Where Parker upset me today

[Riversider]

Yeah great...
Put him on with time to shine only to put him in the shop window - or should I say Spuds window!

That was my first thought as well.
Far from make him a safer option for the future, I get the feeling it could easily have backfired in the end. Just an opinion, doesn't mean it's right!

FFS , do you honest believe that the likes of Spurs, Liverpool, Celtic etc etc only watch first team football ? Of course they don't, they are all well aware of Jay Stansfield already, him playing for 20 minutes against City in The F.A CUP  wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.

[hongkongfulham]

What if hes not up to it and cant cope. The kids seventeen with no experience and you want him brought on in a game where hes barely going to touch the ball and with little chance  to succeed  . That would have been truely irresponsible.On the bench was a great experience . his time will come if he is good enough.

if that's the case then he shouldn't be on our bench.

I agree, I can never understand how game after game on the bench provides better experience than sitting in the stand.

its probably worse isn't it. Sit them all game just to see a defender come on instead of you

Personally think there is a big difference? You get to go through team talk, warm up, get closer to the first team players, and the whole energy is surely way different to a PL2 because the stakes are higher. Not withstanding the game being against City, as he will have got to sit next to people he probably idolizes (Aguero, De Bruyne). These are big moments when you are 17, and cannot be experienced in the stands. You'd hope he gets a taste for it and works that much harder to be more involved.

But agree he should have got more minutes once the game was gone, no harm in it.

[The Rational Fan]

Yeah great...
Put him on with time to shine only to put him in the shop window - or should I say Spuds window!

That was my first thought as well.
Far from make him a safer option for the future, I get the feeling it could easily have backfired in the end. Just an opinion, doesn't mean it's right!

FFS , do you honest believe that the likes of Spurs, Liverpool, Celtic etc etc only watch first team football ? Of course they don't, they are all well aware of Jay Stansfield already, him playing for 20 minutes against City in The F.A CUP  wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.

Rodak was a top keeper at Rottenham, ahead of Fabri in training and even though he was a lot younger than Fabri his market value was still less,  a few championship games rose his value significantly. Frankly, if he wasn't under contract before playing in the championship for us, I doubt we would be able to afford him now based on his recent performances. In fact the Brentford business model is based on signing players and putting them on show to other clubs. Player development is great, but Fulham should be clear which players we are developing, that is those like S.Sess that are on long contracts with us.

[colinwhite]

Yeah great...
Put him on with time to shine only to put him in the shop window - or should I say Spuds window!

Riversider . We cant judge the har m bit at all as we dont work with the playerand make judgements on whats best for his development. So we have to trust the club,not just Parker but academy staf etc as they will all have been involved.

That was my first thought as well.
Far from make him a safer option for the future, I get the feeling it could easily have backfired in the end. Just an opinion, doesn't mean it's right!

FFS , do you honest believe that the likes of Spurs, Liverpool, Celtic etc etc only watch first team football ? Of course they don't, they are all well aware of Jay Stansfield already, him playing for 20 minutes against City in The F.A CUP  wouldn't make a blind bit of difference.

[toshes mate]

Since there is a debate going on here then clearly there must be other discussions going on all over the football league about what to do with young talent.  Nobody disputes that.

What can be disputed, however, is the logical rationale of playing the lad for three minutes, ten minutes and not at all in certain games.  Most of us were very confident that RS was being handled smartly by FFC until things went downhill fast.  It is a game of risk and I don't believe there are any straightforward answers.

[The Rational Fan]

Since there is a debate going on here then clearly there must be other discussions going on all over the football league about what to do with young talent.  Nobody disputes that.

What can be disputed, however, is the logical rationale of playing the lad for three minutes, ten minutes and not at all in certain games.  Most of us were very confident that RS was being handled smartly by FFC until things went downhill fast.  It is a game of risk and I don't believe there are any straightforward answers.

One thing you are dead right on is player development is very hard, and there are a lot of factors. Game time helps some players and focused training helps. I think Ryan Sessegnon needs to bulk up a little to be stronger defensively, and that maybe more important than game time. Obviously, RS cannot lift weights on Fridays if he is playing on Saturday, so there is a trade off. Traditional, we know is the focus of spanish clubs is techinical skills, Germany is devoping physically and English getting playing with the men as soon as possible. I think The English may have something to learn from others.

[MikeW]

Interesting to read what Tony Cascarino had to say about our tactics on Sunday in The Times:

Fulham pay price for high-risk tactics
Playing out from the back is a dangerous tactic for any side. Championship teams trying to play out from the back against Manchester City is just daft. Doing it at the Etihad when you are down to ten men is plain crazy. Three of the four goals Fulham conceded yesterday resulted from players making terrible mistakes while trying to play the ball around their own penalty area. Madness. Fulham got what they deserved.

Spot on in my view.

[Jim©]

The youngsters at Liverpool all get given opportunities it wouldn't have hurt to have given Stansfield 20 minutes in a game that was now a dead rubber,
We had plenty to gain and absolutely nothing to lose.

I still can't believe people try and compare our squad to that of Liverpool's.
A young player learns by being in and around the first team set up- training, learning from the pros around them, not necessarily just having 10 mins here and there.
Why chuck a kid into a game where we're being battered, he's unlikely to touch the ball and not exactly going to have any influence on the game? Non sensical to me.

[Riversider]

Interesting to read what Tony Cascarino had to say about our tactics on Sunday in The Times:

Fulham pay price for high-risk tactics
Playing out from the back is a dangerous tactic for any side. Championship teams trying to play out from the back against Manchester City is just daft. Doing it at the Etihad when you are down to ten men is plain crazy. Three of the four goals Fulham conceded yesterday resulted from players making terrible mistakes while trying to play the ball around their own penalty area. Madness. Fulham got what they deserved.

Spot on in my view.

I don't normally agree with Cascarino, but on this occasion he is absolutely right, but you can't blame any of the players for those awful tactics, the blame should all be with Parker, tactics and formations and team selection is all his domain,
As Tony rightly points out Parker got it horribly wrong, hate to say it but we are third in the league despite Parker not because of Parker

[toshes mate]

Traditional, we know is the focus of spanish clubs is techinical skills, Germany is devoping physically and English getting playing with the men as soon as possible. I think The English may have something to learn from others.

I think it is a much deeper and more profound issue than culture.  We know that the academic year birthdates favour children born September to December for physical and, in some senses, mental development. RS was exceptional since he fell into the less favoured group.  Age of onset of puberty must also impact on development.  As I said before it has always been a bone of contention as to how you handle talent be it physically or mentally based.  Importantly the academic year cut off favours girls just the same as it favours boys.  Be interesting to know how academies deal with these things given schools generally just accept it as something that doesn't have a straightforward answer.

[alfie]

Interesting to read what Tony Cascarino had to say about our tactics on Sunday in The Times:

Fulham pay price for high-risk tactics
Playing out from the back is a dangerous tactic for any side. Championship teams trying to play out from the back against Manchester City is just daft. Doing it at the Etihad when you are down to ten men is plain crazy. Three of the four goals Fulham conceded yesterday resulted from players making terrible mistakes while trying to play the ball around their own penalty area. Madness. Fulham got what they deserved.

Spot on in my view.

I don't normally agree with Cascarino, but on this occasion he is absolutely right, but you can't blame any of the players for those awful tactics, the blame should all be with Parker, tactics and formations and team selection is all his domain,
As Tony rightly points out Parker got it horribly wrong, hate to say it but we are third in the league despite Parker not because of Parker

With all due respect if you are implying that our position of 3rd in the league is not down to Parker, why is it down to Parker that we lost, he is either responsible for both scenarios or none of them.

[colinwhite]

Traditional, we know is the focus of spanish clubs is techinical skills, Germany is devoping physically and English getting playing with the men as soon as possible. I think The English may have something to learn from others.

I think it is a much deeper and more profound issue than culture.  We know that the academic year birthdates favour children born September to December for physical and, in some senses, mental development. RS was exceptional since he fell into the less favoured group.  Age of onset of puberty must also impact on development.  As I said before it has always been a bone of contention as to how you handle talent be it physically or mentally based.  Importantly the academic year cut off favours girls just the same as it favours boys.  Be interesting to know how academies deal with these things given schools generally just accept it as something that doesn't have a straightforward answer.

Agree that this is a complex topic and cant be generalised about. Its individual based development and this can vary enormously.More often than not the kids that make an early breakthrough anre not necessarily the ones who make it all the way. It can be ahuge advantage to be a late developer ,and that doesnt always equate to which month of the year you are born.

[Riversider]

Interesting to read what Tony Cascarino had to say about our tactics on Sunday in The Times:

Fulham pay price for high-risk tactics
Playing out from the back is a dangerous tactic for any side. Championship teams trying to play out from the back against Manchester City is just daft. Doing it at the Etihad when you are down to ten men is plain crazy. Three of the four goals Fulham conceded yesterday resulted from players making terrible mistakes while trying to play the ball around their own penalty area. Madness. Fulham got what they deserved.

Spot on in my view.

I don't normally agree with Cascarino, but on this occasion he is absolutely right, but you can't blame any of the players for those awful tactics, the blame should all be with Parker, tactics and formations and team selection is all his domain,
As Tony rightly points out Parker got it horribly wrong, hate to say it but we are third in the league despite Parker not because of Parker

With all due respect if you are implying that our position of 3rd in the league is not down to Parker, why is it down to Parker that we lost, he is either responsible for both scenarios or none of them.

Tactics and general game play have been awful on so many occasions , but weve won games at times because of individual brilliance,
We have the biggest budget in this division by a million miles (wages, loan fees, transfers) and yet weve still struggled in large parts against the likes of Barnsley, QPR, Luton, Charlton etc all clubs that havent got a pot to pi** in,
Are you trying to imply that Parker has done amazingly well to get us to third ?
Would the following have got this squad to tjird, Jokanovic ? Bilic ? Bielsa ? Warnock ?
Third is the bare minimum for this club, if we dont finish in the top 6 he should be sacked in May and will probably never manage again

[alfie]

Interesting to read what Tony Cascarino had to say about our tactics on Sunday in The Times:

Fulham pay price for high-risk tactics
Playing out from the back is a dangerous tactic for any side. Championship teams trying to play out from the back against Manchester City is just daft. Doing it at the Etihad when you are down to ten men is plain crazy. Three of the four goals Fulham conceded yesterday resulted from players making terrible mistakes while trying to play the ball around their own penalty area. Madness. Fulham got what they deserved.

Spot on in my view.

I don't normally agree with Cascarino, but on this occasion he is absolutely right, but you can't blame any of the players for those awful tactics, the blame should all be with Parker, tactics and formations and team selection is all his domain,
As Tony rightly points out Parker got it horribly wrong, hate to say it but we are third in the league despite Parker not because of Parker

With all due respect if you are implying that our position of 3rd in the league is not down to Parker, why is it down to Parker that we lost, he is either responsible for both scenarios or none of them.

Tactics and general game play have been awful on so many occasions , but weve won games at times because of individual brilliance,
We have the biggest budget in this division by a million miles (wages, loan fees, transfers) and yet weve still struggled in large parts against the likes of Barnsley, QPR, Luton, Charlton etc all clubs that havent got a pot to pi** in,
Are you trying to imply that Parker has done amazingly well to get us to third ?
Would the following have got this squad to tjird, Jokanovic ? Bilic ? Bielsa ? Warnock ?
Third is the bare minimum for this club, if we dont finish in the top 6 he should be sacked in May and will probably never manage again

So we have won games because of individual brilliance, equally we have lost games because of individual mistakes.
Appreciate our discussion

[LittleErn]

For me the game to play him was Wednesday. But he gave him about 3 minutes, when he should have had 20, as Charlton were there for the taking.

Massively frustrating.

+1

The lad needs his confidence to be boosted - playing him against MC might have done just the opposite.

[colinwhite]

The point remains though Riversider . You cant put it down to the manager when we lose,and down to individual brilliance which has nothing to do with Parker when we win. Its always a mixture of the two. I think Parker is learning. It could have been better. so far  but it also could have been worse. There would be no guarantee with any of the mentioned managers, and the question of budget is actually not really relevant because if man City reasoned like that Guardiola would have benn ditched by now. You have to look at the whole picture.
I share the frustration at times but I dont think  its all down to Parker . In all hes done resaonably well and  if had he had  had more luck with injuries who knows where we would be now.For me the most important thing is that the players seem to be completely behind him.

[Riversider]

The point remains though Riversider . You cant put it down to the manager when we lose,and down to individual brilliance which has nothing to do with Parker when we win. Its always a mixture of the two. I think Parker is learning. It could have been better. so far  but it also could have been worse. There would be no guarantee with any of the mentioned managers, and the question of budget is actually not really relevant because if man City reasoned like that Guardiola would have benn ditched by now. You have to look at the whole picture.
I share the frustration at times but I dont think  its all down to Parker . In all hes done resaonably well and  if had he had  had more luck with injuries who knows where we would be now.For me the most important thing is that the players seem to be completely behind him.

Agree with a lot of what you say but two factors must be taken into consideration,
Firstly this is the weakest Championship in many a long year,
Secondly we have one of the highest budgets in European football, we are the Manchester City of The Championship and yet we constantly struggle against teams that have nothing,
The Khan family have done all that can be asked of them to Provide Parker with all the tools he needs to get this club promoted, we (without a shadow of doubt) have better players than Leeds, WBA, Forest and Brentford but do we have a better coach ? Thats the 64 million dollar question.

[Statto]

With all due respect if you are implying that our position of 3rd in the league is not down to Parker, why is it down to Parker that we lost, he is either responsible for both scenarios or none of them.

Our position of 3rd is absolutely down to Parker.

With a decent manager we'd be 1st.

[colinwhite]

So if we do get up to first you will then think SP is a "decent manager " ? Just asking !
For the record I think parker is ok ,nothing more ,nothing less.

[Statto]

So if we do get up to first you will then think SP is a "decent manager " ? Just asking !
For the record I think parker is ok ,nothing more ,nothing less.

100% yes.
Or even if we finished a convincing 2nd.

But despite the gap to 2nd closing, we're quite far from that. We're 4th, just as close to 8th as we are to the top 2nd, and the bookies still have quite long odds on us going up (about 3-1) given we're in the middle of a particularly easy run of games at the moment.

And for the record, as I've said many times, I don't have any serious personal problems with Parker. My view is simply that (a) his performance so far has been below reasonable expectations and (b) the jury is still out on whether he has the inherent ability to develop into a good manager in the long-term.