Why do people hate Scott Parker?

[BigGrantsTash 74]

Obviously this is a little irrelevant now as he’s been appointed elsewhere. Nor was I someone who particularly wanted Scott Parker. The reaction when he was linked was strange all the same.

There was a lot of vitriol towards him. Lots of people saying they hope it’s not him and Wagner is better etc. Did any of you watch his Bournemouth and Fulham teams?

To my eye they always played good football. Kept it on the floor, played out from the back almost religiously. Attacked, scored goals. In their promotions, they played similarly to us and Huddersfield under Wagner. The issue the fans had with Parker Is that he would try and play out from the back in the prem. A bit like us under Farke.

Yet I see many posts claiming his football is ****e and long ball. He’s a dinosaur, he’s Dean Smith 2.0. His teams don’t pass etc.

Is it just the case that these people don’t watch his teams but believe in the lazy stereotype that all English managers are crap and play hoofball? 
I was a little underwhelmed with Parker and I’m a little underwhelmed with Wagner. To me they’re both at a similar level with a similar style. Except Parker has 2 promotions to Wagner’s 1. Yet everyone else thinks Wagner’s on a different level.

 

[Newtopia 573]

I must have missed those comments, I definitely do not hate him, he is a talented guy.  I just didn’t think he was a good fit for ourselves.

[keelansgrandad 6,680]

Didn't really understand the bitterness toward him by some. Its going to be a risk no matter who we bring in. Well apart from Steve Bruce. 

[TeemuVanBasten 3,328]

1 hour ago, BigGrantsTash said:

Obviously this is a little irrelevant now as he’s been appointed elsewhere. Nor was I someone who particularly wanted Scott Parker. The reaction when he was linked was strange all the same.

There was a lot of vitriol towards him. Lots of people saying they hope it’s not him and Wagner is better etc. Did any of you watch his Bournemouth and Fulham teams?

To my eye they always played good football. Kept it on the floor, played out from the back almost religiously. Attacked, scored goals. In their promotions, they played similarly to us and Huddersfield under Wagner. The issue the fans had with Parker Is that he would try and play out from the back in the prem. A bit like us under Farke.

Yet I see many posts claiming his football is ****e and long ball. He’s a dinosaur, he’s Dean Smith 2.0. His teams don’t pass etc.

Is it just the case that these people don’t watch his teams but believe in the lazy stereotype that all English managers are crap and play hoofball? 
I was a little underwhelmed with Parker and I’m a little underwhelmed with Wagner. To me they’re both at a similar level with a similar style. Except Parker has 2 promotions to Wagner’s 1. Yet everyone else thinks Wagner’s on a different level.

 

The reason I didn't want Scott Parker was really quite simple. Following that 9-0 defeat to Liverpool in his post-match press conference to question his clubs recruitment and "ambition", clearly not happy that they'd only spent about £25m this season and essentially saying that he had an impossible job. Rather than adopt a win or lose as a team mentality he projected the heavy defeat onto his Chairman and his players. 

His chairman had already said that they wouldn't be spending big as his priority was to run a sustainable football club, whether that was in the Premier League or the Championship. Scott Parker made the decision to undermine his Chairman (who actually, has done a hell of a lot for the club and invested a lot of his money). Yes, £25m is a great deal of money but there is a Covid black hole to consider like there is for every club of their/our size, and its a hell of a lot more than we spent in Farke's first promotion season.

Parker was essentially publicly rejecting the brief, which was to try and stay up with what he has at his disposal.

The implication of that post-match press conference was that he didn't think his players were good enough to stay in the Premier League. That was certainly how his players would have taken it.

They are definitely in a relegation battle under Parker's successor, but they aren't in the relegation zone, they are 15th. They have a chance of staying up, and their players are doing a decent job of trying to prove Parker wrong. I'm sure going into this transfer window the owner/Chairman will find a bit more money for a player or two in January, that will be Gary O'Neil's reward for having faith in his players and getting them into this position.

Now look at our current situation. We have no January transfer budget. The new manager essentially gets what he has at his disposal. Again, we might see a loan player or two, funded by some fringe players leaving (perhaps half of Hugill's wages off the wage bill on a loan deal, Saxon Earley sold, maybe Krul will go back to Holland where he had summer interest?). But essentially our new manager has to do whatever he can to turn our current bunch into a better side.

We don't need a manager who is going to come in, publicly state that his players aren't good enough and that he needs a big transfer pot. We haven't got a big transfer pot and a manager gets what he is given.

Following those comments Parker is now perceived as: 1). Not a team player, and 2). High maintenance. Not only has he never shown that he can work on a tight budget, he's effectively come out and said that he's not prepared to. He's the epitome of the overly well paid English journeyman who has had it easy his whole life.

He also did the dirty on relegated Fulham by swapping them for Championship promotion rivals Bournemouth, after they gave him his big break as a manager (and 4 years as a player). Fulham fans already perceived him as disloyal. That doesn't help the perception that people have of Scott Parker being all about Scott Parker. 

Mark Robins on the other hand has shown that he work at a basket case club which seems to be close to administration every 18 months, building a side on a pittance and taking them up from League Two to the top half of the Championship. Wagner had some generous budgets in the Premier League but essentially spent £3m on his promotion side. He has also been really loyal to Coventry, some would argue too loyal. We don't need a manager who flounces and jumps ship a year into a multi-year rebuild and transformation project, which is essentially what we will need to embark on. We need a manager who can buy into what we need to build here now, not a short-termist manager looking for a stepping stone.

We don't have much money. Therefore we need a manager who has shown that he can do a job with what he has at his disposal and very limited transfer funds, being able to organise and improve a less than ideal group and develop what he is given into better and smarter players. Not somebody who constantly wants money to be thrown at problems. 

Yes Parker has two promotions on his CV, and yes Wagner only has one, but Wagner did it with a team which wasn't expected to be challenging for promotion by anybody, be it pundits, bookies or football fans, and Parker did it with two teams who had probably a top 2 or 3 wage budget where not getting promoted would have been seen as a failure (Fulham almost certainly the highest wage bill in the league, and Mitrovic is essentially a Championship cheat code, I read somewhere that he was believed to be the first £100k a week player in the Championship).

Wagner also kept a team up. Lets not forget that the only reason Parker went to another side to win his second promotion is because he failed to keep his first team up. Then he bottled trying to keep his second promoted team up. 

Edited January 1, 2023 by TeemuVanBasten

[Nora's Ghost 157]

Parker is another woke Southgate without the comedy teeth.

 

We want someone with grit in charge of the team not a sissy 'strictly' candidate.

[hogesar 10,762]

No hate but had no excitement towards him and Bournemouth fans weren't impressed with the football both at championship and prem level.

And after his public outburst about not enough spending etc a rookie manager in Gary O'Neil came in and comfortably out performed him.

[Commonsense 802]

3 hours ago, Nora's Ghost said:

Parker is another woke Southgate without the comedy teeth.

 

We want someone with grit in charge of the team not a sissy 'strictly' candidate.

I don’t want or like Parker. However I object to your constant referrals to sissy, pandering etc. All this managers before Southgate enjoyed fantastic success didn’t they?

[king canary 8,756]

The view I got from fans of Bournemouth and Fulham was largely similar to how people viewed Smith a couple of months ago- that the teams he managed were almost winning games despite him and he has squads that were too good for the level. It is notable that Bournemouth fans were not remotely unhappy to see him binned off even after he led them to promotion.

[lake district canary 4,830]

I never took to him as a player or manager, maybe something to do with his personality and/or body language.

Look at the last three English managers from outside the club who tried the job - Smith, Hughton and Roeder (yes, Hughton was born in England) - they just did not fit. I think that having played at big city clubs and had careers in similar, coming to Norwich was not something they could adjust to - there are not many - if any - clubs like us, given the geographical and cultural situation -- we are a bit err......"special".

Any of the English managers who have been on the list - be it Bruce, Parker, Robins or any other - are quite dour personalities, when we need something a bit more feisty - like Lambert or Alex Neil (in his early days with us) - or like the cultured Farke who had a bit of continental charisma. So for me anyone apart from an English manager, although as I've said elsewhere, Dyche does have a depth some people don't credit him for and he might be able to make a go of it, but it would be a gamble.

Parker would just be like another Smith, when what we need is another Farke.

 

Edited January 1, 2023 by lake district canary

[Barham Blitz 869]

6 hours ago, TeemuVanBasten said:

The reason I didn't want Scott Parker was really quite simple. Following that 9-0 defeat to Liverpool in his post-match press conference to question his clubs recruitment and "ambition", clearly not happy that they'd only spent about £25m this season and essentially saying that he had an impossible job. Rather than adopt a win or lose as a team mentality he projected the heavy defeat onto his Chairman and his players. 

His chairman had already said that they wouldn't be spending big as his priority was to run a sustainable football club, whether that was in the Premier League or the Championship. Scott Parker made the decision to undermine his Chairman (who actually, has done a hell of a lot for the club and invested a lot of his money). Yes, £25m is a great deal of money but there is a Covid black hole to consider like there is for every club of their/our size, and its a hell of a lot more than we spent in Farke's first promotion season.

Parker was essentially publicly rejecting the brief, which was to try and stay up with what he has at his disposal.

The implication of that post-match press conference was that he didn't think his players were good enough to stay in the Premier League. That was certainly how his players would have taken it.

They are definitely in a relegation battle under Parker's successor, but they aren't in the relegation zone, they are 15th. They have a chance of staying up, and their players are doing a decent job of trying to prove Parker wrong. I'm sure going into this transfer window the owner/Chairman will find a bit more money for a player or two in January, that will be Gary O'Neil's reward for having faith in his players and getting them into this position.

Now look at our current situation. We have no January transfer budget. The new manager essentially gets what he has at his disposal. Again, we might see a loan player or two, funded by some fringe players leaving (perhaps half of Hugill's wages off the wage bill on a loan deal, Saxon Earley sold, maybe Krul will go back to Holland where he had summer interest?). But essentially our new manager has to do whatever he can to turn our current bunch into a better side.

We don't need a manager who is going to come in, publicly state that his players aren't good enough and that he needs a big transfer pot. We haven't got a big transfer pot and a manager gets what he is given.

Following those comments Parker is now perceived as: 1). Not a team player, and 2). High maintenance. Not only has he never shown that he can work on a tight budget, he's effectively come out and said that he's not prepared to. He's the epitome of the overly well paid English journeyman who has had it easy his whole life.

He also did the dirty on relegated Fulham by swapping them for Championship promotion rivals Bournemouth, after they gave him his big break as a manager (and 4 years as a player). Fulham fans already perceived him as disloyal. That doesn't help the perception that people have of Scott Parker being all about Scott Parker. 

Mark Robins on the other hand has shown that he work at a basket case club which seems to be close to administration every 18 months, building a side on a pittance and taking them up from League Two to the top half of the Championship. Wagner had some generous budgets in the Premier League but essentially spent £3m on his promotion side. He has also been really loyal to Coventry, some would argue too loyal. We don't need a manager who flounces and jumps ship a year into a multi-year rebuild and transformation project, which is essentially what we will need to embark on. We need a manager who can buy into what we need to build here now, not a short-termist manager looking for a stepping stone.

We don't have much money. Therefore we need a manager who has shown that he can do a job with what he has at his disposal and very limited transfer funds, being able to organise and improve a less than ideal group and develop what he is given into better and smarter players. Not somebody who constantly wants money to be thrown at problems. 

Yes Parker has two promotions on his CV, and yes Wagner only has one, but Wagner did it with a team which wasn't expected to be challenging for promotion by anybody, be it pundits, bookies or football fans, and Parker did it with two teams who had probably a top 2 or 3 wage budget where not getting promoted would have been seen as a failure (Fulham almost certainly the highest wage bill in the league, and Mitrovic is essentially a Championship cheat code, I read somewhere that he was believed to be the first £100k a week player in the Championship).

Wagner also kept a team up. Lets not forget that the only reason Parker went to another side to win his second promotion is because he failed to keep his first team up. Then he bottled trying to keep his second promoted team up. 

Yeah, but apart from that ... ? 😉