Is Parker a Liability?

Submitted by hammersfanno1 on 17 May, 2008 - 15:05.
The stats show that West Ham have only won 27.7% of the games that Parker has featured in. That is a dreadful negative drag factor! Why? Well Parker fans will argue that he has been struggling for fitness and featured in the fag end games when our form nose dived. However, is our collapse in form linked with Parker's return? Newcastle struggled when Parker was in the team, he looked decidely ordinary in an England shirt, Chelsea didn't rate him and, of course, Charlton never won a high percentage of their games - they were never better than mid table. Is the problem that Parker is neither one thing nor the other? He lacks the positional discipline to do the holding midfield job but seems to have an allergic reaction to getting into the opposition penalty box. You can't play Mullins and Parker together because neither offer a goal threat. You can't play Parker as the holding player because he goes wander about. So, does he represent another £7.5m badly spent?
( categories: )
Submitted by Giga on 17 May, 2008 - 15:40.
Here we go again.. What percentage of games has he featured in where he has completed atleast 5 360degree circles with the ball?
Submitted by hammersfanno1 on 17 May, 2008 - 15:41.
Easy, 100%
Submitted by Giga on 17 May, 2008 - 16:05.
Ok, how about percentage of minutes on pitch where he thought he was the best player on the pitch and made stupid runs and lost the ball?
Submitted by hammersfanno1 on 17 May, 2008 - 16:08.
LOL. I'm ploughing through the games now!
Submitted by Denbighammer on 17 May, 2008 - 15:11.
I think most people feel that Parker is a good player and generally a decent signing. A simple win ratio doesn't tell the whole story, particularly with a player who has only one season under his belt. Maybe its more relevant after 4/5 years but not after one injury-hit season for player and team.