The term committed is appropriate here because in the good old days, you could be committed insane and sent to an asylum. And let's face it, it wouldn't be difficult, based on the last 4 years, to make out a case for a name change from the Boleyn to Bedlam!
The Boards are full of bull about Parker committing to West Ham. Oh yes? Nine days AFTER the transfer window closed, and more than a month AFTER a contract extension was offered, Parker has eventually got around to putting his grubby mark on his salary increase. With nurses, doctors, soldiers, teachers and civil servants facing pay freezes and people in the private sector living in fear of redundancy, Parker will be pocketing an EXTRA ten grand a week and will be guaranteed his obscene salary, regardless of performance, until his mid thirties!
Tell me, where is Parker's commitment exactly? He can't go anywhere now so why wouldn't he accept an extra £10k per week for as long as he continues to play for us? But why didn't he commit before the window closed? Why did many fans feel he was below par until the window closed? Why didn't he pledge himself publicly to the club until Tottenham lost interest on the final day of the window? Some commitment! Rooney is committed to Coleen on that basis!
Of course, the truth is that commitment works only one way here. If Parker breaks down injured, loses form or ages badly, he still gets his salary. But does anybody believe that he would be committed to the club if we went down? Does anybody believe that if we are in the bottom three in January and Tottenham come back in for him, that he will stay? Sullivan has already said that we might let him go at the end of the season if Parker really wants to go. You can bet your life that there are a whole host of release clauses in the contract that Parker can trigger when it suits HIM!
at no point did parker say he wanted to leave even after the bids came in for him which he could well of done. whether or not he is committed doesnt really matter he has signed the new deal which is a guarantee of a better price for him even if he does leave in the next window. besides which a west ham midfield without parker would be a lot weaker.... good luck to him
ReplyDeleteIs this your way of defending your two month campaign of insisting that Parker would leave before the transfer deadline. If so, you're a sore loser with no humility.
ReplyDeleteI don't actually disagree with a word you've said above but you could say exactly the same about most PL players at the moment.
I don't doubt that he wanted to leave but he was NEVER going to be sold at the fee quoted (£10M+), he's just not worth it at his age.
Time for us all to move on... (at least until the next transfer window)
Why does it guarantee we will get a higher price for him if we sell him in September? Liverpool are already rumoured to be preparing a bid if we are in the bottom three. They will be in a stronger position then and will bid LESS!
ReplyDelete1834, glad you agree with me.
The fact is Parker wanted to leave and Sullivan wanted to sell him. Circumstances dictated otherwise. It's clear.
ReplyDeleteSoory, I meant January in the reply above! I must see the doctor about my alzheimer's!
ReplyDeleteSorry I meant sorry above. I must see an infant school teacher about my spelling!
ReplyDeleteHave you actually seen Parker's contract? Because if the answer is anything but 'yes' then all of the above is nothing but poorly researched speculation.
ReplyDeleteWhat an earth is this piece doing comparing the salary of a football worker to that of a soldier, a nurse or any other public sector worker? It is absolutely irrelevant and makes you sound like a bitter lefty.
No one forces anyone to be a poorly paid soldier, or a poorly paid teacher or a poorly paid anything. They choose to be so that is their problem. They don't like it, they know what they can do. And I'm very sure they could do without you speaking out for them.
Please answer these questions, without your usual not-so-smart answers.
Have you seen Parkers contract (yes/no)?
What is the link between a professional footballers contract and a public sector worker's contract? How are they in the least connected?
Why are you so bitter about it?
I am not comparing his salary, I'm comparing his salary INCREASE. The whole thing is obscene. If you cannot understand that, I despair. But that is the secondary issue. Parker's salary has to be paid out of the club's limited funds. When you are paying the best part of £4million a year in wages to ONE player, it limits what you can afford to pay for and to others. Imagine you are Collison on £2k a week and you are getting changed with Parker who is on £73k per week. How do you feel? This is a great way of destroying team morale if you ask me, a great way of increasing the likelihood of relegation.
ReplyDeleteHave I seen the contract? Daft question.
Fact is HF you were wrong! Parker stayed on and declared his loyalty. Of course, he is financially better off but no more than he would have been if he was transferred to Spuds.
ReplyDeleteAnd he is a much better player than you give credit for. With Hitz, Behrami and Barrera around him we may end up with a pretty good midfield line.
So you haven't seen the contract? Daft article then, really.
ReplyDeleteTottenham wouldn't be stupid enough to pay him what we are paying him.
ReplyDeleteParker is on £73k a week? How on earth do you know that?
ReplyDeleteand for that matter, how do you know collison's on £2k a week? you don't. this is utter drivel.
ReplyDeleteYou were WRONG - Totally, completely and utterly WRONG - I know you have problems letting go, because it took you months even after Zola left you kept on and on like a bitter ex wife who's husband went off and found someone better.
ReplyDeleteGet over it and move on, and if you haven't seen the contract then your article as usual is based on tittle tattle, rumour and tabloid speculation and isn't worth a light.
Stani you haven’t a clue that Parker wanted to go and Sullivan certainly didn't want to sell him, FACT. You and your bum chum mate just can't accept being wrong most of the time. Just get back to sticking your arse up in the air for Trevor while you try to convert him to the dark side!
ReplyDeleteIG? Really? Amazed if true! How is the golf swing? Mouth and brain just as foul as ever I see.
ReplyDeleteIt's a serious question Hammersfan, and one you seem to be avoiding. How do you know what salary Parker is on before/after signing the new contract? How do you know what salary Collison is on?
ReplyDeleteIG,
ReplyDeleteAll this talk about Parker getting you hot under the collar? Why's that? We got an Iain Dale Mark Noble scenario here.
I like Parker, I didn't want him sold but what has happened is clear to see to anyone who doesn't kid themselves. If you had read my comments on here for any reasonable length of time then you'd know that.
So are you going to tell me why Parker took so long to sign the deal?
Happy Eid HF! :)
So, if you take all of the lies, made up 'facts', conjecture, tabloid rumour, etc, etc from the article above all you are left with is:
ReplyDelete"Parker signs new deal".
Great stuff Hammersfan, you really surpassed yourself this time.
1639, not avoiding at all. You will remember that the break down of players' salaries hit the net a while back and print offs were distributed in the Duke of Edinburgh on a match day last season. This showed Collison's salary at £2,000 per week which confirmed something said by that obnoxious Yank on 606 on Radio 5, back in the January I think. Although the club CLAIMED that the information was incorrect (they would wouldn't they because confidential information had been released into the public domain?), the total salary bill was remarkably similar to the figure published in the club's accounts for salaries. A remarkable comparison perhaps, or people working backwards and making educated guesses perhaps.
ReplyDeleteWe can argue until the cows come home about who earns what but we know salaries ran out of control under Eggert and we know Parker was signed by him. We also know that Parker is one of the highest wage earners and that S&G talked about the unsustainable wage structure when they joined (which may be why the salries were leaked in the first place). We also know, because Sullivan told us, that Parker had been offered an extended contract, offering a salary rise of £10k per week.
I am not talking here about his overall salary package, but about his wage rise, which, was unnecessary and obscene. Sullivan confirmed this figure when he boasted about the deal being offered to keep Parker.
1728, if you ignore what Sullivan himself said too. Tell me, why do you bother to read anything? It is all lies according to you. Who tells the truth according to you? How are we meant to piece together what is going on at the club? Believe the OS? Or Sullivan? Gold help us!
ReplyDelete17:41 - The 'release' of the clubs wages was in fact a hoax which is why the club were able to successfully sue the newspaper in question and why the newspaper in question were also forced to retract their story.
ReplyDelete17:45 - So we piece together 'the truth' by listening to the ramblings of a paranoid individual who knows nothing about the club except what he reads on the internet?
But, if you feel that: "How are we meant to piece together what is going on at the club? Believe the OS? Or Sullivan? Gold help us!" why on earth would you go on to say:
"We also know that Parker is one of the highest wage earners and that S&G talked about the unsustainable wage structure when they joined (which may be why the salries were leaked in the first place). We also know, because Sullivan told us, that Parker had been offered an extended contract, offering a salary rise of £10k per week.
I am not talking here about his overall salary package, but about his wage rise, which, was unnecessary and obscene. Sullivan confirmed this figure when he boasted about the deal being offered to keep Parker."
You created a slight paradox for yourself there. You don't believe anything the owners say when it fuels your paranoia but you do believe them when it fuels your paranoid delusions? You can't have it both ways hammersfan, you end up sounding like a dribbler.
Are you connected to the club or any one inside it?
I don't think I sound like a dribbler at all. Are you suggesting that Sullivan lied when he talked about Parker's contract extension and salary increase? In which case, that is FURTHER proof that we cannot trust to what we are told through official channels. If you are saying you believe him, it endorses what I say in the article.
ReplyDeleteDo I think that Sullivan lies every time he opens his mouth? No. Do I always trust what he says? No. So, like anybody with any common sense, I try to read between the lines. I may get it right sometimes, I may get it wrong sometimes. So what? Nobody makes you read what I write. Nobody forces you to believe it. Anybody with any common sense reads what I write and thinks, "Does that sound right to me?" If it does, fine. If you don't, then you can throw down a challenge.
Tell me, do you believe Parker has been given a salary increase? That's what Sullivan has told us has happened.