeed Murphy) then what does he bring to the team? He is a hard worker who on his good days breaks up play effectively and moves the ball sensibly ..if slowly. At the moment he is worthy of a place in our team and has had some good games for us. But frankly he is now at best an average championship player. I asked a question some time ago.. Parker ..part of the problem or part of the solution? I am increasingly convinced we will not be a top 6 championship side if we have to rely on Parker as the mainstay of our midfield.

cant see him as a starter next season, not if we want to go up at any rate

[YoungsBitter]

Parker further forward? You are kidding. Yes he has some good moments going forward ...about three a season. If he cannot be a good defensive midfield player (and in answer to another post .. you need to cover huge ground to cover this effectively, especially if you are running into and creating space when the back 4 win the ball ...think Makele ..or indeed Murphy) then what does he bring to the team? He is a hard worker who on his good days breaks up play effectively and moves the ball sensibly ..if slowly. At the moment he is worthy of a place in our team and has had some good games for us. But frankly he is now at best an average championship player. I asked a question some time ago.. Parker ..part of the problem or part of the solution? I am increasingly convinced we will not be a top 6 championship side if we have to rely on Parker as the mainstay of our midfield.

cant see him as a starter next season, not if we want to go up at any rate

I am glad other people can see the issue - it has been blindingly obvious to me that if we look at matches won and matches lost the common denominator over 2 seasons has been Parker. Yes he is a nice guy but he is too short, gets pulled out of position then covers back and sits too deep, when we do break he slows everything down. I would be happy to see him help out with a coaching role but if Hindeman is fit I would rather see him or Tunnicliffe at the base of the diamond which Kit seems incapable of not playing...

[FPT]

I think we fall into a common trap these days in specifying midfielders as "defensive" or "attacking."

I agree with Stu's point, though, that Scott Parker is more of an engine rather than the brakes or the prop shaft. Scott Parker can be more influential in a free-er role than as the deepest midfielder, though with his legs going enough as it is, he'll struggle even more to manage games with the extra kilometre or so in a box-to-box role. Although Ryan Tunnicliffe is probably the option to be our next defensive midfielder, I don't think he's good enough to be starting for us now - he's so below average technically.

To address a few points in the post/replies quickly:

- The full backs being uncovered is not a fault of the system, but the fault of the players. The central midfielder of that side should be across to cover as soon as possible with the defensive midfielder and the other central midfielder creeping over to watch for the ball coming centrally.

- Kit is working with unbalanced squad he was given, and there's progress was always going to be limited. Of course he could do better defensively for the squad, but looking at our goals against - 19 of our goals were conceded prior to Kit arriving, Kit also had our best right back and left back injured, leaving us with a mismatch of defenders.

- Moving a defender into that role is an interesting proposition, but I don't think Bodurov is the man. I do think that is when we look at Tim Hoogland, but I'd rather not. Tiago Casasola (I know but this is hypothetical) is technically proficient, so could have the technique to play this role but as I said, we're talking hypothetically.

- Scott Parker is a very good and important player for us, and for a good reason. I wonder where we would be without him this season? A lot worse off I'll tell you that. Every team needs a Scott Parker around, even if for just the one in three games. We need to have a very strong summer transfer window this year to make our mark (belatedly) on the division, and Scott Parker being around the squad for another season is vital in overseeing the transition.



It's certainly a good discussion to bring up, but as you note, we have little other option. Scott Parker is our most capable there, so we can't really complain whether he can play there or not.

[fulhamben]

I think we fall into a common trap these days in specifying midfielders as "defensive" or "attacking."

I agree with Stu's point, though, that Scott Parker is more of an engine rather than the brakes or the prop shaft. Scott Parker can be more influential in a free-er role than as the deepest midfielder, though with his legs going enough as it is, he'll struggle even more to manage games with the extra kilometre or so in a box-to-box role. Although Ryan Tunnicliffe is probably the option to be our next defensive midfielder, I don't think he's good enough to be starting for us now - he's so below average technically.

To address a few points in the post/replies quickly:

- The full backs being uncovered is not a fault of the system, but the fault of the players. The central midfielder of that side should be across to cover as soon as possible with the defensive midfielder and the other central midfielder creeping over to watch for the ball coming centrally.

- Kit is working with unbalanced squad he was given, and there's progress was always going to be limited. Of course he could do better defensively for the squad, but looking at our goals against - 19 of our goals were conceded prior to Kit arriving, Kit also had our best right back and left back injured, leaving us with a mismatch of defenders.

- Moving a defender into that role is an interesting proposition, but I don't think Bodurov is the man. I do think that is when we look at Tim Hoogland, but I'd rather not. Tiago Casasola (I know but this is hypothetical) is technically proficient, so could have the technique to play this role but as I said, we're talking hypothetically.

- Scott Parker is a very good and important player for us, and for a good reason. I wonder where we would be without him this season? A lot worse off I'll tell you that. Every team needs a Scott Parker around, even if for just the one in three games. We need to have a very strong summer transfer window this year to make our mark (belatedly) on the division, and Scott Parker being around the squad for another season is vital in overseeing the transition.



It's certainly a good discussion to bring up, but as you note, we have little other option. Scott Parker is our most capable there, so we can't really complain whether he can play there or not.

our last two away wins have been without parker, so i beg to differ on him being the most capable there. and i dont think we would be any worse off without him. looks good when we win, anonymous when we lose, which is often. and our squad isnt unbalanced, kit just makes it look that way with his refusal to try the obvious

[bill taylors apprentice]

Agreed!

[St Eve]

Parker tries and tries but just runs around in circles. We need to start thinking about life without Parker

[Cravenawin]

I would have thought today especially, we will need the fighting qualities and Leadership and experience of Scott Parker.

I would have thought today especially, we will need the fighting qualities and Leadership and experience of Scott Parker.

Couldn't agree more. The amount of Parker bashers on here is amazing.

[Dodger53]

Parker tries and tries but just runs around in circles. We need to start thinking about life without Parker

He actually walks more than he runs and yes in circles, slow slow and more slow is what Parker brings to the team

[FulhamStu]

If you read my piece again, i am not saying Scott Parker should not play, I am saying he should not be the DMF player.   I am also not saying Scott Parker should be attacking all the time.  Parker is a water carrier type player, certainly worth his place in the team but not as DMF more conventional central midfield.

[filham]

Yes Stu I fully agree with you our attack looks at its best when we are chasing a game and  Parker is up there just behind the strikers and actually running at defenders , he has both the skill and experience needed in the engine room of the team.

It shouldn't be too hard to find a tall tough player too help out the back four, Tunnicliffe being the obvious choice

[Skatzoffc]

For me the future is Hyndman. He could be the new Murphy.

His close control and 1st touch is great.
His awareness and simple triangle possession football is exemplary for someone his age.

He will improve with the right coaching, (what I'd give to get Murphy on the backroom staff to coach our young midfielders).
But probably needs to increase his core strength in the difficult, physical, midfield role. Especially in this division.

He has also played for the USA team in a more forward role and apparently excelled in the more attacking position.

Imo, it is essential we keep him but also bring on his skills in the future.

COYW!