Paul Parker | 1993-1994

Moderators: Korinov, Epsi, Adrien, Albo7, Brezza, jurgens

User avatar
PES Stats Database
Posts: 15835
Joined: 2008 Dec 09, 12:06
Been thanked: 251 times

Paul Parker | 1993-1994

Postby PES Stats Database » 2009 Jun 12, 11:36

Club: Manchester United



Growth type: Standard

INFO:

Spoiler: show
A speedy and tenacious defender, the diminutive Londoner was a crisp passer of the ball who possessed uncanny positional sense. Parker was solid and rarely flamboyant but was plagued by injuries in the latter half of his United career. Nevertheless, he made 79 Premier League appearances and was integral in the historic 1992/93 title victory (Manutd.com).


Compared to Gary Neville who replaced him the following season, I wouldn't say he was as good a passer as Manutd.com claim. His crossing was a bit hit and miss and his short passing lacked a bit of pace.

His tackling and speed were however of good quality and for his size he held his own rather well in physical duels. But I don't think he was a particular good reader of the game, if he had been I'm sure he'd have managed more than 19 caps for England. When Parker reached his prime there were no clear 1st choice RB for England, he featured in the WC in 1990 in Italy but was in and out of the squad later. Partly due to injuries, but I think his positioning and mentality played it's part. Parker's passing often suffered when he got the jitters, and if I remember correctly that happened more often than desired in high-profile games.

I've rated his ATT this low because he wasn't very effective going forward, he's still got a decent aggression which will make him go forward. Having DEF at 77 might seem high considering I criticise his positioning, but his tackling was quite good and he was also agile which also helped. I've kept the sliding star optional as agility is relatively high for a defender his size.

Dribbling wasn't his game, he could run with the ball unpressurised but would pass it if challenged. Which leads me to his crossing, I've landed on 75 because I think he was rather inconsistent. I might be harsh here, but I'm comparing him to the Neviller and IMO they didn't come close.

As mentioned he suffered from nerves in some games, so I put consistency at 5 and mentality at 80 since he still put the effort even if it wasn't one of his best days. Aggression is two points lower than Neville, he wasn't quite as marauding as him.

Finally, his TW where I was of two minds of which value he should have. 1: He worked well with his partners in defence, 83 reflects that without going overboard. Or 2: Rate it lower because he could sometimes get caught out, compared to how Neville cooperated with whoever played in RM Parker was a class below.

BTW, he played 56 matches in 93/94 but I still think he needs injury tolerance C, his entire career at Utd was marred with injuries.



ADDITIONAL LINKS:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Parke ... tballer%29

http://www.national-football-teams.com/ ... p?id=17280

http://www.worldfootball.net/spieler_pr ... ul-parker/

Last edited by choccy on 2009 Jun 24, 17:21, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
electric_trigger
Posts: 647
Joined: 2009 Mar 05, 11:59
Location: Cardiff

Re: Paul PARKER 1993/1994

Postby electric_trigger » 2009 Jun 16, 12:51

Injury rating seems a bit harsh, towards the end of his Utd career he had injuries but 93/94 he was as you say a near ever present. ;)
User avatar
Alcohomicide
Posts: 2073
Joined: 2009 Jan 15, 17:48
Contact:

Re: Paul PARKER 1993/1994

Postby Alcohomicide » 2009 Jun 20, 14:45

His passing was atrocious, actually. Seriously, it was no better Traoré or Sissoko's.
"When we were winning leagues and European Cups at Real I always said Makelele was our most important player. There is no way myself Figo or Raúl would have been able to do what we did without Claude and the same goes for Liverpool and Gerrard."
User avatar
choccy
Posts: 293
Joined: 2008 Dec 15, 13:37

Re: Paul PARKER 1993/1994

Postby choccy » 2009 Jun 24, 16:50

Atrocious is maybe harsh, but what values were you thinking of? Any other things you'd like to see changed?

I'm basing this on memory (youtube isn't exactly brimming with Parker vids) so I was quite surprised when Manutd.com said he was a crisp passer. I originally intended to have lower values, so the values I landed on was a compromize.

As for injury C, yes it's not fair if you look at 93/94 isolated, but as I said in all his other seasons at Utd he spent a lot of the time in the compny of the physios.
Persona non grata
User avatar
Alcohomicide
Posts: 2073
Joined: 2009 Jan 15, 17:48
Contact:

Re: Paul PARKER 1993/1994

Postby Alcohomicide » 2009 Jun 24, 17:08

Luckily we get lots of classic matches here.

He seemed to have real problems judging the pace of passes. Sometimes he would smash them at his team mates feet, and often you'd see the likes of Andrei and Eric really struggling and having to use every bit of their technique to gather the passes in and keep control of the ball, then the next you'd see him underweight one. It was frustrating, because he tried to be adventerous too. You'd see a nice crisp, flowing move the ball would get to him on the right he would try a lifted pass and stagnate the attack. He was no maybe as atrocious as I said, but definitely not cultured, and only crisp in the sense he wasn't too great at judging the passes, so actually sps could go up, but for spa...maybe 72-73 and that's kind. :lol:

His crossing/long pass should not be green, in fact many centre forwards were better crossers. 73 max for lpa, lps is fine I think.
"When we were winning leagues and European Cups at Real I always said Makelele was our most important player. There is no way myself Figo or Raúl would have been able to do what we did without Claude and the same goes for Liverpool and Gerrard."
User avatar
choccy
Posts: 293
Joined: 2008 Dec 15, 13:37

Re: Paul PARKER 1993/1994

Postby choccy » 2009 Jun 24, 17:24

Updated accordingly ;)

To me he was a bit of a spastic, you never knew what he'd do when he had the ball :P And my opinion of him has even dropped now that he's become a pundit... He's itching to to put the foot in when he comments on Utd, classless prick IMO.

Where do you live mate? I'd like to get my hands on the channels you have ;)
Persona non grata
User avatar
Alcohomicide
Posts: 2073
Joined: 2009 Jan 15, 17:48
Contact:

Re: Paul PARKER 1993/1994

Postby Alcohomicide » 2009 Jun 26, 20:16

Aye, I read his articles from time to time, when I need a laugh. The one before the Liverpool game was classic. :P

You're also right about on the ball, you always felt he had okay ability but his decisions were a bit irrational and all the United fans I know were relieved when he was replaced. He had a good work ethic, though. He tried. Sometimes you're just not born with the brain to be a top player. (All of us, for instance.. :P) He will always be able to say he played for the best team in the country though, so well done to him.

I live in England, we get ESPN classic. It's great, one minute you're watching Gento, the next Paul Parker and Steve Bruce ahahaha. :lol: I also am lucky because I know people who will have vhs tapes or what. I also watched footie back then, though I was quite young (I'm 23) so I remember the players. But yeah, ESPN classic is a great channel. I'd be angry if we lost it due to the financiall crisis.
"When we were winning leagues and European Cups at Real I always said Makelele was our most important player. There is no way myself Figo or Raúl would have been able to do what we did without Claude and the same goes for Liverpool and Gerrard."
User avatar
choccy
Posts: 293
Joined: 2008 Dec 15, 13:37

Re: Paul PARKER 1993/1994

Postby choccy » 2009 Jun 27, 20:46

It's an easy way to get noticed, throwing shit your old clubs way. He has nothing to be bitter about, just unlucky with injuries and the fact the Neville completely outclassed when he emerged.

ESPN Classics is now a high priority after the holidays ;)
Persona non grata
User avatar
vinnie
Posts: 3685
Joined: 2012 Apr 06, 03:11
Location: ♛      
Has thanked: 386 times
Been thanked: 672 times

Re: Paul PARKER | 1993-1994

Postby vinnie » 2017 Jun 03, 00:08

I think this is a pretty good set, and if it hasn't been added to the editor, i'd recommend it to be added.

I would suggest increasing defence and reducing his aggression. I'm a big fan of defensively skilled fullbacks, and i don't mind giving fullbacks pretty big defence numbers when i think they prove themselves to be all around defensively knowledgable and consistently excellent in their tackling and positioning. Parker is probably one of those players that Carragher refers to when he talks about failed centrebacks, because he has very little if any technical skill- a bad touch, a very poor dribble, a very bad short passing ability, and a decent at best long passing ability- not to mention his height, but he is a superb tackler who attackers rarely even dare to try to dribble because of how well he can jockey dribblers and time his tackles. indeed i often noticed through a game that attacks would go less and less down Parker's side, and more and more down Irwin's.

I think Parker is a bit better than Irwin defensively, who i think is more positionally excellent, and level-headed- but Irwin was much easier for attackers to turn inside out and beat on the dribble. Irwin plays more like a veteran, and it amazed me to see Irwin in 1998/1999 looking like the exact same player- i'd assumed Irwin was some 33/34 year old on the verge of retirement in 1994 (he reminded me a bit of the Lahm of the last year and a half).
It's really surprising to realize that Parker was Irwin's senior in 1994, as on the field the opposite would be assumed based on the way they play. There isn't a big gap in age between the two, Parker is only a year or so older than Irwin, but i would have assumed Irwin to have been somewhere in his early-to-mid thirties, and Parker around 25.
i would rate Irwin in 1994 (and frankly i don't think he's any worse in nearly all attributes in 1999, maybe even better in some?) as something around a 76-78 defence, and Parker as around an 81 (restraining myself).

Parker doesn't go up that much either, he's much more like a third short centreback who is occaisonally aware of his duty to make overlapping runs. hell pallister almost makes more runs up the field joining the attack if i go off a quick comparison of the impressions i can recall. I wouldn't recommend more than 76, 78 aggression at most.

A tiny note to add is that he shouldn't have more than 85 stamina, and possibly deserves less. if one considers how little Parker goes up the field to make overlapping runs, what i noticed is his waning stamina over the game even despite that he doesn't cover too much ground outside of his defensive work. 85 is not necessarily wrong, but my impression was closer to 83 stamina.

The last detail i have a difference with the set in is about speed, i think Parker is quick, but i think 89 is at least 3-4 points to much- i think he's somewhere between 83 and 86 top speed.

As i began, everything else in the first post set is pretty accurate in my opinion; these suggestions are hardly revising the concept of the set, merely adjusting the extent of some strengths and weaknesses.

I like defensively skilled fullbacks alot, and Parker is one of the top defensive fullbacks i've seen. He's overall a bit of a weakness because of his lack of technical skill, and his mediocre/poor contributions to the offense; i think even without his injury problems Neville was due to replace him because Neville was a bit more committed offensively, as well as having a bit more awareness of the flank's overall requirements, but i think Parker was a solid part of the 1993/1994 United team, and a particularly excellent defender as a fullback.

some notes i pasted while watching Giggs:
Spoiler: show
parker 1v1 defence:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_WXCN17tRw&t=32m11s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z_WXCN17tRw&t=46m40s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNT8XPGC5Tg&t=16m30s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNT8XPGC5Tg&t=18m40s (to 54s)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNT8XPGC5Tg&t=1h12m51s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNT8XPGC5Tg&t=1h17m45s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNT8XPGC5Tg&t=1h24m10s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fNT8XPGC5Tg&t=1h28m23s
irwin has more difficulty dealing with beardsley.

parker res:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dyj8yonT1Fs&t=5m50s

very poor short passing by parker (3+ unforced giveaways per game). touch poor.

parker 1v1 defence:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9iPtypdml5A&t=38m28s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZrqFWWKpYLQ&t=2m27s
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e618fNtTqnQ&t=8m54s not flawless
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jOcQ4yYBGrQ&t=10m10s


something like this overall?

*moved to first post*
If you don't put effort into your post, i won't put effort in my response.
User avatar
Albo7
Posts: 2575
Joined: 2010 Mar 31, 12:02
Location: The Mango Tree
Has thanked: 156 times
Been thanked: 245 times

Re: Paul Parker | 1993-1994

Postby Albo7 » 2017 Jun 03, 11:03

Added to the editor and updated with woonies suggestions. You've been doing a great job reviewing these United players players. Thank you woonie . . .
Image TROLL KING Image

Image

Return to “90's”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: staubsauger and 4 guests