Parker is quite useless going forward(never really been his game) so he has to be an anchor imo. Hudd whilst a terrific passer, just doesn't have the mobility to run up and down all game so for the way we try to play he's also best used in the anchor position acting as a quarterback (not a destroyer) and a positional cover(like a bit more static carrick). Pair the two together and you've basically got two players who in tandem are no real direct threat for any defense. Hudd is a worry, but he can be sat on by an attacker, not a defender. This will greatly restrict our forward play (as we saw against wigan) because we've got one player trying to push up, running into blind alleys, getting in peoples way and one player, who although he can pick a pass, is no threat to their midfield or defender. When our attack is at it's best (see those 20odd mins against City) we are superior because we have people swarming about, making themselves avaliable which in turn makes it easier for our ball carrier and harder for the defense and with one man down pushing forward with either Parker or Hudd, we cannot afford to have the other one play because we'll then be two men down.
-
The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...
Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports
Still sticking with my avatar for now.
I think he would be very well suited in a role off the bench to defend a lead ie break up play and let us counter when we're pressured but not sure if he should be starting every week. Of course if Sandro was still fit we wouldn't be having this discussion but it is very unjust to put so much blame on Parker. The amount of abuse I've seen for him is incredible.
Agree that he could be effective shoring (spelling?!?) up a lead from the bench. Felt we really saw benefit of his return to the team which coincided with our stopping conceding late goals.
However, his role this year has infuriated me as I feel going forward he is a detriment to the team as he's too predictable and ALWAYS hangs on to the ball a second too long which doesn't suit our play.
Worth remembering for everyone who thinks he's 'spursy' etc: he turned us down instead of the Chavs; he then turned us down in favour of the Geordies; we were also in for him when he went to West Ham.
All that being said, I reckon there's no point getting rid this summer. Won't get any money. And I suspect he has a positive effect in the dressing room and training pitch.
(I do realise that I posted that I never wanted to see him in a spurs shirt again as was making my way out the DW in despondency)
However, his role this year has infuriated me as I feel going forward he is a detriment to the team as he's too predictable and ALWAYS hangs on to the ball a second too long which doesn't suit our play.
Worth remembering for everyone who thinks he's 'spursy' etc: he turned us down instead of the Chavs; he then turned us down in favour of the Geordies; we were also in for him when he went to West Ham.
All that being said, I reckon there's no point getting rid this summer. Won't get any money. And I suspect he has a positive effect in the dressing room and training pitch.
(I do realise that I posted that I never wanted to see him in a spurs shirt again as was making my way out the DW in despondency)
I agree with all of that. Do you think AvB has told Parker to push up? It's so obviously not his game & I would have hoped that AvB would see that.
I don't overly disagree with your assessment of Parker, but I'd say you were being particularly harsh on the threat offered by Thudd. No real direct threat? His shooting aside which on song is awesome to see, his pass against city to Bale and the fact that he hit the post against wigan, and nearly took the keepers hands off at the wrist, bely your claims that he can't hurt defences, or pose a threat. Against Wigan I'd say he looked the most likely scorer, given that Bales was a pure fluke and the other a miscued own goal. I understand the thrust of your argument, but I think the only chink in the axis is Parkers one dimensional range, rather than it being dual failing of both players.
Oh and a static Carrick - harsh again, I don't see Carrick as a box to box workrate monster, and Thudds passing is superior - IMV.
How quickly they all forgot Mido...
I think it has to do a little with instructions yes, from what I know of AVB and what we saw early in the season when Sandro was playing we always wanted to alternate which of the two deeper midfielders went into the final 3rd to be a problem for the defense. With alternating players making runs the defense can never really rest as they can never predict that, oh it's only gonna be X pushing forward, so we can relax if Y has the ball. It worked well with Sandro in the team, as he can pass, dribble and make ok decisions up there, Parker however, not so much.
I'm always harsh when I judge football, because football is not a game for sentimentality, you need to be ruthless if you want your side to go forward. However, I don't think I'm overly harsh on Hudd, if you read more of my posts you'll see that I'd like to keep him and use his strengths to our benefit.
No, he's no direct goal threat, passing from deep is no direct goalthreat and the big man does not have the mobility to take defenses by suprise. Tell an attacker to follow him and he'll have no problems doing so (as long as he does as he's been told) unless he's got the pace of a snail. Which in turn means that Hudd is unable to escape a marker and make himself the required space he needs 90% of the time.
Here's a couple more players I don't see as direct goalthreats: Carrick, Modric, Xabi Alonso, Tom Carroll.
All but one of the players mentioned are world class players and sadly for hudd, he's even less of a direct threat than these guys are. Modric is perhaps the most threatening of the five, as he can take on a player, play a one two while bursting into a pocket of space and either thread a ball through to a better positioned player or have a pop himself and score a screamer. Most of the time though, he's too deep to be called a direct threat, all of these guys main value lie in the fact that they can change the tempo of a game and all of them (including Carroll, but not Hudd) have a change of pace or overview enough that they are always an option for their teammates. While this might just be because Hudd is slightly unfit/off the pace he is currently too static to always be an option for his colleagues and you need look no further than to his two last matches. When given space and time he dominated in both matches and pulled strings everywhere, the moment however either team pressed a little higher, put him under pressure sooner or just stuck a man on him, he faded out and even more so when he got tired against wigan in the 2nd half. I agree that Hudds shooting can be devestating, but these days he can't get himself into a position to use it, mainly because he currently needs more time on the ball to settle himself than before his injury and until he regains that fitness/confidence to trap a ball on and play it on with the next touch (be it a shot or pass) under pressure he will always be less of a threat than he was.
No, Carrick is no box to box workhorse, but he is ALWAYS in space, always able to recieve the ball and to be able to do both of those you need to move, quite a lot actually. Hudd on the other hand is not only slow in his movement, he is also struggeling to find that space to recieve the ball atm, while he possibly can work this out for next season, for now, he's not really good enough to start against a fit team, bring him on fairly early in the second half and let him stretch and already tireing team and he'll work wonders.
or Rasiak.
If you possess NO sentimentality, then why bother supporting any one club? You might just as well support the club that best suits your footballing needs in terms of style and capability. I believe that sentimentality is at the core of any football supporter.
I really dont get the personal nature of your assessment here, I dont disagree with a lot of what you have said, but all of it, less the reflections on Thudds speed across the ground and general fitness applies to any or all of the midfielders that you mention, with the possible exception of Modric, who is a totally different style of player. Carrol is a long way short of all of them in terms of footballing maturity, and needs to work on his physique to stop being muscled out of games.
Carricks game relies on his metronomic ability to do the simple things well, along with a good range of passing off both feet, and being a good tackler.Thudds ball control is not his problem at all, and again I think you are harsh and borderline unfair in saying that he is ponderous in possession, his ball skills and close control are wonderful for a big man (he reminds me of Martin Chivers in that respect) and I know its a cliche, but thats because it is surprising to see someone with the physique of a centreback, play with the delicacy of a midfielder. Struggling to find space to receive the ball? I'd say that based on his 20 minutes against city and his time against Wigan, he actively sought and received possession very effectively, made excellent use of it from the position he occupied, and still had the stamina to be in the mix at the death. He was the most efficient user of the ball in my opinion, in both games.
He is however still either too unfit, or carrying too much weight (hair?) and is too slow to add the 10-15% into his game that would make him devastating, his core skills are still in evidence. One of the failings that really mark him out, is that he has the turning speed of a supertanker, as the ball is passed beyond him, his recovery time is non existant, and that is why he is playing so deep.
He does bring other skills beyond the average midfielder, in that he is a good defender at set pieces, mostly due to his height and strength, and as he showed against Basle, he makes a great fill in central defender.
Sorry I am not familiar with other stuff you have posted, but its nice to chat with someone with such positive views, thank you for taking the time to explain them.
Presumably Parker is playing to instructions, so that's makes nonsense of a lot of the criticisms and vitriol unfairly aimed at him. Why would ABV keep picking him if he was disobeying his instructions, some people seem to misunderstand not just football but basic management theory and practice.
As I've said before, Scott's record with the team is pretty much the same as Sandro's and indeed our season overall with whoever's playing. So it's unlikely he's the poor player some mistakenly make him out to be.
The idea of 'get him out and Sandro' back is also wrong. Parker's not keeping Sandro out of the team, Sandro is injured. I would have thought all Spurs fans knew that bit of info by now. We're lucky Scott was available when Sandro got injured. IF AVB chooses Hudd or Holtby on Saturday instead of Parker that's fine by me, but none of those three are world beaters. Each has strengths and weaknesses, hence AVB's preference for Parker doubtless.
Bale is our world beater and Lennon currently is a 'must play'. None of the other contenders for the front 6 are particularly outstanding ATM, maybe Dembele but he keeps getting injured/not quite fit enough, etc.
As I've said before, Scott's record with the team is pretty much the same as Sandro's and indeed our season overall with whoever's playing. So it's unlikely he's the poor player some mistakenly make him out to be.
The idea of 'get him out and Sandro' back is also wrong. Parker's not keeping Sandro out of the team, Sandro is injured. I would have thought all Spurs fans knew that bit of info by now. We're lucky Scott was available when Sandro got injured. IF AVB chooses Hudd or Holtby on Saturday instead of Parker that's fine by me, but none of those three are world beaters. Each has strengths and weaknesses, hence AVB's preference for Parker doubtless.
Bale is our world beater and Lennon currently is a 'must play'. None of the other contenders for the front 6 are particularly outstanding ATM, maybe Dembele but he keeps getting injured/not quite fit enough, etc.
Hossam Ghaly
If you all read the article, this isnt a debate about whether or not Scott Parker is Spurs Worst player ever.
Its a misleading title.
Its a misleading title.
why are people trying to make this something it isnt?
Scott Parker WAS good. Then he got old (apparently it can happen). His legs stopped working. His ability to function as a top flight footballer ended.
Anyone would think this is the first time it had happened.
Scott Parker WAS good. Then he got old (apparently it can happen). His legs stopped working. His ability to function as a top flight footballer ended.
Anyone would think this is the first time it had happened.
AvB seems to want him to be a box to box midfielder and that isn't what he was doing for us last season. As many have said... Get the ball, turn 180 pass to Modric, VdV, Bale.
After he came back from what is a very nasty injury given his age, AvB has obviously told him to retain possession more and run with the ball forward.
As a result he has been caught in possession, ended up taking wild shots with no one else to pass to and been made a scapegoat due to missing a couple of sitters.
I'd rather it was Dembele doing that role and Parker just floating between our box and just over the half way line mopping thinks up and making life difficult.
What we have lacked this season is a Modric or VdV who can ask for the ball off Parker and make something happen. It's almost like Parker is now trying to do that himself, and that isn't really in his game.
So the question is not is he any good, but like a few other players, does he fit the style of football he is being asked to play?
After he came back from what is a very nasty injury given his age, AvB has obviously told him to retain possession more and run with the ball forward.
As a result he has been caught in possession, ended up taking wild shots with no one else to pass to and been made a scapegoat due to missing a couple of sitters.
I'd rather it was Dembele doing that role and Parker just floating between our box and just over the half way line mopping thinks up and making life difficult.
What we have lacked this season is a Modric or VdV who can ask for the ball off Parker and make something happen. It's almost like Parker is now trying to do that himself, and that isn't really in his game.
So the question is not is he any good, but like a few other players, does he fit the style of football he is being asked to play?