Well according to the 'media' now we're not, which to me is a good thing. However to answer your question, why? because Harry's leaving in a year and no longer seems to give a flying one.
I was totally against Parker coming, don't need him etc. However, given the injury to Sandro - out for a "minimum" 3 months, which means christ knows how long, I wouldn't mind having Parker. IF we can get him on loan.
Why? Because he'd probably make a decent partnership in central midfield with any of the other three players that we currently have there and want to keep, he's hard working, disciplined, English (quota) and a good all round player. Why not? Price, wages, age, injury/fitness concerns. Not sure that he's the best option available, but how many people would rather keep Jenas?
I'd rather Parker than Jenas. But I'd rather Modric, Hudd, VDV, Sandro, Kranjcar and even Palacios than Parker.
I am surprised so many are against him. He was immense last year for Wet Spam (they'd have been down by Xmas if he hadn't been there) and for a better team he could really shine. I remember him from his Charlton days - great tackler, decent passer and a great long range shot. I would welcome him - especially for a year's loan.
Totally agree. If we stumped up what Real are supposedly demanding for Diarra he'd have to be an automatic first choice in midfield and I'm currently very happy with Modric, Sandro and Hudd and I feel it might stunt the latter two's development if they were dropped to the bench too much.
Players that Spurs are habitually linked with every transfer window: Joe Cole Scott Parker Matthew Upson Giuseppe Rossi Diego Forlan Mirko Vucinic
