I don't think Mr Personality will drop Park but it would be interesting to find other views on this 'marquee signing'. His work rate is second to none, he puts pressure on when needed, can run all day and lets not forget, he played for Man UTD! Fergie put him in his away euro games for the above reasons when a draw or a nicked win was the result wanted. I personally haven't seen any evidence of a very good player or that of a captain! I don't mind the bloke and would rather have him in my squad than not but if you are going to play out wide then obviously work rate is a main factor but surely beating an opponent in the final third would be high up on your list. At the moment we seem to have too many runners! As an opposition manager looking at the qpr team sheet, hoilletand Tarrabt would draw my attention a hell of a lot more than Park and SWP !!
He's not a left-winger that is for certain. I think our two best wide players are Hoilett on the left and Park on the right.
Would at least like to see how we played without him, so agree with you there bob. But I'm afraid the captaincy and not least the publicity towards the far east market have made him almost 'undroppable'. Which of course is a shame as our best eleven should ALWAYS play before any other agenda. The problem with him not beating his man is also annoying regarding being a 'wide man', he doesn't have that burst of pace needed. On the other side though he brings some much needed qualities to the side. His running a well documented one, but many others not highlighted enough imo. Against Spurs he had a pass accuracy of 90%, not bad for a man operating mostly in the opposing half/third. His technique isn't bad either, something which is vital if we want to play an attractive type football, he fits well with Granero and Faurlin. His movement and runs into the box are also of high quality, makes him very difficult to pick up, like against Chelsea (when he should have done better with the finish though). This is a quality that can make up for not being able to beat his man, but only when played in a fluid position/role. Guess what I'm saying is I'd like to see how we look without him, we dropped our captain last season and it probably turned our season around, imo though I believe we're better with him. But only when he have TWO other attacking outlets beside him, hopefully Hoilett and Taarabt, meaning we can only play one up front when Park play.
Personally i don't understand why he is captain or commanding a place in the starting eleven. From what i have seen he is best at breaking the play up, a similar role to Ale (who should have been made captain). If Park was bought in to generate merchandise sales he certainly did that judging by the amount of Park shirts coming out of the club shop on the first day of the season however as a captain and first choice player i remain unconvinced.
Not sure what is so wrong with Park. But what we DO need is a second consistent goalscorer. (and more goals from midfield) The midfield is really good (the defence is not...so we must always aim to score at least one more goal than the opposition). Zamora is doing his best ....It is the second striker position that worries me....a second handful of trouble upfront, would just solve so many of the other problems. I think Johnson injury is a terrible blow and Cisse and Taarbs lack of fitness and laziness has not allowed us to fill this role. If Sparky can solve this problem position we will start winning, the pressure will come of the defence we will not be asking if we have too many runners or whether Park is not creative enough
No, drop SWP or Mackie and play Park in his preferred position of RW with Hoilett or Taarabt on the left.
I have said this on other threads, but I think so, definitely a Yes. I don't see him as a wide player, or at least not unless he's playing alongside a few of the best attacking players on the planet as he did at Man U, where he was the buzzing irritant. I think Park is better in more central midfield but we have better players there now. Much of this also applies to SWP too, though he at least very quick and draws in defenders.
The midfield is really good for battling, "running everywhere" draws or narrow defeats. We need more creativity in there to help get some wins. Against sides like West Ham we can be a little more attacking, although I recognise the physical element to their game.
I really do not want to see SWP or Mackie play, thats an admission we are only trying for a draw. Hughes is already too negative for me and I dont want him to take it even further.
I know, SWP and Park wont create a thing, especially as playing SWP means Park will be nullified on the left. It will push me into the Hughes out camp if he does that yet again and yet again we struggle to make chances and dont get a result.
Yep. Some on here won't have it though. We need to create more and be more adventurous at home, particularly against teams outside the top 6.
Hughes doesnt think like that, he wants a clean sheet and to hope to sneak a goal. However our defence is down to the bare bones so we need to score 2 or 3 to get a win, something that wont happen with SWP and an out of position Park playing.
No he shouldn't be dropped. But i have said this a number of teams he played rm for one of the best clubs in the world under the most successful manager for years. So why the hell are we playing him left midfield it is just pure stupid. i could understand if Hughes had no choice but to play him there fair enough but we have 3-4 players that can play there right now.
