You've got to put a body on him and make it physical: he'll shy away from contact. Letting him all that space is lunacy.
True, in fact I would put two players on him. Still, he' one of the few players in the modern game who can be genuinely described as unplayable on his day. Plus he has searing pace, meaning the rest of the team and can sit back and play on the break.
Oh christ, the Guardian have declared Parker man of the match and Richard Williams has already posted an article stating that 'Scott Parker shows why he is England's leading man'. Clearly he had written the vast majority of it before the game. I really don't understand this. We can't have a player who can't trap or pass a ball in the centre of midfield, let alone make him captain! It's embarrassing.
-Holland got to the World Cup Final, and had the best chance in normal time to win. - They sit back and play on the break. England will always struggle against teams like this, even more so with Parker in midfield. - Robben when fit is as good as any forward in the game. Creative, fast, with a great left foot. -You sound like a broken record always blaming the manager for the wrong reasons.
I didn't say he played poorly, I'm just pointing out that the Guardian made him man of the match and that Richard Williams(Guardian writer) posted a separate article not long after the game finished, most of which he had clearly already penned. Parker spends the whole game turning to try and pass back to his centre halves. He is the epitome of everything that is wrong with English football in its style. How about when he fell over his own fee in the centre circle and gifted Holland a prime opportunity to break? I don't fault his effort, attitude or side parting, only his footballing ability.
agreed I thought Baines, Barry and Young (despite his goal) were some of the poorer players on the pitch
why so much Parker hate? Barry, Downing...usual suspects...though Baines looked susceptible as well. my top 3 players would be Cahill, Sturridge, Parker
Not sure this has been discussed in another thread or not...but what's up with the camera angle at Wembley ? At least on the feed in America, which I still assume is the main feed, the camera was not centered on the field. It was quite a bit off to the left. I'd say 40 yards from the goal. Maybe 15-20 yards off-center.
And it's too low - it's difficult to judge the distances between the players. Reminds me of the Highbury TV angle. Can't stand it.
First goal, not so much - Sturridge, Smalling and the non-existent midfield were to blame. Second goal, yes. Baines for the last goal was even worse defending. Not drilling that Robben would cut inside to shoot on his left foot into every defender's head and not changing the formation when Sturridge came on (not the first he has conceded possession at the halfway line casually leading to a goal) was poor coaching IMO.
Isn't the whole point of Parker to stop goals like the first? He offers nothing going forward so he better be protecting the back 4 at all times, he was out of position to start with and his attempts to catch Robben were funny.
haha true, although I find the high pitched din of schoolboys so often heard at friendlies pretty annoying too.
His head looks like its going to either fall off or topple him over through the sheer weight of it when he runs. The media likes to create its pantomine villains, and conversely its heroes. Never will you hear a bad word uttered about Scotty Parker by the English press or the vast majority of England fans. Parker's main qualities are running around and pressing, blocking shots and fouling. His positional sense and reading of the game is actually fairly poor hence the number of crunching tackles he seems to make. If England play him, it should be as a destroyer in a free role. Like a shit Sissoko with no pace.
Pearce is saying that full time job is not for him ,but he still wants to lead the team in the Euro's! haha I wouldnt put it past the buffoons of the FA to write off a whole tournament with this dolt in charge.
What a feeble effort by Baines not to try to get a block in after we got back to 2-2. You'd think he might have been inspired by Parker who would probably jump in front of a runaway truck if he thought it would prevent a goal.
To be fair to people criticising people at fault for the first goal... Robben at times is almost unplayable. Anyone with that close control runnning at you at speed is likely to make you either concede a foul, (or even worse, a penalty), or score a goal. The REAL problem was throwing that many people forward when the game's still 0-0 against a side that's as good as the Dutch. I've been watching some of the games back when we had our best run in recent years against some decent sides in the WC qualifiers and it's interesting to see that we DIDN'T steamroller sides right from the off as I'm sure some people still think. Quite the contrary, a lot of the games were pretty close for, say, half the match. We kept it tight with a couple of fellas, (usually Barry and Lampard), sitting in front of the back four who don't tend to lose possession and then let the players in front of them do the damage... BUT over the course of the 90 mins. That's the OPPOSITE of what happened last night where we had Parker trying to get forward and Barry had been taken off for Milner. In fact, our success during that period reflects how most successful international sides play the game which is 'cagey'. The days when even sides like Brazil throw people forward with abandon are LONG gone. The fact that Pearce thought Milner would be a good person for that role says everything about why he shouldn't be the England manager I suppose Having said that I thought we did pretty well last night and there were some bright spots. I thought Cahill and Smalling were quite good and Micah Richards was decent, bearing in mind he was playing against one of the most effective wingers, (when he's on form and 'at it'), in the game. Sturridge was OK BUT he's still rather hit and miss for me. I think he's one of the those players where you have to take the rough with the smooth. He MIGHT score a wonder goal but, then again, he might not and if he doesn't he doesn't give evenough in other areas. Maybe by the end of the season he'll have figured it out but we'll see I s'pose. Parker was OK but you can't leave him on his own out there in that position. I thought Welbeck worked hard but had little support. In that regard, (lack of support), I thought Ashley Young and Stevie Gerrard were particularly innefective. Maybe Stevie was injured before the start? Not sure what excuse Young has DESPITE his goal. Adam Johnson looked threatening on occasion but, then again, so did Downing. Johnson just seems a better footballer to me though. As has already been said, based on that performance there's quite a gap between Ashley Cole and whoever comes next for the left back slot but, again, to be fair, it's only one game I guess.
I honestly can't believe some people think that we deserved to lose 3-0.. with better management and more clinical finishing we would have won that. We had the best chances in the game, and I think that generally the first half was played well by us.. we were trying to keep it on the floor. Don't forget that Sturridge probably should have scored, Downing should have scored, and someone else came close who should have scored. I honestly don't think it was a bad performance, Holland are not a great team if you can keep Robben quiet.. which we would have had more of a chance of doing if Cole was fit. And Prenn i'm not sure how you can say we have a poor crop of players coming through.. IMO this is the best bunch for at least 10 years.. Wilshere, Sturridge, Welbeck etc with Mceachran etc waiting in the wings.. much better than recent years when we've had Milner etc
Parker can do a job against some opposition... just not on his own. My problem with him is that against sides with small, tricky players who dive, (a lot of international sides including some of the best around), he's likely to be off the pitch before too long. Well, if you take the side throug the euros that IS being in full time change. I mean, that's pretty much the definition of it. Otherwise, what's he saying... that he doesn't mind not being in charge when we havent got a any games? WTF? As you say, the FA are CLEARLY trying to get him to run the side because, for the FA, he's the 'acceptable' face of football management in England, i.e. not very good.