No matter what I think of him, the fact that the likes of Carrick, Hargreaves, Jenas, Huddlestone, Barry have all been as or even more lauded/recognised than SP has over the years is scandalous. I also think it's a travesty that he's now pigeon-holed (largely by Chelsea's handling of him) into a defensive midfielder who occasionally contributes in the final third... when he was at his peak with us he was one of the most complete young box-to-box midfielders I can think of and some of his goals and passing were top draw.
In my opinion the only central midfielders of English nationality who are/have been better than him for a number of years are Gerrard, Scholes and Lampard... and in terms of potential then Wilshere is in there now as well.
[cite]Posted By: Rothko[/cite]Hargraves was/is a better player then Parker
Hmm debatable but I can see where you're coming from... impossible to truly assess it entirely as I think injuries mean that Hargreaves will never have truly peaked in his career
[cite]Posted By: Six-a-bag-of-nuts[/cite]Oh come on Bing.
That episode knocked the stuffing out of Curbishley.
We had been in the top 4 for something like 5 weeks; stuffed Chelsea on the boxing day and beat Spurs away in the same week
We were well on course for our best ever finish under Curbs and had a strong shout for a Champions league spot.
Chelsea then tapped up our best player and he demanded he be allowed to move as he would rather rot in the reserves than play for us again.
No spin required.
Well I repeat that its my understanding that Scott was being prepared to be sold to Chelsea the previous summer. So prepared that he splashed out on a new house in anticipation of the signing on fee he never got. The reason the deal fell through was that Abramovitch came on the scene and they looked elsewhere for players.
When Chelsea came for him again, suddenly we were never going to sell him. I remember Martin Simmons stating that we would only sell him for £25M. Yet we sold him. The spin from the Curbs/the clubs end was that he had refused to play. In the end the club had a choice, keep him or sell him. They chose to sell him, despite not having anyone lined up.
It is extremely easy to blame Scott, I think like Pardew has done with Carroll, the club tries to manage the fans anger and the people who get the blame are the player and the wicked big club who bid lots of money. Nobody I am sure believes that Carroll was sold for any other reason than the serious money that was offered. That was, in my view, the same reason why Scott was sold.
Was it the right move for him, absolutely not? He probably put paid to his England chances for years because of it.
Despite what is said about Hargreaves, the sad thing is that Hargreaves has been injured for much of his career. Parker is, as I have said earlier, the best Englishman currently playing in the holding/defensive midfield role.
Its time to move on and acknowledge Scott as one of, if not the best players, our club has ever produced.
[cite]Posted By: bingaddick[/cite]Its time to move on and acknowledge Scott as one of, if not the best players, our club has ever produced.
I agree and I think most can... sometimes I think people confuse not liking a player and not appreciating his abilities... for example, Ronaldo is everything most people think modern football can do without in terms of his attitude - me included, but WHAT a player he is!
Well I repeat that its my understanding that Scott was being prepared to be sold to Chelsea the previous summer. So prepared that he splashed out on a new house in anticipation of the signing on fee he never got. The reason the deal fell through was that Abramovitch came on the scene and they looked elsewhere for players.
When Chelsea came for him again, suddenly we were never going to sell him. I remember Martin Simmons stating that we would only sell him for £25M. Yet we sold him. The spin from the Curbs/the clubs end was that he had refused to play. In the end the club had a choice, keep him or sell him. They chose to sell him, despite not having anyone lined up.
It is extremely easy to blame Scott, I think like Pardew has done with Carroll, the club tries to manage the fans anger and the people who get the blame are the player and the wicked big club who bid lots of money. Nobody I am sure believes that Carroll was sold for any other reason than the serious money that was offered. That was, in my view, the same reason why Scott was sold.
Was it the right move for him, absolutely not? He probably put paid to his England chances for years because of it.
Despite what is said about Hargreaves, the sad thing is that Hargreaves has been injured for much of his career. Parker is, as I have said earlier, the best Englishman currently playing in the holding/defensive midfield role.
Its time to move on and acknowledge Scott as one of, if not the best players, our club has ever produced.
There seem to be 2 extremes of opinion on the Parker episode: -
1. "He did the dirty on us, he's scum" or
2. "He did what anyone would do, get over it"
I don't want to get pigeon holed in either of those extremes.
The crucial thing for me, as I said in a previous post, was the timing.
I said previously that had he gone at the end of the season, I and many other Charlton fans would have understood and wished him well,
You tell me we were going to sell the previous summer and if I take your word for that then I'd feel the same as if he left at the end of the season - very disappointed but accepting that these things happen.
But he didn't.
He left in the middle of our most successful season in my lifetime; poached by yes, our champions league rivals, who had no intention of playing him regularly.
It was the timing. As Curbs himself put it, "we had a right chance 'ere, then...bosh"
For me it's not about Parker, it's about Charlton and his leaving when he did scuppered our best chance of Europe I expect to ever see.
I don't feel like just dismissing the disappointment with a glib " time we moved on"
I agree Scott was one of the best players we ever produced.
I still love watching him in our shirt on the old DVD's
[cite]Posted By: Six-a-bag-of-nuts[/cite]For me it's not about Parker, it's about Charlton and his leaving when he did scuppered our best chance of Europe I expect to ever see.
I don't feel like just dismissing the disappointment with a glib " time we moved on"
I am not trying to tell you what to think, thats up to you. My view is my view. I just think that the player was scape-goated for being sold by the club for what was then, a record price for our club.
The club position was one of "we didn't want to sell him but it was clear he wanted to go". Yet they were preparing to sell him for less in the previous summer. Every player has a price and Chelsea met our price. If we thought he was worth keeping at any price, we wouldn't have sold him. He was under contract and - like Charlie Adam, he'd have had to put up with it. Why are fans so keen to blame players when we all know that players are put on long-term contracts to give them a value in any transfer negotiation.
I am disappointed he went. Whether we were going to get into Europe is more debatable. I just think its wrong to continue to feel aggrieved with him about what happened. You can if you wish, I never did.
Anyone who thinks parker should have stayed with us and gambled with his family's future, because that's what he would have been doing by turning down the chelsea move, is just living in cuckoo land
Yes we'd all love for everyone to want to play for charlton forever for the pure love of our club but unfortunately it doesn't work like that
No one knows for certain what would have happened to parker or charlton or chelsea if parker had stayed
The only thing that was certain once he signed for chelsea was that his and his familys own financial security had improved greatly and everything else is pure guesswork
Obviously it doesn't mean we can't dislike him/ his actions and guess as to what might have been etc ......
but I think I'll personally survive without a full written apology cos he doesn't worship our god that is Charlton Athletic
I saw a lot of Paul Gascoigne playing for Newcastle as a 18/19 year-old. As an attacking midfielder, at the same age, Parker was in the same bracket. Unfortunately Chelsea ruined him by trying to convert him into a holding midfielder, because they could not accomodate him in their side as Lampard was already in the attacking midfielder position. Wrong move, at the wrong time. I would suspect that he was badly advised by his agent, who encouraged him to take the first opportunity to join a big club, without considering where he would fit into the team.
A shame really, he could have been top-drawer with 30-40 England caps to his name by now. Another season at Charlton could have set him up for a move to Man Utd for example, who had Alan Smith playing alongside Scholes in midfield at the time. Instead, he stagnated at Chelsea and is only now reaching the level of performance he had produced in his early career.
I think Scott Parker made a big Mistake going when he did.
However I think that Charlton were more in the wrong as when he signed his 5 year contract it had clearly been implied that he could go if one of the big three came in for him. It was Charlton who suddenly said no but we are doing well we want to renage on that verbal agreement.
I also think that even though Charlton were treeting him badly he would have stayed but he was getting some very bad advice.
The real blame for me lies in the person giving him that advice.
When Scott Signed the 5 year deal I believe he was committed to Charlton and was part of a team whith an ethic of team first which had taken us to where we were. However at the same time we signed another player.
This player had refused to play for Celtic so they had to sell him to Sheff Wed.
This player then refused to return from Italy so Sheff Wed had to sell him.
This player was then released from West Ham after regularly causing dressing room problems by undermining the manager resulting in the relegation and the destruction of one of the most talented teams in the league.
This player was then released by Charlton one month after signing a new contract because we were too scared to try to get him to stay.
This player said that he was taking Scott Parker under his wing.
This is what Parket said about DiCanio ONE WEEK before he threw his toys out of the pram.
"He has been fantastic for me. Maybe he sees me as someone he wants to help.
"I've got so much respect for him and maybe he sees that I'm ready to listen to him and I want him to help me.
"I want to go far and I want to try and be the best player I can be. I feel with his help that hopefully I can do that."
I can never understand how some people can deamonise Scott and yet hold up DiCanio as a hero.
Anyone who thinks parker should have stayed with us and gambled with his family's future, because that's what he would have been doing by turning down the chelsea move, is just living in cuckoo land
According to rumours he was on ca £15k a week with us and had just signed a five year contract, if he was on a much lower salary I could understand him wanting to move, but his future was secure financially. Chelsea was never going to work out for him - their central midfielders at the time included Lampard and Veron and a couple of other top class players who all had international caps, CL experience and could justify a starting place over a kid with talent but no caps, no international experience, no medals and experience of playing in any of the European competitions. What manager would start Parker over say Lampard? Can you imagine the media and fan reaction if Ranieri (Chelsea's manager at the time) had done that and then lost?
If he had to go he should have chosen a club that was a step up the ladder where he could be gain more experience and a few caps. At Chelsea he was always going to be a squad player and a lightly used one at that and that set his career back.
[cite]Posted By: oohaahmortimer[/cite]Anyone who thinks parker should have stayed with us and gambled with his family's future, because that's what he would have been doing by turning down the chelsea move, is just living in cuckoo land
Yes we'd all love for everyone to want to play for charlton forever for the pure love of our club but unfortunately it doesn't work like that
No one knows for certain what would have happened to parker or charlton or chelsea if parker had stayed
The only thing that was certain once he signed for chelsea was that his and his familys own financial security had improved greatly and everything else is pure guesswork
Obviously it doesn't mean we can't dislike him/ his actions and guess as to what might have been etc ......
but I think I'll personally survive without a full written apology cos he doesn't worship our god that is Charlton Athletic
I generally agree with your comments and views ooaah but to be honest I think this one is completely unsubtantiated. As BFR said, it was generally publicised that Parker had just signed a new £15k per week contract with us (plus, presumably, bonuses). That's not far short of £1,000,000 a year. Even with the most extremely negative forecast of his future at that point, there is no way that anybody can suggest that by remaining on that salary for a further 5 months he would have somehow 'put his family at risk'. Even if he had suddenly suffered a career-ending injury, based on the settlement Gordon Watson got and how patently clear it was that Parker would go onto be at worst an average premier league player, any payout would have been vast and plenty to make sure he and his family were well set for life. Besides which, he could have just as easily injured himself in that way in his first game for Chelsea. Notwithstanding all of that, I don't know but I doubt at that age (how old was he at the time, 23?) he had children, so he probably just had himself and maybe a bird to look out for.
But either way, nobody in their right mind can argue that waiting 5 months on a more 'modest' salary of £15k p/w as opposed to £45k p/w would have put his family at risk. It would simply have delayed their ability to start living the obscenely lavish style that footballers expect today.
I do agree with the point that we cannot obviously expect people to worship or love Charlton the way we do. But there is a difference between that and showing a downright lack of respect and appreciation for what the people and your employers have done for you. No he doesn’t love Charlton, but he wouldn’t have been where he was then or is now if it wasn’t for us, so he has a lot to thank us for and I don’t think it is unreasonable to say he owes us some respect. If I got offered a new job, I am contractually obliged to complete at least a one-month notice period and I would certainly be grateful to my existing lot for what they have done for me so I wouldn’t want to stitch them up and leave them high and dry. Parker owed us to wait for his big move til the end of this season…
AND on top of all that, and regardless of Charlton, I know footballers aren’t generally the brightest tool in the box but Parker doesn’t seem particularly stupid on the whole and the simple fact was, even then, financially aside, it was pretty obvious that that was not a good move for Parker and his career. Sometimes you have to earn less to earn more, a bit like doing a degree etc. If Parker had stuck it out with us his stock would’ve kept rising (there ain't a player before who has been able to lead little ole Charlton into Europe) and he could probably have picked and chosen his move in the summer, and who knows, if he had made the right one he might be looking back on 50-odd England caps and some trophies (as well as an even bigger bank balance), rather than just an average, underachieving premier league footballer for a decade.
[cite]Posted By: sygonrima[/cite]I can never understand how some people can deamonise Scott and yet hold up DiCanio as a hero.
To my understanding PdC asked if he could return to the club he supported, and we granted him. I didn't get the impression that there was any bad feeling there. Why do you think that there was? I did recall at the time an announcement that Lazio would play a friendly with us and we'd profit from that. Still waiting...
One thing that your comment did trigger with me was why HH seems to escape much ire. Parker left and brought us in good money while HH walked out under contract but on a free when he activated a clause in his contract that allowed him to line his pockets as a reward for our relegation (this for a player who'd been relegated with a number of teams already at that point).
[cite]Posted By: sygonrima[/cite]I can never understand how some people can deamonise Scott and yet hold up DiCanio as a hero.
To my understanding PdC asked if he could return to the club he supported, and we granted him. I didn't get the impression that there was any bad feeling there. Why do you think that there was? I did recall at the time an announcement that Lazio would play a friendly with us and we'd profit from that. Still waiting...
One thing that your comment did trigger with me was why HH seems to escape much ire. Parker left and brought us in good money while HH walked out under contract but on a free when he activated a clause in his contract that allowed him to line his pockets as a reward for our relegation (this for a player who'd been relegated with a number of teams already at that point).
Regarding HH, I heard from someone inside the club that he did us a favor - we couldn't have afforded to keep him. In fact we had several players on high wages that stayed with us that season - we needed more with "relegation clauses" in their contracts, not less.
I've been thinking though (there's a first) - even if Parker had stayed, that doesn't mean we wouldn't now be watching L1 football at the Valley. Although we may have had our season in Europe to look back on I suppose.
Can't blame Parker for moving on, anyone of us would move jobs to a better company offering us bigger wages and potentially travelling Europe. Just like any of us Parker has to think about himself and his family first when coming to financial decisions just because he is a footballer doesn't change the fact its his living. I love Parker and i believe he is the only one who can keep West Ham up but teams can't rely on one player.
can't blame him for what he did really - wasn't the deal supposed to be lined up in the summer at £5 million, hence why we brought Mat Holland in and it fell through when Chelsea changed manager? The fact we got £10 million suggests we weren't excatly shafted. I don't expect blind loyalty from players, just that they act reasonably and the club get what the player is worth. It was the start of the progress graph starting to turn following 10 - 15 years of steady progress but that wasn't really his thought. Unfortunately it was just the natural order of things re setting itself.
[cite]Posted By: Mortimerician[/citeTo my understanding PdC asked if he could return to the club he supported, and we granted him. I didn't get the impression that there was any bad feeling there. Why do you think that there was?
There was a quote sometime after (either by Murry or Curbs) along the lines of, PdC said he wanted to leave and we knew that he would cause to much trouble if we tried to keep him ( I can't track the quote down so it may have been in one of the meet the fans/agm things).
I can't quite see why we would have let him go if we were not afraid of him causing trouble. He had signed a contract and we were already down one striker because "someone" had convinced Carlton Cole that he was to good to be playing for Charlton.
Whatever you think about Scott Parker gotta say he's an inspirational footballer. He was ruled out of the Liverpool 3 hours before kick off as definatly not playing. He ended up playing 90minites with a shoulder injury, scored a great goal and was man of the match.
I was upset when he left but don't blame him - he was a magnificent player when he left us. I'd go so far as to say he could have been truly world class. His ball retention was good, his passing was good, awesome tackler, great leader - really did have the lot.
didn't work out at Chelsea but since then he's been pretty much the first name on the team sheet at wherever he's been. Scandalous he has been overlooked for the national team so much but maybe there's something we, the public, don't know but is common knowledge in footballing circles. Who knows
I have no animosity towards him. As Oohaah said, we'd love him to still be here plying his trade for us but he moved on to a bigger fish and he is perfectly within his rights to do so - I'm just surprised Man U and Arsenal didn't come calling as he'd be right up their street imo
Scott Parker is voted 2011 Footballer of the Year by the Football Writers' Association, well deserved by our ex youth product, took him longer to get there than it should have done. Wonder where he will end up next season.
Comments
No matter what I think of him, the fact that the likes of Carrick, Hargreaves, Jenas, Huddlestone, Barry have all been as or even more lauded/recognised than SP has over the years is scandalous. I also think it's a travesty that he's now pigeon-holed (largely by Chelsea's handling of him) into a defensive midfielder who occasionally contributes in the final third... when he was at his peak with us he was one of the most complete young box-to-box midfielders I can think of and some of his goals and passing were top draw.
In my opinion the only central midfielders of English nationality who are/have been better than him for a number of years are Gerrard, Scholes and Lampard... and in terms of potential then Wilshere is in there now as well.
Hmm debatable but I can see where you're coming from... impossible to truly assess it entirely as I think injuries mean that Hargreaves will never have truly peaked in his career
Well I repeat that its my understanding that Scott was being prepared to be sold to Chelsea the previous summer. So prepared that he splashed out on a new house in anticipation of the signing on fee he never got. The reason the deal fell through was that Abramovitch came on the scene and they looked elsewhere for players.
When Chelsea came for him again, suddenly we were never going to sell him. I remember Martin Simmons stating that we would only sell him for £25M. Yet we sold him. The spin from the Curbs/the clubs end was that he had refused to play. In the end the club had a choice, keep him or sell him. They chose to sell him, despite not having anyone lined up.
It is extremely easy to blame Scott, I think like Pardew has done with Carroll, the club tries to manage the fans anger and the people who get the blame are the player and the wicked big club who bid lots of money. Nobody I am sure believes that Carroll was sold for any other reason than the serious money that was offered. That was, in my view, the same reason why Scott was sold.
Was it the right move for him, absolutely not? He probably put paid to his England chances for years because of it.
Despite what is said about Hargreaves, the sad thing is that Hargreaves has been injured for much of his career. Parker is, as I have said earlier, the best Englishman currently playing in the holding/defensive midfield role.
Its time to move on and acknowledge Scott as one of, if not the best players, our club has ever produced.
I agree and I think most can... sometimes I think people confuse not liking a player and not appreciating his abilities... for example, Ronaldo is everything most people think modern football can do without in terms of his attitude - me included, but WHAT a player he is!
There seem to be 2 extremes of opinion on the Parker episode: -
1. "He did the dirty on us, he's scum" or
2. "He did what anyone would do, get over it"
I don't want to get pigeon holed in either of those extremes.
The crucial thing for me, as I said in a previous post, was the timing.
I said previously that had he gone at the end of the season, I and many other Charlton fans would have understood and wished him well,
You tell me we were going to sell the previous summer and if I take your word for that then I'd feel the same as if he left at the end of the season - very disappointed but accepting that these things happen.
But he didn't.
He left in the middle of our most successful season in my lifetime; poached by yes, our champions league rivals, who had no intention of playing him regularly.
It was the timing. As Curbs himself put it, "we had a right chance 'ere, then...bosh"
For me it's not about Parker, it's about Charlton and his leaving when he did scuppered our best chance of Europe I expect to ever see.
I don't feel like just dismissing the disappointment with a glib " time we moved on"
I agree Scott was one of the best players we ever produced.
I still love watching him in our shirt on the old DVD's
I am not trying to tell you what to think, thats up to you. My view is my view. I just think that the player was scape-goated for being sold by the club for what was then, a record price for our club.
The club position was one of "we didn't want to sell him but it was clear he wanted to go". Yet they were preparing to sell him for less in the previous summer. Every player has a price and Chelsea met our price. If we thought he was worth keeping at any price, we wouldn't have sold him. He was under contract and - like Charlie Adam, he'd have had to put up with it. Why are fans so keen to blame players when we all know that players are put on long-term contracts to give them a value in any transfer negotiation.
I am disappointed he went. Whether we were going to get into Europe is more debatable. I just think its wrong to continue to feel aggrieved with him about what happened. You can if you wish, I never did.
Yes we'd all love for everyone to want to play for charlton forever for the pure love of our club but unfortunately it doesn't work like that
No one knows for certain what would have happened to parker or charlton or chelsea if parker had stayed
The only thing that was certain once he signed for chelsea was that his and his familys own financial security had improved greatly and everything else is pure guesswork
Obviously it doesn't mean we can't dislike him/ his actions and guess as to what might have been etc ......
but I think I'll personally survive without a full written apology cos he doesn't worship our god that is Charlton Athletic
A shame really, he could have been top-drawer with 30-40 England caps to his name by now. Another season at Charlton could have set him up for a move to Man Utd for example, who had Alan Smith playing alongside Scholes in midfield at the time. Instead, he stagnated at Chelsea and is only now reaching the level of performance he had produced in his early career.
However I think that Charlton were more in the wrong as when he signed his 5 year contract it had clearly been implied that he could go if one of the big three came in for him. It was Charlton who suddenly said no but we are doing well we want to renage on that verbal agreement.
I also think that even though Charlton were treeting him badly he would have stayed but he was getting some very bad advice.
The real blame for me lies in the person giving him that advice.
When Scott Signed the 5 year deal I believe he was committed to Charlton and was part of a team whith an ethic of team first which had taken us to where we were. However at the same time we signed another player.
This player had refused to play for Celtic so they had to sell him to Sheff Wed.
This player then refused to return from Italy so Sheff Wed had to sell him.
This player was then released from West Ham after regularly causing dressing room problems by undermining the manager resulting in the relegation and the destruction of one of the most talented teams in the league.
This player was then released by Charlton one month after signing a new contract because we were too scared to try to get him to stay.
This player said that he was taking Scott Parker under his wing.
This is what Parket said about DiCanio ONE WEEK before he threw his toys out of the pram.
"He has been fantastic for me. Maybe he sees me as someone he wants to help.
"I've got so much respect for him and maybe he sees that I'm ready to listen to him and I want him to help me.
"I want to go far and I want to try and be the best player I can be. I feel with his help that hopefully I can do that."
I can never understand how some people can deamonise Scott and yet hold up DiCanio as a hero.
According to rumours he was on ca £15k a week with us and had just signed a five year contract, if he was on a much lower salary I could understand him wanting to move, but his future was secure financially. Chelsea was never going to work out for him - their central midfielders at the time included Lampard and Veron and a couple of other top class players who all had international caps, CL experience and could justify a starting place over a kid with talent but no caps, no international experience, no medals and experience of playing in any of the European competitions. What manager would start Parker over say Lampard? Can you imagine the media and fan reaction if Ranieri (Chelsea's manager at the time) had done that and then lost?
If he had to go he should have chosen a club that was a step up the ladder where he could be gain more experience and a few caps. At Chelsea he was always going to be a squad player and a lightly used one at that and that set his career back.
I generally agree with your comments and views ooaah but to be honest I think this one is completely unsubtantiated. As BFR said, it was generally publicised that Parker had just signed a new £15k per week contract with us (plus, presumably, bonuses). That's not far short of £1,000,000 a year. Even with the most extremely negative forecast of his future at that point, there is no way that anybody can suggest that by remaining on that salary for a further 5 months he would have somehow 'put his family at risk'. Even if he had suddenly suffered a career-ending injury, based on the settlement Gordon Watson got and how patently clear it was that Parker would go onto be at worst an average premier league player, any payout would have been vast and plenty to make sure he and his family were well set for life. Besides which, he could have just as easily injured himself in that way in his first game for Chelsea. Notwithstanding all of that, I don't know but I doubt at that age (how old was he at the time, 23?) he had children, so he probably just had himself and maybe a bird to look out for.
But either way, nobody in their right mind can argue that waiting 5 months on a more 'modest' salary of £15k p/w as opposed to £45k p/w would have put his family at risk. It would simply have delayed their ability to start living the obscenely lavish style that footballers expect today.
I do agree with the point that we cannot obviously expect people to worship or love Charlton the way we do. But there is a difference between that and showing a downright lack of respect and appreciation for what the people and your employers have done for you. No he doesn’t love Charlton, but he wouldn’t have been where he was then or is now if it wasn’t for us, so he has a lot to thank us for and I don’t think it is unreasonable to say he owes us some respect. If I got offered a new job, I am contractually obliged to complete at least a one-month notice period and I would certainly be grateful to my existing lot for what they have done for me so I wouldn’t want to stitch them up and leave them high and dry. Parker owed us to wait for his big move til the end of this season…
AND on top of all that, and regardless of Charlton, I know footballers aren’t generally the brightest tool in the box but Parker doesn’t seem particularly stupid on the whole and the simple fact was, even then, financially aside, it was pretty obvious that that was not a good move for Parker and his career. Sometimes you have to earn less to earn more, a bit like doing a degree etc. If Parker had stuck it out with us his stock would’ve kept rising (there ain't a player before who has been able to lead little ole Charlton into Europe) and he could probably have picked and chosen his move in the summer, and who knows, if he had made the right one he might be looking back on 50-odd England caps and some trophies (as well as an even bigger bank balance), rather than just an average, underachieving premier league footballer for a decade.
Bad move for him, bad move for us.
To my understanding PdC asked if he could return to the club he supported, and we granted him. I didn't get the impression that there was any bad feeling there. Why do you think that there was? I did recall at the time an announcement that Lazio would play a friendly with us and we'd profit from that. Still waiting...
One thing that your comment did trigger with me was why HH seems to escape much ire. Parker left and brought us in good money while HH walked out under contract but on a free when he activated a clause in his contract that allowed him to line his pockets as a reward for our relegation (this for a player who'd been relegated with a number of teams already at that point).
Regarding HH, I heard from someone inside the club that he did us a favor - we couldn't have afforded to keep him. In fact we had several players on high wages that stayed with us that season - we needed more with "relegation clauses" in their contracts, not less.
I've been thinking though (there's a first) - even if Parker had stayed, that doesn't mean we wouldn't now be watching L1 football at the Valley. Although we may have had our season in Europe to look back on I suppose.
There was a quote sometime after (either by Murry or Curbs) along the lines of, PdC said he wanted to leave and we knew that he would cause to much trouble if we tried to keep him ( I can't track the quote down so it may have been in one of the meet the fans/agm things).
I can't quite see why we would have let him go if we were not afraid of him causing trouble. He had signed a contract and we were already down one striker because "someone" had convinced Carlton Cole that he was to good to be playing for Charlton.
Always will............
Agree MOG .
Inspirational greedy bastard also.
didn't work out at Chelsea but since then he's been pretty much the first name on the team sheet at wherever he's been. Scandalous he has been overlooked for the national team so much but maybe there's something we, the public, don't know but is common knowledge in footballing circles. Who knows
I have no animosity towards him. As Oohaah said, we'd love him to still be here plying his trade for us but he moved on to a bigger fish and he is perfectly within his rights to do so - I'm just surprised Man U and Arsenal didn't come calling as he'd be right up their street imo