Bournemouth vs Fulham Post match reactions

[Bassey the warrior]

So not only is Parker arrogant, smug and narcissistic; but he's also a pathological liar.......

I was going to say Parkers a master of fake news!
But frankly he talks in riddles and I don't understand most of what he says!
COYW !

His vocabulary and grammar is at primary school level.

[LC]

Silva is absolutely correct.

I didn't mind Scott Parker, I thought we were defensively weak when he took over and we stopped leaking under him.

The style of play under Silva is much better to watch and we've also been solid at the back. I would say we've certainly improved under Silva and he's absolutely correct in what he's saying.

Bottom line, we will be champions, and I actually think mini rivalry's like this are great for the game, looking forward to playing Parkers Bournemouth next season in the PL (I think they'll go up) and winning 

[blingo]

So not only is Parker arrogant, smug and narcissistic; but he's also a pathological liar.......

I was going to say Parkers a master of fake news!
But frankly he talks in riddles and I don't understand most of what he says!
COYW !

Neither does he lol

[Craven Mad]

I think he had every right to be angry about it, both personally and on behalf of his team.

The football we play now is far better than under Scott - it's ridiculous to say we play in the same way, and an insult to Silva as it implies that Marco's either done nothing with us or has copied Scott.

The team playing is also totally different - for one, Ivan isn't leading the line anymore, Mitro's back from exile, and we've had a very high turnover of players.

It was just a stupid thing of Scott to say, but unsurprising for someone who stupidly stuck to the same losing formula for a whole season and never realised he was to blame.

I still think it's crazy that Scott managed to get such a tidy squad of players relegated last year - Marco would've kept that team up.

[davew]

There are a lot of things I do not like about Scott e.g. his attire, his pre and post match interviews, the style of football that he wants his team(s) to play, there are things that I have liked in the past, as a player he was a true professional and the thing I like most now, is that he is no longer with us!!

[ffcthereligion]

From Bournemouth forum 🤤

You can blame individual players all you like but the fact that there is now a very good chance we miss out lays on the shoulders of one man, and that is Scott Parker.

This conservative control orientated brand of football that is centred around entirely predictable patterns of play (creating overloads in the wide areas to force a cut back situation) has been counterproductive for us. We have managed to eek out the points anyway due to the quality we possess but imagine how much better it could have been if the shackles had been released for the entire season.

Last night at three nil down the Parker master plan was thrown out of the window, the new plan was to get bodies into the box and deliver in some quality crosses. Low and behold we were all over them like a rash for the last third.

This is the reason I and many others can just not warm to him, he has needlessly over complicated our game to the point that control and not losing are favoured above all else. Had we just attacked without fear all season then we would be up right now. We have gambled the future of our club on this man's 'project,' I hope it will prove to be worth it Blake and Hughes. Because if the football is this tedious now, imagine how bad it's going to be if we don't go up and there's no Solanke, Lerma, Cook ect.

[Craven Mad]

If they like it now, they're gonna love it in the prem with Scott!

[Nick Bateman]

The headline could be reversed after witnessing Scott's latest affront to Fulham Football Club.
Last season he incorrectly sent of Joachim Andersen, a decision which was not upheld by the EPL who rescinded the red card and any suspension thereafter. It still meant Fulham were punished having 10 men for that match which we lost.

Scott seemed vengeful in his actions when Fulham played away to Bournemouth last weekend. The official encouraged a desperate Bournemouth to 'dive' at the drop of a hat and Scott was so whistle-happy it was difficult to get any football played. This ref turned the game into a farce and custodians like this are a major blot on the game we all love.

Despite all of this, Fulham were winning until Scott played 8 extra minutes, 3 more than the allotted 5 despite there were no significant hold-ups, injuries nor noticeable time-wasting. After yet another dive Scott awarded the hosts a penalty, which they scored and then he blew the whistle which prompted Marco Silva to express his grievances.

Nobody knows exactly what Silva said to Scott but I am fairly sure it was not rude or unprofessional enough to warrant an instant red card!

Silva has now been charged by the FA, as Andersen was, this time it will the official's word against Silva.

On Talksport, Scott's performance was described as a "mare" (as in nightmare). Indeed he had a shocker but noticeably it only affected Fulham.

He is a Premier League ref and if he has a personal vendetta against Fulham so, this will carry into next season. What if Scott influences his "mates" among the refs to continue to punish Fulham for embarrassing him years ago?

Several years back Bruce Buck, Chelsea chairman & lawyer, called a meeting of all senior refs to offset what he deemed could be a backlash by refs against his club after one of their players accused Mark Clattenberg of making a racist remark. Head of the EPL Richard Scudamore was there as was Mike Riley to allay Buck's concerns, and true to their words, Chelsea have not had any refereeing decisions against them, rather the opposite.

But one doubts Fulham can pull the same stunt as Chelsea. We are only Fulham as Graham Scott felt when he sent off Andersen, who cares about them?!? Certainly not the FA as they charge Silva for being a human being and reacting understandably under massive provocation from an out-of-control, of evil intent, vindictive official.

I will miss Mike Dean's departure while the likes of Graham Scott continue to despoil the little honesty of the game. Dean, though sometimes contentious, always seemed reasoned and would not always favour the so-called 'big teams' hence the media's portrayal of him in a negative light.

I do like the fact Silva challenges officials and one would not like him to be censored from voicing his annoyance at what he deems are wrongful calls. He should express his views post-match in a way that does not get him into further trouble, use the word 'luck' when describing bad decisions for example.

Fulham should pay any fine he incurs and also lodge a formal complaint about the evil Graham Scott.

[Rupert]

Clearly you are absolutely correct, the whole world hates Fulham FC and countless generations of referees have had it in for us, indeed have dedicated their professional careers to preventing us from attaining our rightful spot at the pinnacle of world football. How else to explain it? It is such a relief to realise it is the referees and the authorities who are to blame for our failures, and not our fault at all.
Yes, thank you, Nick, for enlightening us all. I have assembled a shrine to you in the fairy grotto at the bottom of our garden, where I shall nightly sacrifice a virgin, or if I can't find one of them, a Bournemouth supporter, in the hope that St Jude looks favourably upon you and aids your dissemination of the truth.

More power to you, tell the world that it is NOT OUR FAULT, IT IS ALL A MASSIVE CONSPIRACY.

Just watch out for the Men in Black, they will be desperate to silence you, and ignore anyone who accuses you of being paranoid. They are clearly in the know, and are probably masons.

[Nick Bateman]

I think you are the chap living in cloud cuckoo lala-land Rupret, as you seem to believe the sun shines out of referees bottoms!

Contrary to what you stated, most football people like Fulham. The refs are not "most people" and are pretty much told which clubs to help and if they have "mares" as the Talksport commentator said, they are never held to account. Fulham actually got a draw with the 10 men last year and a different Scott, namely Parker summed it up perefctly and how Silva should make post-match comments that do not get him into further trouble.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dq72GHcD_x0

https://hammyend.com/index.php/2020/12/time-to-micem-up/

[Rupert]

I think you are the chap living in cloud cuckoo lala-land Rupret, as you seem to believe the sun shines out of referees bottoms!

Contrary to what you stated, most football people like Fulham. The refs are not "most people" and are pretty much told which clubs to help and if they have "mares" as the Talksport commentator said, they are never held to account. Fulham actually got a draw with the 10 men last year and a different Scott, namely Parker summed it up perefctly and how Silva should make post-match comments that do not get him into further trouble.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dq72GHcD_x0

https://hammyend.com/index.php/2020/12/time-to-micem-up/

No, Nick, no! You are falling into their trap. Divide and rule. I am right behind you, but they have made you so paranoid you think even true believers like me are out to get you. It's tragic, Nick, just tragic that they have unsettled you so much that you are trying to denigrate a true disciple.
All those people who claim they love Fulham, Nick, they only tell us that so they can have their wicked way with us. Don't believe them! I bet you that they are all masons too.

Keep the faith, Nick, it's you and me against the world right now.

[WindyCity]

Despite all of this, Fulham were winning until Scott played 8 extra minutes, 3 more than the allotted 5

I don't think this is accurate?  (I could be mistaken?)

The foul was called during the final minute of the 5 allotted as extra time.  (Tbh, thought the 5 was excessive, but what do I know?)  So I don't think there is cause for complaint about the game going 8 extra minutes.  After the pen was given, and after all the complaining and chin wagging about it, time kept ticking off building up to 8 or 9 minutes by the time the pen was taken and the final whistle blown.