 |
| Is he the answer? |
There's two ways of looking at the possible signing of Parker. It could either add that extra bit of steel and passion to the side and do us wonders, or he could not really make the side and end his career in a way he doesn't deserve. Many say he should be signed as cover for Alex Song. Is this fair though? Is it fair to sign a player who has just been named Football Writers Player of the Year and could walk into the first team of more or less any PL side just to keep the bench warm in case Song gets hurt? We're not Manchester City. I think that would be disrespectful to take advantage of him having the best season of his life. He deserves regular first team football.
Let's face it, he isn't as good a passer as more or less every CM we currently have. Excluding possibly Denilson .... However, he is a lot more scary, passionate and difficult to play against than many of the players we currently have. Sides currently know if they can get past our midfield and have a crack at our defence, they have a pretty good chance of scoring. With Parker sitting in the centre of our team, I somehow don't think they'd get as many chances to face our defence.
Parker works extremely hard and he has shown that all season. He is a player you can guarantee will give blood, sweat and tears for his side. He'll tackle until he has lost consciousness, and will rouse the side if things aren't going well (for example, look here). There is a "but" coming I promise! BUT, would he fit in to our side unless Wenger drastically changes tactics and approach play? Our game revolves around passing our way through teams whereas Parker strikes me as the sort of player who'd be happy bullying his way through teams, playing longer balls etc. This contrast in styles could work, or could go horribly wrong. If we sign him, there's a chance he would be viewed as many as the replacement for Cesc if he left. Could he live up to and replicate Cesc's influence in our side? These figures don't look good in that department ....
2010/11 Season:
Scott Parker - 31 Games, 5 goals, 2 assists, 36 shots.
Cesc Fabregas - 25 Games, 3 goals, 11 assists, 71 shots. (all stats via ESPN Soccernet)
If Scott was to have to fill a gap left by Cesc Fabregas, you'd have to say he'd struggle based on the stats above. He has provided 9 less assists than a half-fit Cesc Fabregas who has played 6 games less. If he wants to fit into and establish himself in our team he'd have to improve his chance creation level a lot. I don't accept the whole "the strikers in front of him aren't good enough anyway" argument for Parker as for quite a lot of the season, the same could have been said about Cesc. Surprisingly, for those who say we don't shoot enough, including myself, the number of shots taken by the two club captains is quite a shock. I accept that maybe Nasri or Wilshere would be given the Fabregas role ahead of Parker and he would drop deeper. Even then, would he do a majorly better job than Wilshere or Song? I don't think so.
Don't get me wrong, I think Parker is a quality player and we should seriously look into the possibility of signing him but I don't think he would fit in brilliantly with our current style of play. I might be wrong however because I know he can pass a ball. He was also very impressive when he lined up alongside Jack Wilshere for England recently, which could be promising. I have one major fear though and that was summed up perfectly by @Sonurus on twitter (give him a follow) when he said, "would max be a squad player in my eyes. Much like Denilson is now." As good a player Scott Parker is, I feel this could well be the case. Can you really picture Arsene playing Parker ahead of the tip-tap passing champions like Cesc, Nasri, Wilshere, Song, Diaby etc (Again, left out Denilson...) just because he will tackle hard and cares a lot? Sadly, I think not
I feel I'm being too negative on the man. He is a great player and we have many reasons to sign him. One tweet that I believed summed up the reasons we should sign him well was by @gunnerszzz."Because he sounds like he's got some balls and hungry for medals." As bad as it might sound, it is true. Parker is gutsy, experinced and bordering on mental when he gets angry. These are all things many fans say we are missing right now. The other replies when I asked whether or not we should sign Parker or not were mainly 70-30% in favour of the deal. I believe most of the yes tweeters included the words "leadership" "spirit" and "experince" ...
As good a player as Scott Parker is and everything he would bring to the side, are there not other alternatives? I know some say we lack the English backbone in our side and to an extent I agree, but surely if English players were so important, the England football team wouldn't be crap.... Anyway, there's no reason why we can't buy an equally experinced, talented and hard-working player from abroard. I may not necessarily feel great about all of them but Melo, Pirlo, Diarra? All could do an equally good job as Parker, I'm sure.
To finish, Scott Parker is a great player full of passion, commitment and desire. Don't get me wrong. However, when some say the signing of him will win us the league, I think they're being a bit too expectant of the player. He has excelled in a poor West Ham side and in all honesty, wouldn't suit our style of play as well as other potential signings. Despite this, I still hope we sign him. He would easily challenge our current players in centre midfield, there's no reason he couldn't start for us. Even better, he'd give the lads a right dressing down if we were playing poorly, I feel we lack that right now. There's a poll to your right somewhere, tell me what you think.
Thanks,
Joe (@Tilley_96)
No comments:
Post a Comment