Anyone else think Sandro is better than Parker?

[faze_coys]

Always though sandro is the better foil for us.

He does his own job and doesnt try and do everyone elses like parker.

parker occupy modrics space too much, he holds on to the ball too much, he doesnt want to let modric dictate play (which i believe is one of the main reasons for modrics loss of form)

 

[Misfit]

Parker's ball playing ability was ruined at chelsea where he decided to go for the cash instead of playing a part in a decent team. He has had a journeyman career really and only now is he actually at a big club. Its a shame he never got to fulfill his potential as the next Gerrard. Sandro is already the much better player in terms of his all round play and I hope he finds the consistency. Is it no surprise that Modric had his best game in ages with him holding?

Yes, a salutary lesson for all younger players about being careful of your next move. Chasing the money at a "big club" in the short term could doom you to a 6 yr banishment in the hinterlands of Newcastle and West Ham.

 

[Maske2g]

Why the bloody hell not?! Playing them both in the same team greatly increase our ability to win and retain the ball and frees Modric of any defensive burden, allowing him to play further up the pitch where he can cause more problems..

Are you joking?

1 - They have been on each others toes whenever they have played together. No team need two defensive midfielders with average ball retention

2- Modric is shit in dangerous positions. His decision making, execution, and general threat disappears when he gets in the box. He is a water carrier like a Deschamps, Xavi, Scholes, or Essien, not an attacking midfielder like Ozil, Silva etc. His dimunitive stature is not a reason to assume otherwise. His ability to keep possession to allow the team to catch a breather, reshuffle, or build from the back, is what makes him a special player.

3- Modric makes us tick in the middle and without him there we FAIl to dominate possession compared to when he does play there

4 - It's the kind of defeatist attitude employed by teams at the bottom trying to nick a point when they come to white hart Lane

5 - We dont look like scoring when they play together.

I can't find one genuinely good reason to play them together unless we're 1-0 up in the final game, about to finish third, and we go all out defence.....

 

[Maske2g]

Yes, a salutary lesson for all younger players about being careful of your next move. Chasing the money at a "big club" in the short term could doom you to a 6 yr banishment in the hinterlands of Newcastle and West Ham.

I'm sure he'll regret it when he lives out the lions share of his life in retirement with only 23 million in the bank.....

 

[faze_coys]

Are you joking?

1 - They have been on each others toes whenever they have played together. No team need two defensive midfielders with average ball retention

2- Modric is shit in dangerous positions. His decision making, execution, and general threat disappears when he gets in the box. He is a water carrier like a Deschamps, Xavi, Scholes, or Essien, not an attacking midfielder like Ozil, Silva etc. His dimunitive stature is not a reason to assume otherwise. His ability to keep possession to allow the team to catch a breather, reshuffle, or build from the back, is what makes him a special player.

3- Modric makes us tick in the middle and without him there we FAIl to dominate possession compared to when he does play there

4 - It's the kind of defeatist attitude employed by teams at the bottom trying to nick a point when they come to white hart Lane

5 - We dont look like scoring when they play together.

I can't find one genuinely good reason to play them together unless we're 1-0 up in the final game, about to finish third, and we go all out defence.....

basically this.

but i do think modric HUDD and sandro would work beautifully together.

 

[Maske2g]

basically this.

but i do think modric HUDD and sandro would work beautifully together.

Yes, because then you have someone who is a great passer to make up for his lack of athletism.

However, we would need a coach to teach them how to get forward more.

Kederia is the tackling ball winner of an athlete for Real madrid in the same formation, but he is also the one that gets high up the park, while the less athletic Alonso sits deep.

 

[Misfit]

I'm sure he'll regret it when he lives out the lions share of his life in retirement with only 23 million in the bank.....

Well of course. Had he not gone to chelsea, he'd still be a multi-millionaire. He's spent the majority and the peak of his short career playing for shit teams in the main.

Naturally none of them ultimately give a fuck. It's just a job, they get paid fortunes to play a child's game and they have all the power.

Bet you he didn't think his career would pan out like this though.

 

[$hoguN]

Why does one need to be better than the other?

I would argue we need to be playing both as they bring slightly different but equally important sets of skills to our side.

Parker gives us a midfield leader, who is dogged and will run around all game breaking up play.

Sandro gives us an athletic midfielder capable of making some insanely good tackles, interceptions and as he gets older will start to add a few goals to his game with the way he hits the ball.

 

[Gbspurs]

Happy to have both in the squad, especially given their respective ages. Not sure how long sandros contract is but he needs a biggy

 

[Krafty]

I think they are ever so slightly different players.

Parker will go chasing after people like a dog with the smell of bacon in his nostrils, while Sandro tends to shield the back 4 a little better.

Parker is a little more guts and glory, Sandro can be caught in possession.

Equally, Sandro is more capable on the ball, his range of passing is better and he has a much better long shot. Parker just doesn't look like having a meaningful effort on target, ever.

Parker appears to be a sharper to what others are doing and what they are capable of. He knows Modric is the better technical player, so he'll give him the ball quickly. Perhaps because Sandro has a bit more in his locker, he doesn't just shift it on automatically. Both have their plus and minus points.

I think there are times when one plays ahead of the other, times when they will play together, maybe times when neither are needed. My personal opinion is that Sandro is the better footballer, but Parker has leadership qualities that we badly need.

 

[spudtrader]

Why the bloody hell not?! Playing them both in the same team greatly increase our ability to win and retain the ball and frees Modric of any defensive burden, allowing him to play further up the pitch where he can cause more problems. They give the midfield a solid base so that the 4 players in front of them (preferably Modric, vdV, Bale and Adebayor) can do what they do best. They also allow the fullbacks to get forward more. Those two plus Modric is about as good as a midfield gets in the Premier League.

In theory it is a really suitable formation to be playing but i don't like the rigidity it causes, some have suggested putting vdv in front of them instead of modric in order to offer more of a goal threat.

It has its strengths but should only be played in away games against teams in the top 4/5, perhaps home games against utd & city, where the primary concern is to not lose.

Having Sandro and Parker at the club is an amazing position to be in, and if we had similar quality in depth across the team, we would have an unbelievable squad.

 

[faze_coys]

Parker appears to be a sharper to what others are doing and what they are capable of. He knows Modric is the better technical player, so he'll give him the ball quickly. Perhaps because Sandro has a bit more in his locker, he doesn't just shift it on automatically. Both have their plus and minus points.

lolwut.

 

[Krafty]

lolwut.

When Parker gets the ball he looks to give to someone, mainly Modric, immediately because he knows he hasn't got the skills to play a 45yard pass out wide or dribble round someone. This keeps the ball moving fast and importantly means it gets to a player who can create an opening sooner.

Sandro is a better passer, so when he gets the ball he will survey the options open to him. He can switch the ball from one flank to the other, but equally he can be caught in possession or slow our play down, with the opposition getting closer to the likes of Modric before he receives the ball. Comprendy?

 

[Bus-Conductor]

Are you joking?

1 - They have been on each others toes whenever they have played together. No team need two defensive midfielders with average ball retention

2- Modric is shit in dangerous positions. His decision making, execution, and general threat disappears when he gets in the box. He is a water carrier like a Deschamps, Xavi, Scholes, or Essien, not an attacking midfielder like Ozil, Silva etc. His dimunitive stature is not a reason to assume otherwise. His ability to keep possession to allow the team to catch a breather, reshuffle, or build from the back, is what makes him a special player.

3- Modric makes us tick in the middle and without him there we FAIl to dominate possession compared to when he does play there

4 - It's the kind of defeatist attitude employed by teams at the bottom trying to nick a point when they come to white hart Lane

5 - We dont look like scoring when they play together.

I can't find one genuinely good reason to play them together unless we're 1-0 up in the final game, about to finish third, and we go all out defence.....

Strange statements, completely out of sync with actual reality:

We qualified for CL football with Modric playing mostly at LM. We beat Milan away with Modric not playing in CM.

Games this season without Modric in a cm 2:

Wigan away 2-1 - 64% possession
Newcastle away 2-2 - 45%
Norwich away 2-0 - 59%
Chelsea home (first half) 1-1 - 59% (second half 0-0 48%)
Swansea away (first half) 1-0 49% (second half 0-1 39%)
Arsenal away (second half) 0-3 43% (first half 2-2 42%)
Chelsea away 0-0 - 55%
Bolton home cup 3-1 - 64%
Swansea home 3-1 - 41%
Sunderland away 0-0 - 77%
QPR away - 0-1 69%

The vast majority of results and ball domination facts do not support your thesis that we don't dominate the ball when Modric isn't in a cm 2.Only two full games did we not dominate the ball when Modric wasn't playing in a cm 2. One against possession specialists Swansea and the other Newcastle away. And half a game against the leagues other possession specialists Arsenal. And in only one of those did we loose the game.

As for playing Sandro and Parker being defeatist, this is a strange idea. We are clearly more successful when Modric isn't played in a cm2. That would make it defeatist to play him there wouldn't it ?

 

[Maske2g]

Strange statements, completely out of sync with actual reality:

We qualified for CL football with Modric playing mostly at LM. We beat Milan away with Modric not playing in CM.

Games this season without Modric in a cm 2:

Wigan away 2-1 - 64% possession
Newcastle away 2-2 - 45%
Norwich away 2-0 - 59%
Chelsea home (first half) 1-1 - 59% (second half 0-0 48%)
Swansea away (first half) 1-0 49% (second half 0-1 39%)
Arsenal away (second half) 0-3 43% (first half 2-2 42%)
Chelsea away 0-0 - 55%
Bolton home cup 3-1 - 64%
Swansea home 3-1 - 41%
Sunderland away 0-0 - 77%
QPR away - 0-1 69%

The vast majority of results and ball domination facts do not support your thesis that we don't dominate the ball when Modric isn't in a cm 2.Only two full games did we not dominate the ball when Modric wasn't playing in a cm 2. One against possession specialists Swansea and the other Newcastle away. And half a game against the leagues other possession specialists Arsenal. And in only one of those did we loose the game.

As for playing Sandro and Parker being defeatist, this is a strange idea. We are clearly more successful when Modric isn't played in a cm2. That would make it defeatist to play him there wouldn't it ?

I'm not really sure I get what your saying. You argued my point, and then listed 10 league games in which we played well in 2 of them....not really sure where your backing your opinion up...seems to be contradicting it.

If we played like we did against Milan away every week, I would never go again. Yes it was valiant, yes it was brave, yes it was against what Spurs are all about. (I used to have a win at all costs attitude, until we bored out way to a draw at Anfield this year playing similar tactics)

I think my point was not about taking Modric out of the middle anyway....it was that he is shit when played more advanced, and we have generally been abysmal when Parker and Sandro have played together.

 

[Bus-Conductor]

I'm not really sure I get what your saying. You argued my point, and then listed 10 league games in which we played well in 2 of them....not really sure where your backing your opinion up...seems to be contradicting it.

If we played like we did against Milan away every week, I would never go again. Yes it was valiant, yes it was brave, yes it was against what Spurs are all about. (I used to have a win at all costs attitude, until we bored out way to a draw at Anfield this year playing similar tactics)

I think my point was not about taking Modric out of the middle anyway....it was that he is shit when played more advanced, and we have generally been abysmal when Parker and Sandro have played together.

Except we haven't. A couple of our best performances have been when Parker and Sandro have played together. Like Norwich away, Wigan away, Chelsea away, Swansea home.

In all of those games Modric was given more freedom and got forward more, and while he may not be a clinical finisher - he isn't - having someone with a brain in and around the opposition box has paid off in games where he is.

 

[StartingPrice]

I'm not really sure I get what your saying. You argued my point, and then listed 10 league games in which we played well in 2 of them....not really sure where your backing your opinion up...seems to be contradicting it.

If we played like we did against Milan away every week, I would never go again. Yes it was valiant, yes it was brave, yes it was against what Spurs are all about. (I used to have a win at all costs attitude, until we bored out way to a draw at Anfield this year playing similar tactics)

I think my point was not about taking Modric out of the middle anyway....it was that he is shit when played more advanced, and we have generally been abysmal when Parker and Sandro have played together.

Another SCer falls victim to the wilderness which is BCs stats filled ruminations...it's like he dropped some acid and then watched The Matrix and never came back.

Mask...M A S K...run towards the light

 

[Mr Pink]

Is somebody basically saying that we are shit when both Parker and Sandro play?

 

[Blake Griffin]

when sandro and parker play i feel there's less chance of us losing but also less chance of winning. with just one playing then it's the reverse.

 

[Spurs_Bear]

what about if neither play? draw?