Scott Parker - Writers player of the year

mike65

Well done to Scotty, any team would be happy to have him in the middle I think, either to start or as an option. I suspect he is the real manager at the moment as well.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/apr/22/scott-parker-player-of-year

If the Hammers go down he will surely stay up on a transfer.

pjmn

Well done Scotty - now finish the job and keep us up....

super_furry

Great, great player. I said four years ago that Arsenal should have signed him from Newcastle when West Ham got him. I honestly believe that if they had, they would have won trophies - couldn't think of a better partner for Fabregas in the centre of midfield.

He's been excellent for the Hammers this season, top player.

Blazer

Great player..always rated him since he played at Newcastle and he always gave 110% effort to the team...his game against Arsenal comes to mind at Highbury..
Was sorry that he left to go to West Ham and can't believe none of the big clubs haven't gone for him yet.

nlgbbbblth

Good choice but why can't they wait until the season is finished before announcing these awards? Same as nominating man of the match before the final whistle.

staker

Without him the Irons would be down already.If they do go down,I'd love to see him at WHL next season.

Top player,deserves it.

pickarooney

Sc@recrow wrote: »

Great player..always rated him since he played at Newcastle and he always gave 110% effort to the team...his game against Arsenal comes to mind at Highbury..
Was sorry that he left to go to West Ham and can't believe none of the big clubs haven't gone for him yet.

Chelsea signed him in 2004 but he wasn't up to snuff.

Interestingly Gareth Bale was a close second, so the fotoball writers have a similar view to the professional players on him, completely at odds with this forum's opinion.

adox

Solid and safe choice I suppose but wouldnt have been my no1. Congrats to him anyway.

The Bale hype continues to baffle. Modric must really be wondering what's going on.

Nanis omission leads me to believe these votes are as much about personality as form.

LuckyGent88

Completely deserves the award and all the plaudets he gets. Will count for noing though if West Ham get relegated.

Blazer

pickarooney wrote: »

Chelsea signed him in 2004 but he wasn't up to snuff.

Interestingly Gareth Bale was a close second, so the fotoball writers have a similar view to the professional players on him, completely at odds with this forum's opinion.

Chelsea had also signed Claude Makelele so Parker never really got a chance there. He only played 15 games for them. In fairness Makelele was at the top of his game while Parker was just starting to flourish.
Newcastle signed him the following year and he was fantastic for us...easily our best player till he left.
He reminded me of David Batty and Makelele....hugely influential players in midfield who allowed the more gifted footballers to strut their fancy flicks and skills etc while they were the real backbone of midfield and hugely underrated.
Just look at what happened to Real Madrid when Makelele left...same for Newcastle when Batty left as Gullit didn't rate him.
And watch what happens to West Ham if Parker leaves.

mike65

pickarooney wrote: »

Chelsea signed him in 2004 but he wasn't up to snuff.

Chelsea has been a black hole for quite a few very decent players in the last 10 years. They didn't get the best from him and even bought in Jiří Jarošík (anyone remember him) to push him down the pecking order.

stumpypeeps

adox wrote: »

Solid and safe choice I suppose but wouldnt have been my no1. Congrats to him anyway.

The Bale hype continues to baffle. Modric must really be wondering what's going on.

Nanis omission leads me to believe these votes are as much about personality as form.

Nani should certainly have been in the running for both awards, although since he got kicked he's been utterly useless.

I'd say you're correct that his personality and traits as a player make him as unpopular with journalists as it does with players. Its very easy to correct that if he can be bothered.

pickarooney

Sc@recrow wrote: »

Chelsea had also signed Claude Makelele so Parker never really got a chance there. He only played 15 games for them. In fairness Makelele was at the top of his game while Parker was just starting to flourish.
Newcastle signed him the following year and he was fantastic for us...easily our best player till he left.
He reminded me of David Batty and Makelele....hugely influential players in midfield who allowed the more gifted footballers to strut their fancy flicks and skills etc while they were the real backbone of midfield and hugely underrated.
Just look at what happened to Real Madrid when Makelele left...same for Newcastle when Batty left as Gullit didn't rate him.
And watch what happens to West Ham if Parker leaves.

So you knew all about his Chelsea career and still said you couldn't believe none of the big clubs tried to sign him? His leaving Chelsea didn't affect them in the slightest. No disrespect to Parker; he's a fine player but I'd have my doubts about him being good enough to anchor a top side's midfield.

fulhamfanincork

Good player, shame he's a thug.

flahavaj

stumpypeeps wrote: »

Nani should certainly have been in the running for both awards, although since he got kicked he's been utterly useless.

I'd say you're correct that his personality and traits as a player make him as unpopular with journalists as it does with players. Its very easy to correct that if he can be bothered.

I don't agree with this. He has played a little less with Park and Valencia coming back from injury, but we were far too over reliant on him when he was basically the only fit winger for most of the season anyway.

Het-Field

fulhamfanincork wrote: »

Good player, shame he's a thug.

Do you wish to back that up ?

fulhamfanincork

Het-Field wrote: »

Do you wish to back that up ?

Broke Jimmy Bullard twice, and on purpose in my opinion. Constantly putting in dangerous tackles.

Het-Field

fulhamfanincork wrote: »

Broke Jimmy Bullard twice, and on purpose in my opinion. Constantly putting in dangerous tackles.

Basing an opinion on injuries sustained by Jimmy Bullard is laughable.

Also, what makes you believe the tackles were "on purpose". Further, how many ostensible "dangerous tackles", are in fact not dangerous at all ?

Making allegations on the back of an "opinion" also seems to be weak evidence.

fulhamfanincork

Het-Field wrote: »

Basing an opinion on injuries sustained by Jimmy Bullard is laughable.

Also, what makes you believe the tackles were "on purpose". Further, how many ostensible "dangerous tackles", are in fact not dangerous at all ?

Making allegations on the back of an "opinion" also seems to be weak evidence.

Parker did Bullard up in Newcastle, and if you watch the video slowly Parkers eyes are on Bullard not the ball. Then when Bullard makes a comeback game for Hull against West Ham, Parker does him again and Bullard is out injured for another long period. Coincidence? I think not.

Bullard isn't a saint by any means but no one deserves to have their best years of their career taken away from them.

flahavaj

Nobody could ever convince me that the three lads who've been named for awards - Meireles, Parker or Bale have had better seasons than Nani, Nasri, Vidic, Kompany or Tevez.

The Muppet

Good player I've always rated parker, this must have been a close call between himself and Vidic.

Het-Field

fulhamfanincork wrote: »

Parker did Bullard up in Newcastle, and if you watch the video slowly Parkers eyes are on Bullard not the ball. Then when Bullard makes a comeback game for Hull against West Ham, Parker does him again and Bullard is out injured for another long period. Coincidence? I think not.

Bullard isn't a saint by any means but no one deserves to have their best years of their career taken away from them.

You have no evidence of Parker's intentions.

The Newcastle tackle was a 50/50 ball in which Bullard and Parker went in to lay cliam to the ball. Bullard's leg was left in, and Parker's momentum was bringing him down. It was an unfortunate injury.

Yes, Id imagine the "comeback" injury was coincidental, and no more. Both are center mids, both are very committed players, both are full-blooded, one is very injury prone. All the ingredients are there for a coincidental repeat.

fulhamfanincork

Het-Field wrote: »

You have no evidence of Parker's intentions.

The Newcastle tackle was a 50/50 ball in which Bullard and Parker went in to lay cliam to the ball. Bullard's leg was left in, and Parker's momentum was bringing him down. It was an unfortunate injury.

Yes, Id imagine the "comeback" injury was coincidental, and no more. Both are center mids, both are very committed players, both are full-blooded, one is very injury prone. All the ingredients are there for a coincidental repeat.

Bullard wasn't injury prone until after Parker did him.

We are just going to go around in circles. I remain bitter towards Parker but recognise he is a fantastic player and deserved this award for his play during the season.

dubmick

He had a good season but was hardly the best player in the league.

Hammer Archer

dubmick wrote: »

He had a good season but was hardly the best player in the league.

You obviously havent seen him play all season. As someone said already, if we didnt have him we would have been down last month. Hes a dead cert for hammer of the year for the third season in a row. Think the only other player to do that was brooking.
If we go down and he leaves he will be up there with di canio and tevez as west ham legends and will get a fantastic ovation any time he returns to the boleyn.

dubmick

Hammer Archer wrote: »

You obviously havent seen him play all season. As someone said already, if we didnt have him we would have been down last month. Hes a dead cert for hammer of the year for the third season in a row. Think the only other player to do that was brooking.
If we go down and he leaves he will be up there with di canio and tevez as west ham legends and will get a fantastic ovation any time he returns to the boleyn.

How is it obvious that I haven't seen him play this season?

I've seen him play loads this season. As I said, I didn't dispute him having a great season.

eagle eye

I think he is a better choice than Bale but for me Tevez, Vidic and Nani have been the three best players in the league this year.

Pauleta

The PFA player of the year is a popularity contest. The PWA player of the year is a mix between a popularity contest and bias. The fans player of the year is a joke because people will only vote for their own players. None of them should be taken seriously.

dannydiamond

When I saw the headline on yahoo sport this morning, 'Parker claims writers hounour' I nearly choked on my cheerios.
I thought Paul Parker was after getting an award for spouting drivel every week in his column.:pac:

Captain Havoc

Full of energy and always seems to be giving the same effort as the other 10 players combined. I don't fully agree with the popularity contest point, you name me which of the previous writers winners have won it on personality without having a great season. Personally I think West Ham have lacked motivation, you look at Scott Parker compared to the others and it's frustrating, I think only Robert Green is the only other player to have had a decent full season.

Paully D

A lot of sports journalists who voted for this award are London based and many of them support West Ham, so for those saying Nani, Kompany, Vidic etc should have won, that could be a reason why Parker picked up more votes.

Personally I think Parker's been excellent this season, but I'd rank the best players this year as follows:

1) Nani
2) Kompany
3) Vidic
4) Tevez
5) Berbatov

Parker coming in 6th, perhaps harsh, but you can't leave out the Premier League's two top goalscorer's, two best defenders, and best midfielder who would have blitzed every award if it wasn't for his dislikeable traits.

Blatter

flahavaj wrote: »

I don't agree with this. He has played a little less with Park and Valencia coming back from injury, but we were far too over reliant on him when he was basically the only fit winger for most of the season anyway.

Yep, Nani was excellent in both the Chelsea and Fulham games at Old Trafford and hasn't played as much football.

kryogen

Dont like Scott Parker, mainly due to his haircut

Good player i guess

Dolph Starbeam

kryogen wrote: »

Dont like Scott Parker, mainly due to his haircut

Good player i guess

He looks like he belongs in the 1930's.

I wouldn't say great player like a lot are saying, but he has been good this season and deserves this award, well done.

stumpypeeps

flahavaj wrote: »

I don't agree with this. He has played a little less with Park and Valencia coming back from injury, but we were far too over reliant on him when he was basically the only fit winger for most of the season anyway.

Ok "utterly useless" is a little ott but theirs no doubt he's not performed to the same level since. I feel he's a little damaged psychologically.

As for this award, it should have been between Vidic and Tevez. But them Journo's down in London are a little preoccupied with their own.

UglyBolloxFace

rarnes1 wrote: »

He's been excellent for the Hammers this season, top player.

Only four posts in and that phrase was already mentioned. Sigh.

UglyBolloxFace

UglyBolloxFace wrote: »

Only four posts in and that phrase was already mentioned. Sigh.

Ok UglyBolloxFace

daithijjj

People do realise that the writers player of the year has different criteria to best player of the year, yes?

Personally, i think the biggest robbery of any english award over the last few years was when giggs got it in 08/09 over vidic. Was a bit of a furore at the time as the voting was done the day after giggs had a good game v chelsea, he was pretty meh for the rest of that season and united had just gone with 11 clean sheets on the trot or something, largely down to vidic.

jive

He hasn't been as good or as important to his team as Charlie Adam IMO. Also I don't understand all the anti-Bale on this forum. People like quoting his stats but he's been out injured for a few games and was unbelievable whenever he featured in the Champions League even against Madrid at White Hart Lane when there was nothing to play for. Not to mention that almost every team doubles up on him now creating more space for other players.

Parker has been good don't get me wrong but IMO other players have been better. I'd rate Kompany's season over Parker's. Kompany has been unreal. And given that Charlie Adam is seemingly being overlooked then Parker should probably be overlooked as well given that their both in teams fighting for relegation. Adam playing for Blackpool is the only reason he's not rated as highly as the other players.

mike65

Adams game has gone to pot since January though.

jive

mike65 wrote: »

Adams game has gone to pot since January though.

I thought the PFA award was decided in early Feb anyway. Even if this is recent Adam hasn't gone completely off the boil, I'd imagine you find it hard to perform when conceding about 14 goals every game as well :pac:

UpTheSlashers

Strange decision in my opinion. I get the feeling that these journalists are trying to be edgy or give the impression that they have so much knowledge of the game that their evaluations differ greatly from the average fans.