Manager situation

[Bassey the warrior]

For me Parker is underachieving for sure. However kneejerk reactions are never wise.

I would keep him until end of Feb still, unless someone a better fit is interested. They must be someone that wouldn't radically change our style, so someone that will play a possession-based game. That rules put Moyes, Allardyce, etc.

With this in mind Joka eould be amazing and I don't think it's impossible. We are ambitious and have a decent squad and I he has been out of work for a while. There's a number of inpressive managers in the league as well, just depends on whether they are interested.

I really want it to work out for Parker but he's lacking flexibility and tactical awareness, also a bit of bravery in our attacking play.

[N_O_W_S]

For me Parker is underachieving for sure. However kneejerk reactions are never wise.

I would keep him until end of Feb still, unless someone a better fit is interested. They must be someone that wouldn't radically change our style, so someone that will play a possession-based game. That rules put Moyes, Allardyce, etc.

With this in mind Joka eould be amazing and I don't think it's impossible. We are ambitious and have a decent squad and I he has been out of work for a while. There's a number of inpressive managers in the league as well, just depends on whether they are interested.

I really want it to work out for Parker but he's lacking flexibility and tactical awareness, also a bit of bravery in our attacking play.

Jokanovic has been managing Al Gharafa since July and has a contract until 2021.

[filham]

In my book Parker is our manager for the rest of the season and we all need to get behind him. That doesn't mean we can't be critical of his tactics or team selections but we really don't want a repeat of last season with a big name coming in resulting in no increase in results.

[Spirit of 2000]

Unfortunately I don't think the possession at all costs, let's outplay the opposition approach will work in the premiership. I love Slav and was gutted to see him go but let's remove the rose tinted specs for a second and acknowledge that it wasn't going well for him with his style in the premier. Yes much was down to the dubious business for unsuitable players done by TK but there's also a very real case that a more pragmatic approach is required to survive the premier. Unless you have the sort of players Wolves were blessed with then it's tricky to play an open, possession based game looking to play the opposition off the pitch if you're a newly promoted side. Look at the promoted sides up there this year. Is it the side who are the biggest club who spent well in excess of 100 million (more than us in fact) who're doing the best? No Villa are 17th & only outside the bottom 3 on goal difference. Is it last seasons champions Norwich who dazzled with their attacking play who are doing the best? Nope - they're in the bottom 3. However it's the unfashionable but workmanlike Sheff United with a canny manager in Wilder who have based their game on being organised, hard to beat, running through brick walls for one another and fighting until the last who currently sit 7th from top. In my opinion we need to adopt a slightly more "competitive edge" let's say to our game in the long term and yes let's try to play the football when we can but as many a great coach have said, you EARN your right to play - and that needs to be on a more solid base than our current/recent model.

[toshes mate]

Unfortunately I don't think the possession at all costs, let's outplay the opposition approach will work in the premiership. I love Slav and was gutted to see him go but let's remove the rose tinted specs for a second and acknowledge that it wasn't going well for him with his style in the premier. Yes much was down to the dubious business for unsuitable players done by TK but there's also a very real case that a more pragmatic approach is required to survive the premier.

The FFC relationship with Jokanovic was poisoned long before he managed the team through the play offs.  He had already shown that he could deal with and trump both CK and TK via professionalism alone, and the warning signs were well and truly lit before CK was unceremoniously removed.  The reaction to the Wembley win from TK in particular was almost as if the play off wins were a totally unexpected bonus for FFC, and no serious preparation for recruitment has been arranged.  I suspect that SJ may have wished for and needed better support but I am sure he knew the reality of TK's many flaws. 

SJ talent was being wasted by TK and that is not a recipe for success as can be seen from last season's end product and this season's mixed bag.  FFC in the Khan era have had no collective idea how to hold on to and manage the few gems that come your way in football.   I still believe we need a good professional football background DoF which would not only help recruitment success but also be of merciful assistance to SP who is seemingly losing his way too.   

[Woolly Mammoth]

Unfortunately I don't think the possession at all costs, let's outplay the opposition approach will work in the premiership. I love Slav and was gutted to see him go but let's remove the rose tinted specs for a second and acknowledge that it wasn't going well for him with his style in the premier. Yes much was down to the dubious business for unsuitable players done by TK but there's also a very real case that a more pragmatic approach is required to survive the premier.

The FFC relationship with Jokanovic was poisoned long before he managed the team through the play offs.  He had already shown that he could deal with and trump both CK and TK via professionalism alone, and the warning signs were well and truly lit before CK was unceremoniously removed.  The reaction to the Wembley win from TK in particular was almost as if the play off wins were a totally unexpected bonus for FFC, and no serious preparation for recruitment has been arranged.  I suspect that SJ may have wished for and needed better support but I am sure he knew the reality of TK's many flaws. 

SJ talent was being wasted by TK and that is not a recipe for success as can be seen from last season's end product and this season's mixed bag.  FFC in the Khan era have had no collective idea how to hold on to and manage the few gems that come your way in football.   I still believe we need a good professional football background DoF which would not only help recruitment success but also be of merciful assistance to SP who is seemingly losing his way too.   

The voice of reason and wisdom, and so many wise words from your vocabulary Toshes Mate, and so very refreshing.

[Spirit of 2000]

Unfortunately I don't think the possession at all costs, let's outplay the opposition approach will work in the premiership. I love Slav and was gutted to see him go but let's remove the rose tinted specs for a second and acknowledge that it wasn't going well for him with his style in the premier. Yes much was down to the dubious business for unsuitable players done by TK but there's also a very real case that a more pragmatic approach is required to survive the premier.

The FFC relationship with Jokanovic was poisoned long before he managed the team through the play offs.  He had already shown that he could deal with and trump both CK and TK via professionalism alone, and the warning signs were well and truly lit before CK was unceremoniously removed.  The reaction to the Wembley win from TK in particular was almost as if the play off wins were a totally unexpected bonus for FFC, and no serious preparation for recruitment has been arranged.  I suspect that SJ may have wished for and needed better support but I am sure he knew the reality of TK's many flaws. 

SJ talent was being wasted by TK and that is not a recipe for success as can be seen from last season's end product and this season's mixed bag.  FFC in the Khan era have had no collective idea how to hold on to and manage the few gems that come your way in football.   I still believe we need a good professional football background DoF which would not only help recruitment success but also be of merciful assistance to SP who is seemingly losing his way too.   

The voice of reason and wisdom, and so many wise words from your vocabulary Toshes Mate, and so very refreshing.

I agree Slav was undermined by Khan/CK and the transfer business before last season was very poor (albeit slightly with hindsight) - and this underlines the need for a knowledgeable DOF, or for Khan to at least employ a trusted sounding board who has that acumen. However my point remains that we're not going to prosper trying to outplay most sides in the premier league as simply too many have better and more established players. Refer to my points regarding Villa, Norwich & Sheff Utd. IMO we need to change our approach a little. solid foundations, competitive edge then fight for the right to play some football. It's plausible that this squad would need an entire new back 4 if they were to somehow get up but I also maintain that Parkers tactics would be exploited even more so at that level.

[Robbie]

Xmas three games are crucial ...

[Worcesterwhite]

I think Parker was a gamble that hasn't paid off, need to cut our losses and go again. Sometimes you get a feeling that things will turn around and your having bad luck. Not here I think we are seeing results our performances deserve and if we hadn't rode our luck in the 4 game winning streak things could be a lot worse

[Matt10]

I think Parker was a gamble that hasn't paid off, need to cut our losses and go again. Sometimes you get a feeling that things will turn around and your having bad luck. Not here I think we are seeing results our performances deserve and if we hadn't rode our luck in the 4 game winning streak things could be a lot worse

I have to ask, but how exactly did we ride our luck in the 4 game winning streak? Is it because in two of them we conceded? One of them we looked crap for 25 minutes, but then dominated? Is there a reason those 4 crucial wins are considered lucky? I'm genuinely curious because I've seen this comment made several times, but I'm not sure if that's because the agenda of "Parker Out" is overriding the context of how those matches actually went.

[MJG]

I think Parker was a gamble that hasn't paid off, need to cut our losses and go again. Sometimes you get a feeling that things will turn around and your having bad luck. Not here I think we are seeing results our performances deserve and if we hadn't rode our luck in the 4 game winning streak things could be a lot worse

I have to ask, but how exactly did we ride our luck in the 4 game winning streak? Is it because in two of them we conceded? One of them we looked crap for 25 minutes, but then dominated? Is there a reason those 4 crucial wins are considered lucky? I'm genuinely curious because I've seen this comment made several times, but I'm not sure if that's because the agenda of "Parker Out" is overriding the context of how those matches actually went.

I think (and I'm one) people are generally not convinced that the 4 game run was anything special.
Birmingham we were down to ten men and did well to hold on in the end. QPR, we created very little and QPR were the better side at times and we did nothing for last half hour of the game and held on maybe. Derby were poor and was our best performance, but even then, he went defensive and yes we got the 3rd but had allowed them back in. Swansea, we were lucky and Rodak had a great game and we created nothing again for last 30 minutes.

Nothing was convincing, the style, the end of games, the chances.

[Statto]

I think Parker was a gamble that hasn't paid off, need to cut our losses and go again. Sometimes you get a feeling that things will turn around and your having bad luck. Not here I think we are seeing results our performances deserve and if we hadn't rode our luck in the 4 game winning streak things could be a lot worse

I have to ask, but how exactly did we ride our luck in the 4 game winning streak? Is it because in two of them we conceded? One of them we looked crap for 25 minutes, but then dominated? Is there a reason those 4 crucial wins are considered lucky? I'm genuinely curious because I've seen this comment made several times, but I'm not sure if that's because the agenda of "Parker Out" is overriding the context of how those matches actually went.

I think (and I'm one) people are generally not convinced that the 4 game run was anything special.
Birmingham we were down to ten men and did well to hold on in the end. QPR, we created very little and QPR were the better side at times and we did nothing for last half hour of the game and held on maybe. Derby were poor and was our best performance, but even then, he went defensive and yes we got the 3rd but had allowed them back in. Swansea, we were lucky and Rodak had a great game and we created nothing again for last 30 minutes.

Nothing was convincing, the style, the end of games, the chances.

Indeed. I think it pretty irrefutable that overall, we had the rub of the green in those 4 games. Although I admit I posted about how Parker's "batten down the hatches" approach seemed to be delivering results.

At the time I was prepared say it was justice for the bad luck we'd had, or will get, in other games. Bristol City is an example.

It's only the last couple of games that I've totally lost confidence in Parker (not that I had much to begin with) because they've just been such predictable, comprehensive defeats, with no mitigation, silver lining, or signs of improvement or learning.   

[Jim©]

I guess it depends on your Parker stance.
Personally I thought all four of the games (bar the first 15 mins of QPR & Swansea) we managed the games exceptionally well. A lot was made of the negativity in last 15 mins or so in many of those games, but we saw those games out.
I think if you look at the season as a whole, we have not had the rub of the green at all.

[Matt10]

I think Parker was a gamble that hasn't paid off, need to cut our losses and go again. Sometimes you get a feeling that things will turn around and your having bad luck. Not here I think we are seeing results our performances deserve and if we hadn't rode our luck in the 4 game winning streak things could be a lot worse

I have to ask, but how exactly did we ride our luck in the 4 game winning streak? Is it because in two of them we conceded? One of them we looked crap for 25 minutes, but then dominated? Is there a reason those 4 crucial wins are considered lucky? I'm genuinely curious because I've seen this comment made several times, but I'm not sure if that's because the agenda of "Parker Out" is overriding the context of how those matches actually went.

I think (and I'm one) people are generally not convinced that the 4 game run was anything special.
Birmingham we were down to ten men and did well to hold on in the end. QPR, we created very little and QPR were the better side at times and we did nothing for last half hour of the game and held on maybe. Derby were poor and was our best performance, but even then, he went defensive and yes we got the 3rd but had allowed them back in. Swansea, we were lucky and Rodak had a great game and we created nothing again for last 30 minutes.

Nothing was convincing, the style, the end of games, the chances.

I agree, it wasn't special, however how much special are we wanting here? It's football, it's dynamic, it's difficult and unpredictable. Just because it's not special does not mean it should be downplayed and used as a supporting argument for a change in management. This to me is similar to the complaint of "It's not what you're saying, it's how you're saying it..." is dominating conversations.

It sounds a little damned if you do, damned if you don't, though as well doesn't it? Is the expectation that we dominate for 90 minutes and perform without a hitch? I can't see that in any team to be honest. Even watching the Top 2, they hardly perform that perfectly, but they graft out wins in the same fashion that we have had to. Is it because of the opponents we've faced? I do think it is all about perspective.

To me, we received answers to some questions that may have been lingering, and have even been topics in this forum. Can someone else score goals other than Mitro? Can sending Reid up constantly result in him breaking his goalless streak? Can our central midfield depth be tested? Can Johansen play a deeper midfield role? Can Christie play right back for us again? Can we set up shop in a 5-4-1 versus a 5-3-2?

On paper we know how difficult that trip to St. Andrews was going to be, yet we managed a 1-0 victory from that could have been 2-0 if Kamara's shot wasn't saved in the end. Christie played brilliantly and his cross set up Mitro to take advantage of Camp's mistake.

QPR we got the answer we needed that without Mitro, we could actually score goals via Kamara - who needed a breakout game this year. We showed our character by being completely shell-shocked for 25 minutes, but then completely outplayed them for the next 65. We finished with our 5-4-1 and was able to see McDonald as the depth tester towards the end.

The trend continued, and we were rewarded with having faith in Bobby Reid who scored his first against Derby - a complete performance from top to bottom. Parker is damned if he sets up shop to perserve the points with a 5-4-1, then damned if he doesn't stay in a 4-2-3-1 to pile on the goals. Yes Derby were poor, which is more reason to be satisfied is it not? Is there a specific goal number we should have gotten to make supporters more content? Isn't it good that we didn't underperform against a remarkably terrible Derby side?

Swansea was a tough away fixture, and they were very good on the ball. Our depth was tested again, and it was highly criticized that Onomah started, but without him in the lineup, the two goals for Mitro do not happen. Would I want Arter, Reed, McDonald over him? Absolutely.

It's true, they were not ideal performances, but they were results we needed. I feel like there is a strange theme brewing of supporters who don't like Parker who want to use every single bit of negative that happens to our team as a way to spite him, and validate their stance. Isn't that a bit bizarre? Am I the only one who feels that way? As if the harm to our team is wished upon so the Parker Out agenda can be carried through? 

Personally, I'm indifferent. There's no emotion on my side because there are parts of his football that I like, and I think can be carried out as a template for multiple seasons, but at the same time I feel the rigidness in his tactics are limiting some full potential of himself and his players. I'll criticize the parts that need to be criticized, and I'll praise the parts that should be praised. A 4 match winning streak should be praised, and a 3 match losing streak should be criticized. I understand why the Parker Out snowball is building though, and a negative result vs Leeds won't matter if we play our hearts out, hit the post 20 times, and let one shot to become a conceded goal. It won't be good enough for some, and that's a real shame.

[Bassey the warrior]

For me Parker is underachieving for sure. However kneejerk reactions are never wise.

I would keep him until end of Feb still, unless someone a better fit is interested. They must be someone that wouldn't radically change our style, so someone that will play a possession-based game. That rules put Moyes, Allardyce, etc.

With this in mind Joka eould be amazing and I don't think it's impossible. We are ambitious and have a decent squad and I he has been out of work for a while. There's a number of inpressive managers in the league as well, just depends on whether they are interested.

I really want it to work out for Parker but he's lacking flexibility and tactical awareness, also a bit of bravery in our attacking play.

Jokanovic has been managing Al Gharafa since July and has a contract until 2021.

Oh. Didn't realise that.

[Bassey the warrior]

Unfortunately I don't think the possession at all costs, let's outplay the opposition approach will work in the premiership. I love Slav and was gutted to see him go but let's remove the rose tinted specs for a second and acknowledge that it wasn't going well for him with his style in the premier. Yes much was down to the dubious business for unsuitable players done by TK but there's also a very real case that a more pragmatic approach is required to survive the premier. Unless you have the sort of players Wolves were blessed with then it's tricky to play an open, possession based game looking to play the opposition off the pitch if you're a newly promoted side. Look at the promoted sides up there this year. Is it the side who are the biggest club who spent well in excess of 100 million (more than us in fact) who're doing the best? No Villa are 17th & only outside the bottom 3 on goal difference. Is it last seasons champions Norwich who dazzled with their attacking play who are doing the best? Nope - they're in the bottom 3. However it's the unfashionable but workmanlike Sheff United with a canny manager in Wilder who have based their game on being organised, hard to beat, running through brick walls for one another and fighting until the last who currently sit 7th from top. In my opinion we need to adopt a slightly more "competitive edge" let's say to our game in the long term and yes let's try to play the football when we can but as many a great coach have said, you EARN your right to play - and that needs to be on a more solid base than our current/recent model.

Agree with this, but being able to keep the ball is always a good thing. We must tighten up and also play a higher tempo in this league. Once we go up, we will need to learn how to play with less of the ball, but we need to get there first.

[MJG]

I think Parker was a gamble that hasn't paid off, need to cut our losses and go again. Sometimes you get a feeling that things will turn around and your having bad luck. Not here I think we are seeing results our performances deserve and if we hadn't rode our luck in the 4 game winning streak things could be a lot worse

I have to ask, but how exactly did we ride our luck in the 4 game winning streak? Is it because in two of them we conceded? One of them we looked crap for 25 minutes, but then dominated? Is there a reason those 4 crucial wins are considered lucky? I'm genuinely curious because I've seen this comment made several times, but I'm not sure if that's because the agenda of "Parker Out" is overriding the context of how those matches actually went.

I think (and I'm one) people are generally not convinced that the 4 game run was anything special.
Birmingham we were down to ten men and did well to hold on in the end. QPR, we created very little and QPR were the better side at times and we did nothing for last half hour of the game and held on maybe. Derby were poor and was our best performance, but even then, he went defensive and yes we got the 3rd but had allowed them back in. Swansea, we were lucky and Rodak had a great game and we created nothing again for last 30 minutes.

Nothing was convincing, the style, the end of games, the chances.

I agree, it wasn't special, however how much special are we wanting here? It's football, it's dynamic, it's difficult and unpredictable. Just because it's not special does not mean it should be downplayed and used as a supporting argument for a change in management. This to me is similar to the complaint of "It's not what you're saying, it's how you're saying it..." is dominating conversations.

It sounds a little damned if you do, damned if you don't, though as well doesn't it? Is the expectation that we dominate for 90 minutes and perform without a hitch? I can't see that in any team to be honest. Even watching the Top 2, they hardly perform that perfectly, but they graft out wins in the same fashion that we have had to. Is it because of the opponents we've faced? I do think it is all about perspective.

To me, we received answers to some questions that may have been lingering, and have even been topics in this forum. Can someone else score goals other than Mitro? Can sending Reid up constantly result in him breaking his goalless streak? Can our central midfield depth be tested? Can Johansen play a deeper midfield role? Can Christie play right back for us again? Can we set up shop in a 5-4-1 versus a 5-3-2?

On paper we know how difficult that trip to St. Andrews was going to be, yet we managed a 1-0 victory from that could have been 2-0 if Kamara's shot wasn't saved in the end. Christie played brilliantly and his cross set up Mitro to take advantage of Camp's mistake.

QPR we got the answer we needed that without Mitro, we could actually score goals via Kamara - who needed a breakout game this year. We showed our character by being completely shell-shocked for 25 minutes, but then completely outplayed them for the next 65. We finished with our 5-4-1 and was able to see McDonald as the depth tester towards the end.

The trend continued, and we were rewarded with having faith in Bobby Reid who scored his first against Derby - a complete performance from top to bottom. Parker is damned if he sets up shop to perserve the points with a 5-4-1, then damned if he doesn't stay in a 4-2-3-1 to pile on the goals. Yes Derby were poor, which is more reason to be satisfied is it not? Is there a specific goal number we should have gotten to make supporters more content? Isn't it good that we didn't underperform against a remarkably terrible Derby side?

Swansea was a tough away fixture, and they were very good on the ball. Our depth was tested again, and it was highly criticized that Onomah started, but without him in the lineup, the two goals for Mitro do not happen. Would I want Arter, Reed, McDonald over him? Absolutely.

It's true, they were not ideal performances, but they were results we needed. I feel like there is a strange theme brewing of supporters who don't like Parker who want to use every single bit of negative that happens to our team as a way to spite him, and validate their stance. Isn't that a bit bizarre? Am I the only one who feels that way? As if the harm to our team is wished upon so the Parker Out agenda can be carried through? 

Personally, I'm indifferent. There's no emotion on my side because there are parts of his football that I like, and I think can be carried out as a template for multiple seasons, but at the same time I feel the rigidness in his tactics are limiting some full potential of himself and his players. I'll criticize the parts that need to be criticized, and I'll praise the parts that should be praised. A 4 match winning streak should be praised, and a 3 match losing streak should be criticized. I understand why the Parker Out snowball is building though, and a negative result vs Leeds won't matter if we play our hearts out, hit the post 20 times, and let one shot to become a conceded goal. It won't be good enough for some, and that's a real shame.

As statto says below at the time he posted as did others that parker was closing out the games and being sensible just as you mention above.

I mentioned I thought it was far too cautious and was allowing teams back in and we were basically leaving Mitro up top on his own. And as i have shown elswhere we have for long stages of games and especally in late second halfs create nothing.

I love 3/5 at the back, its my foprmation when i was a coach, but under parker its the worst thing ever.

trouble is the mindset of going safe has not helped us now when chasing, we are stuck in a gear we cant get out of.

Dont get me wrong, very happy we won 4 in a row, but I aslo said if you win and have Rodak as MOTM then there is an issue.

[Matt10]

I think Parker was a gamble that hasn't paid off, need to cut our losses and go again. Sometimes you get a feeling that things will turn around and your having bad luck. Not here I think we are seeing results our performances deserve and if we hadn't rode our luck in the 4 game winning streak things could be a lot worse

I have to ask, but how exactly did we ride our luck in the 4 game winning streak? Is it because in two of them we conceded? One of them we looked crap for 25 minutes, but then dominated? Is there a reason those 4 crucial wins are considered lucky? I'm genuinely curious because I've seen this comment made several times, but I'm not sure if that's because the agenda of "Parker Out" is overriding the context of how those matches actually went.

I think (and I'm one) people are generally not convinced that the 4 game run was anything special.
Birmingham we were down to ten men and did well to hold on in the end. QPR, we created very little and QPR were the better side at times and we did nothing for last half hour of the game and held on maybe. Derby were poor and was our best performance, but even then, he went defensive and yes we got the 3rd but had allowed them back in. Swansea, we were lucky and Rodak had a great game and we created nothing again for last 30 minutes.

Nothing was convincing, the style, the end of games, the chances.

I agree, it wasn't special, however how much special are we wanting here? It's football, it's dynamic, it's difficult and unpredictable. Just because it's not special does not mean it should be downplayed and used as a supporting argument for a change in management. This to me is similar to the complaint of "It's not what you're saying, it's how you're saying it..." is dominating conversations.

It sounds a little damned if you do, damned if you don't, though as well doesn't it? Is the expectation that we dominate for 90 minutes and perform without a hitch? I can't see that in any team to be honest. Even watching the Top 2, they hardly perform that perfectly, but they graft out wins in the same fashion that we have had to. Is it because of the opponents we've faced? I do think it is all about perspective.

To me, we received answers to some questions that may have been lingering, and have even been topics in this forum. Can someone else score goals other than Mitro? Can sending Reid up constantly result in him breaking his goalless streak? Can our central midfield depth be tested? Can Johansen play a deeper midfield role? Can Christie play right back for us again? Can we set up shop in a 5-4-1 versus a 5-3-2?

On paper we know how difficult that trip to St. Andrews was going to be, yet we managed a 1-0 victory from that could have been 2-0 if Kamara's shot wasn't saved in the end. Christie played brilliantly and his cross set up Mitro to take advantage of Camp's mistake.

QPR we got the answer we needed that without Mitro, we could actually score goals via Kamara - who needed a breakout game this year. We showed our character by being completely shell-shocked for 25 minutes, but then completely outplayed them for the next 65. We finished with our 5-4-1 and was able to see McDonald as the depth tester towards the end.

The trend continued, and we were rewarded with having faith in Bobby Reid who scored his first against Derby - a complete performance from top to bottom. Parker is damned if he sets up shop to perserve the points with a 5-4-1, then damned if he doesn't stay in a 4-2-3-1 to pile on the goals. Yes Derby were poor, which is more reason to be satisfied is it not? Is there a specific goal number we should have gotten to make supporters more content? Isn't it good that we didn't underperform against a remarkably terrible Derby side?

Swansea was a tough away fixture, and they were very good on the ball. Our depth was tested again, and it was highly criticized that Onomah started, but without him in the lineup, the two goals for Mitro do not happen. Would I want Arter, Reed, McDonald over him? Absolutely.

It's true, they were not ideal performances, but they were results we needed. I feel like there is a strange theme brewing of supporters who don't like Parker who want to use every single bit of negative that happens to our team as a way to spite him, and validate their stance. Isn't that a bit bizarre? Am I the only one who feels that way? As if the harm to our team is wished upon so the Parker Out agenda can be carried through? 

Personally, I'm indifferent. There's no emotion on my side because there are parts of his football that I like, and I think can be carried out as a template for multiple seasons, but at the same time I feel the rigidness in his tactics are limiting some full potential of himself and his players. I'll criticize the parts that need to be criticized, and I'll praise the parts that should be praised. A 4 match winning streak should be praised, and a 3 match losing streak should be criticized. I understand why the Parker Out snowball is building though, and a negative result vs Leeds won't matter if we play our hearts out, hit the post 20 times, and let one shot to become a conceded goal. It won't be good enough for some, and that's a real shame.

As statto says below at the time he posted as did others that parker was closing out the games and being sensible just as you mention above.

I mentioned I thought it was far too cautious and was allowing teams back in and we were basically leaving Mitro up top on his own. And as i have shown elswhere we have for long stages of games and especally in late second halfs create nothing.

I love 3/5 at the back, its my foprmation when i was a coach, but under parker its the worst thing ever.

trouble is the mindset of going safe has not helped us now when chasing, we are stuck in a gear we cant get out of.

Dont get me wrong, very happy we won 4 in a row, but I aslo said if you win and have Rodak as MOTM then there is an issue.

That's a good point about Rodak being MOTM. One of the areas that I criticize Parker is his defensive approach to press the defensive line so high with the wingbacks, forcing the CBs to cover ball-side so aggressively. It's caused a lot more issues that it has prevented.

[Worcesterwhite]

I think Parker was a gamble that hasn't paid off, need to cut our losses and go again. Sometimes you get a feeling that things will turn around and your having bad luck. Not here I think we are seeing results our performances deserve and if we hadn't rode our luck in the 4 game winning streak things could be a lot worse

I have to ask, but how exactly did we ride our luck in the 4 game winning streak? Is it because in two of them we conceded? One of them we looked crap for 25 minutes, but then dominated? Is there a reason those 4 crucial wins are considered lucky? I'm genuinely curious because I've seen this comment made several times, but I'm not sure if that's because the agenda of "Parker Out" is overriding the context of how those matches actually went.

In answer to your question regarding luck in those four games please see my view of the games and the reason I said this,
Birmingham- a pretty even game could have gone either way, their goalie dropped a clanger and laid it on a plate for Mitro
QPR - We should of been atleast 3-0 down in the first 20mins, we equalise, they could of then conceded again a couple of times before half time. We dominate second half and win
Derby - controlled game no luck envolved
Swansea - had rodak to thank for a string of saves again in first 20mins, Mitro scores only two real chances, the Benifit of having a prem quality striker. Hang on in second half

Please note I don't willingly want Parker out, but I believe there is no other option, his tactics don't work and boring to watch and he has stated he won't change,if he showed willingness to change tactics then I would probably get behind him. Everyone gets things wrong it's how you learn from them that counts and he seems very stubborn on his views

[jarv]

Matt10, well said.   SP is a work in progress and Fulham still in the top 6. Not much wrong with that.