Parker IN or Parker OUT?

[Jims Dentist]

Would need to know who would be the replacement, otherwise it would be a lottery.

[The Rational Fan]

"there is no way the Khans are going to sack him sitting 3rd in table"

And no way they should.

Several points.

First, we know our team better than 99% of us know any of the other Championship teams, which may give a distorted impression of how good we are relative to others. I do not buy into the idea that we have the best squad and ought to be leading the pack. I do buy into the oft-stated comment that the table doesn't lie.

Had to stop reading at "the table doesn't lie" sorry. If you believe that, then no manager could ever be criticised for underachieving. If we were 6 pts adrift at the bottom right now, Parker could just point to the table and say, "well the table doesn't lie, obviously we have the worst squad in the league so it's not my fault we're bottom." Absurd, clearly.

I can respect either opinion that the "table doesn't lie" or that the "table does lie", but if you believe the "table doesn't lie" meaning the "EFL points table" is an accurate reflection of the best team performance, then you must have another table such as "transfer market table" (or "FIFA 20 Player Ratings") to compare "team performance" to the "player valuations".

It would be stupid to compare "EFL points table" to itself as no analysis is possible, the "EFL points table" team performance must be compared to another table that estimates the squad provide to the Manager. For example, the "EPL points table" tells you that Sheffield United are better than Manchester United this season, but without another information (e.g. player wages), it would be impossible to determine who was given the better squad.

Saying "table doesn't lie" means we have we have "the best players by some distance" due to the transfer market table and "those players combined are the 3rd best team" due to the EFL points table. If I was "The Khans", then I would want Parker to tell me i) why with the best players we are the only 3rd best team? ii) why have we dropped 33 points to teams worth less than half our squad?

[Arthur]

Saying "table doesn't lie" means we have we have "the best players by some distance" due to the transfer market table and "those players combined are the 3rd best team" due to the EFL points table.

Couldn't this be so?

After all, if it were true that the XI with the greatest combined market value cannot be anything other than the best team, Mitrovic, Reid, Knockaert and Cavaleiro could play alongside seven free transfers from League 2 and we could still expect promotion. Unlikely.

Without knowing any figures, I can guess, however, that the value of our squad aside from the aforementioned quartet is still higher than most in the Championship. To me, this does show that we should be among those competing at the top; it doesn't prove that we ought to be the top side - even were we to have a more experienced manager. There must be other factors that come to bear upon a group of players becoming the best team - factors that can't be defined in terms of a monetary value. Coaching would be one such influence, of course. But West Brom (and Leeds to a lesser extent) had a decent punt at going up last season. How much is that experience worth to the Baggies this time round, I wonder?

[RaySmith]

That we have the 'best players' in the league is debatable.

Even if the highest valued, don't know if this is true, they are only third best as a TEAM.
In this sense, the important one, the table doesn't lie.

League position is also the only stat that matters, because it determines promotion or relegation.
It is also completely objective, while other figures, such as 'best players' aren't.

[The Rational Fan]

That we have the 'best players' in the league is debatable.

Even if the highest valued, don't know if this is true, they are only third best as a TEAM.
In this sense, the important one, the table doesn't lie.

League position is also the only stat that matters, because it determines promotion or relegation.
It is also completely objective, while other figures, such as 'best players' aren't.

The table tells us we are "only third best as a TEAM" but nothing else, based on the table alone it is almost impossible to make any non-obvious analysis. If I show you the table from South Africa, you cannnot tell much apart from I can already know for myself by looking at it. One of the main discussion questions is Parker In or Parker Out, but the table tells us nothing about that decision. Some think 3rd is terrible based on the players we have and other think that many of the previous seasons have been worse, but the table doesn't tell us anything so while the "table doesn't lie". The "table doesn't tell you much" doesn't answer the most basic questions like is Kamara or Mitrovoic better? and definitely doesn't answer Parker In or Out?

[RaySmith]

But the 'best players' is subjective, opinions will differ, the table isn't - telling you which team has the most points - which team has performed the  best.
The measures performances purely in points gained- and this determines promotion or relegation - not bad luck or bad ref calls, etc - all subjective.

[ByTheRiver]

But the 'best players' is subjective, opinions will differ, the table isn't - telling you which team has the most points - which team has performed the  best.
The measures performances purely in points gained- and this determines promotion or relegation - not bad luck or bad ref calls, etc - all subjective.

If Barcelona were sitting 12th in La Liga this season, would this suggest that its all subjective and as they are 12th, that is probably where they should be. Or, would it suggest that the manager is perhaps underperforming relative to the resources available to them?

It's an extreme hypothetical example granted, but it is a valid one. This is what is happening at Fulham on a lesser scale.

[The Rational Fan]

But the 'best players' is subjective, opinions will differ, the table isn't - telling you which team has the most points - which team has performed the  best.
The measures performances purely in points gained- and this determines promotion or relegation - not bad luck or bad ref calls, etc - all subjective.

If Barcelona were sitting 12th in La Liga this season, would this suggest that its all subjective and as they are 12th, that is probably where they should be. Or, would it suggest that the manager is perhaps underperforming relative to the resources available to them?

It's an extreme hypothetical example granted, but it is a valid one. This is what is happening at Fulham on a lesser scale.

Another hypothetical example is if Ole Gunnar Solskjær has Manchester United sitting 9th on 35 points after 25 rounds and my cousin thinks he is excellent coach but the recruitment and players are to blame, then does the table that doesn't lie prove him right or wrong?

[ByTheRiver]

But the 'best players' is subjective, opinions will differ, the table isn't - telling you which team has the most points - which team has performed the  best.
The measures performances purely in points gained- and this determines promotion or relegation - not bad luck or bad ref calls, etc - all subjective.

If Barcelona were sitting 12th in La Liga this season, would this suggest that its all subjective and as they are 12th, that is probably where they should be. Or, would it suggest that the manager is perhaps underperforming relative to the resources available to them?

It's an extreme hypothetical example granted, but it is a valid one. This is what is happening at Fulham on a lesser scale.

Another hypothetical example is if Ole Gunnar Solskjær has Manchester United sitting 9th on 35 points after 25 rounds and my cousin thinks he is excellent coach but the recruitment and players are to blame, then does the table that doesn't lie prove him right or wrong?

A very good example!

Personally, in this instance, I would say both sides play a part (similar to Fulham last season, for example). I don't believe Ole will ever be a good enough coach for a team of Uniteds size and, had he not been a 'legend' player, he a). wouldn't have been given the opportunity in the first place (a failed coach at Cardiff, currently at Molde would not be offered the Utd job in any other circumstances). or b). would have been sacked a couple of months ago, if he had been given the role.

But, equally, I feel recruitment has played a part. I don't think anyone would say the squad is as good as Man City or Liverpool (how many Utd players would get into a best 11 of the two sides?) so they should probably be finishing third.

The recruitment has been a bit haphazard and 'big names' like Sanchez brought in who has looked unmotivated (Schurrle, anyone?) or massively overpaid for Maquire who isn't ever going to be good enough for a team hoping to compete for a premier league title.

So, yes, in summary, much like Parker should go for underperforming relative to resources, Ole would almost certainly be already gone if it wasn't for the sentimentality. He is doing worse than Moyes/Mourinho/Van Gaal and all recent managers.

I think it mirrors Fulham in a way but nobody can lay the blame at recruitment at Fulham this year. I have criticised TK in the past (I was very much sided with SJ in their public battles) but he has done all expected of him and more this season.

[toshes mate]

A fuller version of this cliché or axiom is the table doesn't lie unless it does.  If individual results don't tell the truth then the table must lie since it is simply a collection with those untruths included.

Incidents and their outcomes are all very random and have widely conflicting impacts.  On Saturday, WBA's Livermore deliberately stamped his studs on the left knee of Ribeiro during a tussle a matter of thirty feet from the assistant and followed it up with a mouthful of abuse as the Forest player lay stricken on the ground.   Livermore wasn't even spoken to by the official in charge Mr Stroud.  A red card or investigation by the authorities into violent conduct should have followed which would have impacted on WBA's season to come.   It is difficult to know if bias hasn't taken over the way football is being managed these days because we are so obsessed with getting things right we are getting much more wrong than we used to do.

Football needs a breath of fresh air at the top levels and an end to money being everything.   

[General]

I think we're destined for playoffs regardless. So Id give him until the end of the season. If he fails at playoffs then he must go. I'd only sack him tonight if we were in real danger of missing out on playoffs, which we aren't

I was considering an option for 'out at the end of the season' but decided against it to force people to make a snap decision. I am mostly in agreement with you, apart from I am so bored of watching us play that I just want a change regardless.

I like Parker, think he could be a good manager, but I'm not of the opinion people have when they count-argue that Parker should go by saying we're third.

The point of this league isn't to stay in it, although I know some want us to. Tactically I think he's been bailed out by pure talent of the squad more than his tactical nous. We don't open teams up like we did under Slavisa, and with Slavisa given this squad we would be.

Reality is that we've been close to the top 2 for a while now and keep faltering - losing 3-0 to the lowest team in the league and having Cauley score two, even though he is in a great run of form - simply shouldn't be happening given the squad we've got. Drawing to Millwall away, even when the weather was shocking and Millwall's goal shouldn't have stood, yes is unlucky - but we dominated them 4-0, breaking records... whilst they've improved, we've arguably also stagnated since then.

3rd is not an accomplishment in this league, neither is anything up until 6th. You either get automatic promotion, or you win the playoffs, which we've done - was a fun day out, but extended the season and ultimately is never guaranteed. And this seasons looks like it's going to be more tightly fought then when we did go up.

It's a risk getting a new manager in, but ultimately Parker needs a tougher job to learn from with lesser quality players to realise that there's a need for variance, to take up the challenge when teams above you falter - resting Kmac and Cavaleiro when we had been on a good run, may have been kind to give them rest - but Millwall was the perfect time to get 2nd, especially after Leeds had lost their game the day before. Then to switch out Bobby for Knockaert who's been a catalyst for us against Barnsley... They're not tactical decisions, they're emotional based on giving a lad a rest.. which I get, but could they really not have played that game? Could you not have substituted them later on and not disrupted the team who had got used to one another... could you ease them out of games to keep their legs fresh?

I don't know who we'd get in or who would be available and so that's a risk of derailing our season... but do I really want us to be in the championship again next season,no. We shouldn't be in this league - no disrespect to it - with the players we have,the owners ambition and the growing stadium etc and we don't need to be either.

It's annoying as ultimately I put this down to the Khan's mistake - why buy a lamborghini (the squad), and then put someone in it who only ever wants to drive it around London in traffic or park it in their garage (a bit harsh, as I do like parker but...). The ultimately wanted to go straight back up, messed around with bringing in defenders all summer due to favourability of the likes of Ream and Odoi but brought in some quality attacking players, although not a back up for Mitro (Woodrow would've been good) - and then hindered that progress by keeping Parker in charge - his first competitive managerial appt.

Anyway - I've said my piece. I'd rather someone tell Parker that he needs to stop messing around, needs to push harder to get the results and get us into the automatics, because sometimes adding that pressure can make the man and we need it, because currently other teams look like they want it more.

[The Rational Fan]

Parker is paid more than the highest paid surgeons in Charing Cross Hospital, no matter how good any surgeon is an inexperienced surgeon is not allowed to be the lead until years of being the assistant surgeon. He is only given the head surgeon when he doesn't have anything more to learn being an assistant surgeon. Our society considers it unacceptable for a surgeon to lose patients by making mistakes and would never say a surgeon has to start by being head surgeon, frankly if we did that patients would be dying unnecessarily everywhere. Scott Parker has a future in coaching and should be doing every coaching job apart from head coach for a few more years. I would have liked him to be placed as the u23 coach with a view to promote him once parchuate payments end and we have to bring in the younger players due to lack of money.

[Statto]

But the 'best players' is subjective, opinions will differ, the table isn't - telling you which team has the most points - which team has performed the  best.
The measures performances purely in points gained- and this determines promotion or relegation - not bad luck or bad ref calls, etc - all subjective.

There are plenty of objective criteria that can be used to determine whether we have the "best players". For example, their most recent transfer value, their salaries, the goals/ assists/ clean sheets they kept in other seasons etc, are all objective. And to a large extent, individuals' opinions will be derived from these objective criteria.

There are also objective criteria that can look behind league position. For example, the "expected goals" metric is indicative of "bad luck". If you lose 1-0 but had a higher expected goals rating the opposition, that essentially means you were unlucky. Similarly "bad ref calls" aren't subjective either - when replays show the referee has simply made the wrong decision.

For the record I'm not saying any of these criteria, objective or not, are 100% reliable. But if they're all pointing in the same direction then you can use them as a justufication for concluding something, eg that this Fulham squad should be in the top 2, with a very high degree of confidence.