Scott Parker
- Thread starter michaelden
- Start date
guate
Well-Known Member
- May 12, 2005
- 3,270
- 1,486
Stemark, can you never be gracious in defeat. 'Parker was always the one 'Arry wanted and as he says in the excellent article posted by Paolo10:"It wasn't an easy one for the football club but he was always the one I wanted from day one. It wasn't easy from the chairman's point of view to sign him - it was his age and length of contract
Hopefully you and other 'Arry bashers can now begin to appreciate the quality of the manager we currently have instead of constantly knocking him.
Hopefully you and other 'Arry bashers can now begin to appreciate the quality of the manager we currently have instead of constantly knocking him.
stemark44
Well-Known Member
- Mar 17, 2005
- 6,598
- 1,829
Not sure why I am defeated?
I don't have a problem with Scott Parker.
It was widely rumoured throughout the summer that we were after Diarra and confirmed a week or 2 ago in an interview given by Adebayor.
Harry obviously gave Levy both names and the decision was taken based on age and future value of the player.
Diarra was younger,so he was our number 1 target when he decided against coming,Parker was the next choice.
I refuse to believe that Harry did not recommend Diarra,given that he played for him at Portsmouth.
I would be shocked if our chairman is the one that decides what players we are going to buy based purely on his own instincts.
AnotherSpursFan
Well-Known Member
- Dec 4, 2006
- 1,810
- 1,792
Mvp mvp mvp!!
dvdhopeful
SC Supporter
- Nov 10, 2006
- 7,623
- 6,052
I think he was quibbling the fact you said Diarra was Redknapp and Levy's first choice. In the article Harry said Parker was always his first choice. Chances are Levy wanted a younger alternative and Harry went with Diarra.
Think the truth, according to the article, would be that Harry's first choice was Parker, Levy's first choice was Diarra - Harry got his way only after things with Diarra fell through.
Think we are all pleased about that
AngerManagement
Well-Known Member
- May 15, 2004
- 12,518
- 2,739
To be fair to Dan Ashcroft his negative predictions are yet to be proved wrong (some of them anyway)
'Tails off badly in the spring', we shall see come spring I suppose.
'Harry will play him ahead of Sandro driving the Brazilian off to Spain/Italy" again we shall see if Harry accommodates both or if Sandro is marginalised as a result of Parker's signing.
Its clear Dan's opinion of Parker as a wash up has been who never really was and had nothing to offer us was very wide of the mark as thus far PArker has been immense for us and probably our best player of the season so far.
I think also to be fair to D'ASH he has openly admitted to being impressed by Parkers form thus far in match threads and ratings threads. I dunno whether he has admitted he was wrong yet or stands by his prediction that Parker will tail off and prove an expensive waste of money or not but some of this remains to be seen still I guess.
Right now its hard to see anyone not thinking Parker was an inspired signing however.
'Tails off badly in the spring', we shall see come spring I suppose.
'Harry will play him ahead of Sandro driving the Brazilian off to Spain/Italy" again we shall see if Harry accommodates both or if Sandro is marginalised as a result of Parker's signing.
Its clear Dan's opinion of Parker as a wash up has been who never really was and had nothing to offer us was very wide of the mark as thus far PArker has been immense for us and probably our best player of the season so far.
I think also to be fair to D'ASH he has openly admitted to being impressed by Parkers form thus far in match threads and ratings threads. I dunno whether he has admitted he was wrong yet or stands by his prediction that Parker will tail off and prove an expensive waste of money or not but some of this remains to be seen still I guess.
Right now its hard to see anyone not thinking Parker was an inspired signing however.
michaelden
Knight of the Fat Fanny
- Aug 13, 2004
- 26,458
- 21,824
- Thread starter
- #1,027
Parker has currently been a much better signing than I thought, but let's not all start sucking each others dicks just yet. (quote from the Wolf in Pulp Fiction)
I'm still wary that HR will marginalise Sandro by playing Parker over him. And in my eyes Sandro is the future captain of Spurs & Brasil. He will be immense and does not need his career held up.
I'm still wary that HR will marginalise Sandro by playing Parker over him. And in my eyes Sandro is the future captain of Spurs & Brasil. He will be immense and does not need his career held up.
jurgen
Busy ****
- Jul 5, 2008
- 6,766
- 17,385
So you're more worried about Sandro than Tottenham Hotspur? Parker's been immense, Sandro will play with him many times for us, and learn from him, and likely become a better player because of it and very likely a better player than Parker has ever been. And Tottenham are a better team because of Parker. What's to be so wary about?
sloth
Well-Known Member
- Mar 7, 2005
- 9,018
- 6,900
When we were first linked with Parker my great fear was that Harry would see it as either Sandro or Parker but rarely both.
I've been reassured by the Wigan match, but am slightly non-plussed since the Arsenal game. Hopefully Harry will have learned the lesson he should have learned long ago.
My fear remains that Defoe is Harry's £16m "had 'im since 'e was a boy... 'es a 20 goal a season striker, no doubt" pick and so he'll continue to favour the set-up which allows him to play Defoe over the one with the greatest chance of winning. Not a terrible equation btw, as either formation is still pretty shit-hot, but still a massive missed opportunity to really move up an echelon if he does it
On this article I think that Levy is the arch negotiator. He had a price he was prepared to pay for Parker and that's what he paid. The issue was that we had other irons on the fire, players who also had a price we were prepared to pay and so that had to wind its course and West Ham had to agree to accept our fee, before we could get Parker in.
In the end people say Levy doesn't back Redknapp, but afaic he backs him to the hilt when its sensible for him to do so.
I've been reassured by the Wigan match, but am slightly non-plussed since the Arsenal game. Hopefully Harry will have learned the lesson he should have learned long ago.
My fear remains that Defoe is Harry's £16m "had 'im since 'e was a boy... 'es a 20 goal a season striker, no doubt" pick and so he'll continue to favour the set-up which allows him to play Defoe over the one with the greatest chance of winning. Not a terrible equation btw, as either formation is still pretty shit-hot, but still a massive missed opportunity to really move up an echelon if he does it
On this article I think that Levy is the arch negotiator. He had a price he was prepared to pay for Parker and that's what he paid. The issue was that we had other irons on the fire, players who also had a price we were prepared to pay and so that had to wind its course and West Ham had to agree to accept our fee, before we could get Parker in.
In the end people say Levy doesn't back Redknapp, but afaic he backs him to the hilt when its sensible for him to do so.
StartingPrice
Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
- Feb 13, 2004
- 32,568
- 10,280
This
michaelden
Knight of the Fat Fanny
- Aug 13, 2004
- 26,458
- 21,824
- Thread starter
- #1,031
No, but if Sandro, by all accounts, is better than Parker, its better for Spurs.
AngerManagement
Well-Known Member
- May 15, 2004
- 12,518
- 2,739
Sandro is young, there are plenty of games for him even if he doesn't often play as a pair with Parker (which no doubt he will)
Why do you assume Parker would be determental for Sandro's development and not aid it?
Do you not think Sandro could learn from the more experienced Parker?
Do you not think Parker's leadership quality could evolve Sandro into the future captain of Spurs and Brazil in a way perhaps he wouldn't have without PArker to learn from?
why do some people look for the negative all the time?
King benefited no end from NAybet's experience and I see no reason why the same won't occur with Sandro.
Parker has been immense thus far, I think all the doubters should be holding hands up.
Sandro will play, he has just come back from injury and he is already getting plenty of game time. There is no harm in blooding him in and he does't need to play every min of every game.
StartingPrice
Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
- Feb 13, 2004
- 32,568
- 10,280
He's already been getting some tips in hilarious barnet-lore, apparently :hump:
SpurSince57
Well-Known Member
- Jan 20, 2006
- 45,213
- 8,229
Bring on the empty horses!
StartingPrice
Chief Sardonicus Hyperlip
- Feb 13, 2004
- 32,568
- 10,280
Are you saying The Moon is a Balloon :shrug: (p.s. If anyone has a first edition hardback of the last named book and would like to post me it I would be most grateful :grin
.
Blake Griffin
Well-Known Member
- Oct 3, 2011
- 14,167
- 38,483
he was right about harry playing parker over sandro though.
SpurSince57
Well-Known Member
- Jan 20, 2006
- 45,213
- 8,229
Piffle.
Donki
Has a "Massive Member" Member
- May 14, 2007
- 14,455
- 18,975
Couldnt agree more biglad, its so obvious some people on here simply don't watch any other teams play football, or if they do they dont know what the games about. :grin:
