Is Scott Parker any better than Jamie O'Hara

[Boots]

I feel Parker is better in that he's a better defender and more mobile, but jamie has one hell of a left foot. Still remember him scoring against West ham from about 25-30m out.

 

[Teegart]

O Hara looks like a mole, not like one from people's faces, like one from the animal kingdom, so for that reason - I'm out

:rofl:

Nicely played sir.

 

[Bill_Oddie]

In financial terms, he cost less. And... no, that's it. I'm out.

Parker is a better footballer and a better voice in the team. His value to Spurs is far greater than O'Hara.

 

[RuskyM]

By the end of the season Parker'll be the best signing we've made since Modric.

You can quote me on that.

 

[sim0n]

O Hara looks like a mole, not like one from people's faces, like one from the animal kingdom, so for that reason - I'm out

clearly he does not have face like deer face... :grin:

 

[mil1lion]

By the end of the season Parker'll be the best signing we've made since Modric.

You can quote me on that.

Better than Sandro and Van Der Vaart? I very much doubt that. One is a top class support striker who was our top scorer last season. God knows what would've happened without him last season. The other is potentially a future world class Brazilian.

I'm sure Parker will prove to be a quality signing, but only for the short term. It's on the level of signing Woodgate several years ago. He wont be the best of signings but will be an effective one.

 

[t7ny]

Yes, mainly in work rate, distribution, general defending and tackling. But it's a big part of the game nowadays.

 

[pistolP]

Yes, the issue i have with his signing,is his age as i do not like us signing the over or around 30's players. I have always like him as a player and i think he will be a good player for us but for how long.

 

[marvel]

Yes.

/thread

 

[opensaysme]

I expect Sandro and Livermore will learn a lot from Parker.

Can I say they will learn from O'hara?

No Sir.

 

[Mr Pink]

We have plenty of 'ball players'....and Ohara would be down the list here. Parker is more of an all action midfielder with his defensive quality being his biggest asset, but still offers drive and some creativity.

On balance its a no brainer in terms of our squad and first eleven as to who would be of more value to us.

 

[fortworthspur]

not yesterday.

 

[AngerManagement]

I thought Parker was great yesterday

He was all energy and helped us tick, he won some very important challenges in the midfield and was a big reason we won what was a very tough away fixture.

Not to mention he played a pivotal role in the opening goal which could well prove to be a turning point in our season. It was very important we win yesterday and the first goal was always going to be huge he made a great assist and it was perfect to see both our new players being involved in the goal.

 

[Mr Pink]

I thought Parker was great yesterday

He was all energy and helped us tick, he won some very important challenges in the midfield and was a big reason we won what was a very tough away fixture.

Not to mention he played a pivotal role in the opening goal which could well prove to be a turning point in our season. It was very important we win yesterday and the first goal was always going to be huge he made a great assist and it was perfect to see both our new players being involved in the goal.

Totally agree, he got my MOM as well.

 

[Archibald&Crooks]

Totally agree, he got my MOM as well.

Your mum?

 

[Mr Pink]

Your mum?

no, your mom :grin:

 

[Paolo10]

He's a better passer, tackler, decision maker, better defensively, more consistent and is harder, but besides all that O'Hara is maybe a bit better. :stupid:

 

[senseispab]

Well you don't know that I wasn't.
But I watch a great deal of football outside Spurs, including a lot of Spanish football. (My other team is Real Madrid)
I think generally that O'Hara is under-rated and that Scott Parker is over-rated.
Whether they meet somewhere in the middle is what the thread is about.
I would happily have kept Jamie as would Spurs as it happens.

I try not to let the fact that Parker turned us down twice for the money influence me. Or that O'Hara was a Tottenham boy.
Scott went Chelsea and rarely played and found his level at Newcastle and
relegated W.Ham.

To those so wrapped up in their own opinion I say give the idea some head room which is the point of any thread.

Ok Scott Parker fits the bill for us at the moment and is a more experienced player than O'Hara and will do a job.
But in terms of ability I think that Jamie is the more naturally gifted player with more vision and creativity.
Parker is more negative.
But I support him because he is a Spurs player, I did no less for JJ another of my lost causes.
But I never switch off my critical faculties and like to think about the game.
I have no particular axe to grind here.

I've given the idea some head room

Parker is much better.

 

[king26]

parker is different gravy far better player

 

[mill]

Is this seriously a thread? hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahhahhahahahhahahahahhaaahahhahahahahhhah the OP you're a mug