PARK-A true unsung hero

Just to show that Logan clearly stated that he had a very negative view of both Park and his performance in this thread, here are his own words...
Logan! said:
Good goal(or was it a failed cross?), chased the ball well and pressed Milan. Back to his usual self late on. Awful touch. Awful passing. Awful player.

Plays well about 5 games a season and somehow gets people on his side because he runs around a lot(slow as feck may I add).
Click to expand...

Logan! said:
The forum is for giving opinions. I've given mine and couldn't care less who disagrees with it. If I'm to be insulted for it by (let's be honest) an FM fanatic who pretends to watch 15 hours of football a day then so be it. I certainly won't lose sleep over it.
Click to expand...
So he's confirming that his earlier ill-considered and inaccurate description of Park is, in fact, his own actual opinion on the subject.

Which he confirms again (emphases mine again):
Logan! said:
I don't really see what's attention seeking about it. It's just my opinion. I rarely post in the football forums because it's full of FM fanboiz and pretend doctors, who insult you if they disagree with you.
Click to expand...
By this time he's also had to complain about the abuse he's getting for these ludicrous remarks.

Eventually, after pages of positive information about Park and responses to his own and KZ's balderdash, he decides to give some 'more considered' detail and some attempt at justification.

The added emphases are mine, to show the 'damning with faint praise' and apparent disregard for the good things Park does. Despite him saying he does really appreciate him, the detail rather counts against him. This also shows just what he does like imo.

Here it is again, pure comedy gold in places:
Logan! said:
I admire Park's commitment to the cause, and his work rate is second to none. He is a very good squad player in that he can come in every now and then, do a decent job and will never complain about not being in the team enough. And why would he? For a player with such limited ability hes very lucky to have found a place in the United squad.

He was signed as a winger. I was delighted when we signed Park because in the previous seasons Champions League I'd seen him almost single handedly take Milan apart. If one or two other PSV players played like him they would have gone through, but as it happened they were very unlucky to go out on the away goals rule.

Is he a winger though? His dribbling is poor. His crossing is poor. He's weak and is pushed off the ball very easily. For a so called winger he seems to lack all of the main qualities generally associated with that role. I don't think it would be wrong to say that the Park on our books is much different to the Park that played for PSV.

[Here he realises he's effectively contradicting himself again - he liked his play, delighted he was signed as a winger, but doesn't rate him there - and tries to say it must be because Park has changed].

Can he play in the hole? Yes, but not in the conventional sense. When played in the hole for us it seems his main role is to shadow the opponents playmaker and disrupt his game. And supporting Rooney( or A N Other striker) seems to be a secondary role.

What annoys me about our fans though is the way Park is lauded for his workman like approach to the game, despite not possessing an ounce of the talent Nani does. 99% of posters here will rarely criticize Park even when he has a bad game because 'he worked hard'.

Nani works just as hard yet barely receives any credit. We've seen in the last month or so just how good a winger he can be. He's strong, he can go past players with ease, he's amazingly fast, he has an excellent long range shot and he's surprisingly good finisher from close range. Yet when he's having an off day people are on his back straight away. It's as if people are just waiting for him to fail so they can criticize him and in my view it's harsh. In the first half against Milan he was poor. He gave the ball away easily a few times early on, nothing he tried came off and he was generally a bit rubbish. I haven't read the matchday thread, but I imagine there were several posters calling for him to be subbed at half time. Then a minute into the second half he does something that Park could only dream of. An inch perfect pass with the outside of his foot to setup Rooney's second goal and put us in the comfort zone.

[Notice the list of wonderful things Nani does and one particularly good thing he did in that game - this is to show why we should rate Nani (and what he does) - and why we are wrong to value Park].

So maybe I am a little harsh on Park at times, but I'm a big fan of Nani and believe he should be afforded the same leighway that Park gets. He puts in just as much effort and if given enough time I believe he'll be an amazing player for us.

[So he's justifying Park-criticism (even though recognising he'd been a bit OTT {massively OTT actually}) because of his love for Nani and Nani's style of play.]
Click to expand...

So:

Logan, a foolish lover of style over substance. Also something of a wazzock.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
So:

Logan, a foolish lover of style over substance. Also something of a wazzock.
Click to expand...

Or a seeker of attention (of any kind), and even the nastiest of replies his starving heart's content.

I briefly entertained the idea of taking his own posts and inserting 'Logan' for 'Park' wherever it popped up, but then I had a vision of my grandson asking me what it was like to have cheap electricity and clean running water back in the day and why we didn't have those things anymore. I didn't want to have to tell him it was because grandpa foolishly wasted it all on making fun of people who were already doing all the hard work for you.
 
All that effort and you haven't really said much at all FS.

You seem to be criticizing me because I went into more detail to explain why I think he's a limited player than I did on saying why he's a valuable player. Would you prefer if I went on and on about things that go against my own opinion? It would seem to be somewhat counter productive to my goal.

And you finish it off with the obligatory insult. The level of debate on here has really dropped.
 
You were the first to bring it down by saying Park's an awful player.

Don't say that and no insults come.
 
hungrywing said:
Or a seeker of attention (of any kind), and even the nastiest of replies his starving heart's content.
Click to expand...

Is everybody who has an opinion different to your own an attention seeker? :confused:

I try not to post in the football forums because it's inhabited by keyboard warriors, people who pretend to be doctors and people who just throw insults around when they've ran out of ideas.

This thread just reinforces that.
 
Brwned said:
You were the first to bring it down by saying Park's an awful player.

Don't say that and no insults come.
Click to expand...

So basically I should follow the sheep?

If we all shared the same opinion there wouldn't be much need for a forum Brwned. It's possible to disagree with somebody without lowering your level of debate to that of a child.
 
Nucks said:
You're awfully daft. Makes me wonder if you've ever played a sport at even a moderate level. The term role player is clearly not in your tool box. Nor is your understanding of what it entails or what it means.

Here is a tip. It is free, I am being generous. To have a successful club, you need people who score, and people who work. Park is a workhorse. He makes everyone around him look better even though he rarely garners any of the accolades himself. That is because he isn't a guy who scores often and he isn't flashy. He puts his nose to the grind stone and gets the job done. He confounds other teams attacking play and while he has a fairly heavy first touch he is extremely clever in his ability to find space and anticipate where he should be to keep us chugging forward.

Any team would be so lucky to have a player like Park, a selfless hard working servant to the club, someone who will subordinate their own ego for the success of the team as a whole.

You say Park is mid table quality at best? You'd have better served your own pretentious ego by staying off the football forums and keeping your mouth shut, all you have done is remove all doubt about your intelligence, or lack thereof.

Park would be a star at a mid table club and is good enough to warrant a FIRST team role for Manchester, fecking, United in all of our biggest and most important matches.
Click to expand...

And another one. :lol:
 
Logan! said:
All that effort and you haven't really said much at all FS.

You seem to be criticizing me because I went into more detail to explain why I think he's a limited player than I did on saying why he's a valuable player. Would you prefer if I went on and on about things that go against my own opinion? It would seem to be somewhat counter productive to my goal.

And you finish it off with the obligatory insult. The level of debate on here has really dropped.
Click to expand...
What part of your repeated insistence that the following constituted your opinion on the matter have you failed to notice?
Logan said:
Good goal(or was it a failed cross?), chased the ball well and pressed Milan. Back to his usual self late on. Awful touch. Awful passing. Awful player.

Plays well about 5 games a season and somehow gets people on his side because he runs around a lot(slow as feck may I add).
Click to expand...
Massively negative and unjustified - and then you confirmed twice that that was what you thought.

You then told us all how we should love what Nani does far more, and tried to disguise how much you fail to appreciate what Park does do. Unfortunately your repeated opinions on Park merely emphasise your inability to recognise the essential nature of the good work done by him.
 
peterstorey said:
Typical of FS's divergent replies which never focus on the critical issue - anyone watching Park for 45 minutes will see that he's a very limited player.
Click to expand...

And useful.

Logan! said:
So basically I should follow the sheep?

If we all shared the same opinion there wouldn't be much need for a forum Brwned. It's possible to disagree with somebody without lowering your level of debate to that of a child.
Click to expand...

No, you should have your own opinion.

But I thought that you didn't actually think he was an awful player?

Thus, if that's the case, you shouldn't have exaggerated your point to such an extent and the fact that you did cause this "drop in the level of debate".
 
peterstorey said:
Typical of FS's divergent replies which never focus on the critical issue - anyone watching Park for 45 minutes will see that he's a very limited player.
Click to expand...

You've always been someone who struggles to admire the essential work needed to allow style to fully express itself Peter - very apt given the nature of the team you support. To you, far too aften, people without the touch and vision of Bergkamp or Cantona, are judged as severely wanting.

Park is a better player creatively than you'd ever admit, contributing well to the attack, he functions as a continuity player, and performs invaluable defensive and covering work (all in one player). That skill set is rare, and highly prized by SAF.
 
One of those confirmations was related to another post about a day later. You're stretching a little here.

And which part of my admission that my initial post was over the top did you fail to notice?

Logan! said:
I was slightly inebriated and went over the top. I believe my subsequent posts have clarified my feelings on park, even if Pogue refuses/is unable to see it.
Click to expand...

I'm surprised you missed it seeing as you went through every post, taking notes, so you could analyze me.

Things would take much less time if everybody tried to keep up.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
What part of your repeated insistence that the following constituted your opinion on the matter have you failed to notice?

Massively negative and unjustified - and then you confirmed twice that that was what you thought.

You then told us all how we should love what Nani does far more, and tried to disguise how much you fail to appreciate what Park does do. Unfortunately your repeated opinions on Park merely emphasise your inability to recognise the essential nature of the good work done by him.
Click to expand...

I got the same impression.
Why didn't Logan compare Park's tracking back to Nani's failing to do so which almost cost us dearly. Maybe Logan should watch the AC game replay again.
 
Logan! said:
Is everybody who has an opinion different to your own an attention seeker? :confused:

I try not to post in the football forums because it's inhabited by keyboard warriors, people who pretend to be doctors and people who just throw insults around when they've ran out of ideas.

This thread just reinforces that.
Click to expand...

No, but statistically speaking, the odds are high that people who take extreme positions in everyday interactions (which internet posts are a part of) are out to get a rise out of someone.

Or they're KZ.
 
Logan! said:
One of those confirmations was related to another post about a day later. You're stretching a little here.

And which part of my admission that my initial post was over the top did you fail to notice?

"I was slightly inebriated and went over the top. I believe my subsequent posts have clarified my feelings on park, even if Pogue refuses/is unable to see it."

I'm surprised you missed it seeing as you went through every post, taking notes, so you could analyze me.

Things would take much less time if everybody tried to keep up.
Click to expand...

You twice confirmed that opinion first. Then your supposed 'clarification' merely revealed your devotion to 'the flash' and your inability to actually see and rate what Park does do well.

I'm criticising you both for your initial views (in vino veritas) and your failure to really do any better once you've calmed down. This has consistently suggested to me that your initial response (whilst poorly expressed) were not too far from your natural prejudice: 'style over substance'.

EDIT - and to clarify those actual remarks to which your posts might have related, here's the history...

I quoted posts 25, 43 & 51 - you also posted 31 'good point well made' (iirc) complaining about an insult - and effectively repeated this in post 45.

Your post 51 did quote someone calling you attention seeking - hence the remark you make about that - but in each case the only 'opinion' that you had posted here about Park was that initial outburst - you stated that that was your opinion twice.
 
kklm05 said:
I got the same impression.
Why didn't Logan compare Park's tracking back to Nani's failing to do so which almost cost us dearly. Maybe Logan should watch the AC game replay again.
Click to expand...

The ability to track back has little to do with his limitations as a footballer.

Bloody hard work in here at times. :D

hungrywing said:
No, but statistically speaking, the odds are high that people who take extreme positions in everyday interactions (which internet posts are a part of) are out to get a rise out of someone.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say it was extreme. My first post maybe, but not the subsequent ones. I don't think you can apply statistical information to someone you've never conversed with before and make a judgement on them based on one over the top opinion.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
You twice confirmed that opinion first. Then your supposed 'clarification' merely revealed your devotion to 'the flash' and your inability to actually see and rate what Park does do well.

I'm criticising you both for your initial views (in vino veritas) and your failure to really do any better once you've calmed down. This has consistently suggested to me that your initial response (whilst poorly expressed) were not too far from your natural prejudice: 'style over substance'.
Click to expand...

On the contrary, I have said what Park does well on numerous occasions, to the extent that I'm no longer going to repeat it to those who refuse to read it. I apologize if I didn't explain it in great detail like you believe I should have done, but his workrate and tracking back are not really very relevant to the point I was making about his technical ability being limited.

I also didn't need to "calm down". I have been calm throughout this thread while others have vented their anger and resorted to name calling. Strange how you miss these things isn't it FS, despite clearly going to so much effort to read every word of what I've written.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
Park is a better player creatively than you'd ever admit, contributing well to the attack, he functions as a continuity player, and performs invaluable defensive and covering work (all in one player). That skill set is rare, and highly prized by SAF.
Click to expand...
What's a continuity player? This isn't the fecking theatre. It sounds like another feeble attempt to justify an overinflated opinion.

Creatively he's poor having a limited range of passing, poor vision, poor technical execution and an inability to beat players. Defensively he's hard working and disciplined but neither a good reader of defensive danger nor a good tackler.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
You've always been someone who struggles to admire the essential work needed to allow style to fully express itself Peter - very apt given the nature of the team you support. To you, far too aften, people without the touch and vision of Bergkamp or Cantona, are judged as severely wanting.

Park is a better player creatively than you'd ever admit, contributing well to the attack, he functions as a continuity player, and performs invaluable defensive and covering work (all in one player). That skill set is rare, and highly prized by SAF.
Click to expand...

Park may be limited in many attributes but he is not "very limited" as Peter described it. If he has been "very limited" then Park should have long been gone with Jemba Jemba.

Oh and talking about why not as many people appreciate Nani. It is simple, did you ever hear Park complaining about lack of first team opportunity?
Park just work his way into contention. He doesn't moan to the media when things didn't go his way. Nani has talent, but he need to add hard work and intelligence into his game as well.
 
peterstorey said:
What's a continuity player? This isn't the fecking theatre. It sounds like another feeble attempt to justify an overinflated opinion.

Creatively he's poor having a limited range of passing, poor vision, poor technical execution and an inability to beat players. Defensively he's hard working and disciplined but neither a good reader of defensive danger nor a good tackler.
Click to expand...

So according to your description, SAF should get rid of Park.
Who should replace Park in the starting lineup if you are in SAF's shoe?
 
Logan! said:
On the contrary, I have said what Park does well on numerous occasions, to the extent that I'm no longer going to repeat it to those who refuse to read it. I apologize if I didn't explain it in great detail like you believe I should have done, but his workrate and tracking back are not really very relevant to the point I was making about his technical ability being limited.

[I read your views, as has everyone here, you love flash stuff - Park isn't flash enough to be a 'real player' for you. I would include reading play and making space as 'technical' abilities since they are techniques that make a more effective player.]

I also didn't need to "calm down". I have been calm throughout this thread while others have vented their anger and resorted to name calling. Strange how you miss these things isn't it FS, despite clearly going to so much effort to read every word of what I've written.
Click to expand...

Really? So when you tried a more reasoned approach this wasn't done in a calmer manner than when you were 'slightly inebriated and went over the top' to quote yourself.

If your initial remarks about Park were made when you were 'calm' then perhaps they were (as I suggested) an accurate reflection of your inability to value Park.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
Really? So when you tried a more reasoned approach this wasn't done in a calmer manner than when you were 'slightly inebriated and went over the top' to quote yourself.

If your initial remarks about Park were made when you were 'calm' then perhaps they were (as I suggested) an accurate reflection of your inability to value Park.
Click to expand...

Since when does 'slightly inebriated' mean angry? :confused:

For a guy who speaks like he's reading from a thesaurus, you do seem to interpret things rather strangely.
 
Getting back to original thread.

I watched the match, again. Something that stuck out was Martin Tyler mentioning that every one of United's players except VDS came to congratulate Park when he scored.

His teammates know his true worth and as such, he gets his praises sung where they matter most, from the manager and his teammates.

He'll never be for everyone though and by everyone I mean United supporters because as Logan has said, he has other things that are of more value for a United winger to have than the qualities and abilities Park possesses.

From this thread though, shows a lot of people on here sing his praises for what he means to the club and the options he gives us. Fantastic player and oh the marketing bit doesn't hurt either ....
 
peterstorey said:
What's a continuity player? ...
Click to expand...

Are you really that dense?

Get into space to receive the ball, keep possession by passing it to another member of your team (Busby & Murphy - 'pass it to another red shirt') - keep it simple at times to keep the momentum going (don't always look for the Gerrard Holywood pass) - when you've passed, make yourself available, or help someone else to become available.

Of course, it also helps if you can stop the opposition's continuity and passing options by reading the game, and combining the positioning that brings, with the ability to get there - even tackling on occasions! :D
 
Feedingseagulls said:
Are you really that dense?

Get into space to receive the ball, keep possession by passing it to another member of your team (Busby & Murphy - 'pass it to another red shirt') - keep it simple at times to keep the momentum going (don't always look for the Gerrard Holywood pass) - when you've passed, make yourself available, or help someone else to become available.

Of course, it also helps if you can stop the opposition's continuity and passing options by reading the game, and combining the positioning that brings, with the ability to get there - even tackling on occasions! :D
Click to expand...

Park's awareness and passing with Scholes created the third goal. It looks so simple on TV. But I guess it is not as simple as it seems. I guess a "very limited" player won't be able to do that.
 
Logan! said:
Since when does 'slightly inebriated' mean angry? :confused:

For a guy who speaks like he's reading from a thesaurus, you do seem to interpret things rather strangely.
Click to expand...

'OTT' was the description that I thought indicated a lack of reasoned, calm appraisal. (Inebriation was your excuse.)

Anyway, it's up to you to choose...

Either your initial opinion was a calmly reasoned one, or it wasn't and you later only later produced a calmer more reasonable one (but you denied this).

You come out looking like a prat either way.
 
peterstorey said:
What's a continuity player? This isn't the fecking theatre. It sounds like another feeble attempt to justify an overinflated opinion.

Creatively he's poor having a limited range of passing, poor vision, poor technical execution and an inability to beat players. Defensively he's hard working and disciplined but neither a good reader of defensive danger nor a good tackler.
Click to expand...

Interesting that Sir Alex chose to highlight this part of his game as "excellent".

You're very confusing. Your understanding's excellent, your application's bizarre at times.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
Are you really that dense?

Get into space to receive the ball, keep possession by passing it to another member of your team (Busby & Murphy - 'pass it to another red shirt') - keep it simple at times to keep the momentum going (don't always look for the Gerrard Holywood pass) - when you've passed, make yourself available, or help someone else to become available.

Of course, it also helps if you can stop the opposition's continuity and passing options by reading the game, and combining the positioning that brings, with the ability to get there - even tackling on occasions! :D
Click to expand...
It's a rubbish term imported from rugby where it makes more sense in a staccato game. It's superfluous and largely meaningless in football where all you've done describe ' playing in midfield'.
 
Feedingseagulls said:
OTT was the description that I thought indicated a lack of reasoned, calm appraisal.

Anyway, it's up to you to choose...

Either your initial opinion was a calmly reasoned one, or it wasn't and you later only later produced a calmer more reasonable one (but you denied this).

You come out looking like a prat either way.
Click to expand...

I couldn't be arsed going to the effort of explaining why I think Park is a limited footballer. I made a short post.

I later expanded it to explain my opinion further. I don't really see how you can summise that I was angry, especially after a 4-0 win against Milan. :confused:

And now we're done with the debate FS. Name calling is so childish and pathetic, especially through the medium of the internet and just makes me feel sorry for you.
 
He has fantastic anticipation as well, which I suppose comes from his understanding of the game. I always find myself smirking whenever he makes one of those oh-I-know-just-who-you're-going-to-pass-to-and-time-my-intercepting-run-to-uncanny-perfection plays.

Two seconds and one mad 6 yard dash later, he ends up intercepting said pass, leaving the intended recipient pissed off and the original passer bamboozled: "Where did you come from? You were eight yards away and not even looking at the ball!"
 
Also interesting that Sir Alex then made comments just last night about Park's intelligence, which makes the idea that he's not got a footballing brain all the more confusing.

"We can talk about Rooney – and he was great – but Park’s discipline, intelligence and sacrifice won us the match tactically. "
 
the only thing that holds park back from being a 20 million plus winger/midfielder is his lack of finishing ability. his movement and work rate has always been superb since psv days. however at united, he has always been one of the worst shooters of the ball in recent memory, for the amount of good positions he gets into. a top player nonetheless.
 
peterstorey said:
anyone watching Park for 45 minutes will see that he's a very limited player.
Click to expand...

Arsenal manager impressed by Korean stars
By Steve Griffiths (AFP) – Mar 5, 2010

LONDON COLNEY, England — Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger admits the success of South Korean players in the Premier League has made him reconsider the possibility of signing Asian stars.

Wenger knows the qualities of Asian players better than most in Europe after spending 18 months working in Japan as manager of Grampus Eight, but Japanese midfielder Junichi Inamoto has been his only signing from the region since taking over at Arsenal 14 years ago.

Inamoto's failure to make an impact in the Premier League convinced Wenger that Asians were a risky investment.

However, he has been forced to think again after seeing Korean stars Park Ji-Sung and Lee Chung-Yong in action at Manchester United and Bolton respectively.

Wenger now acknowledges the Koreans have proved players from Asia have plenty to offer top English clubs and he wouldn't rule out looking at some of the continent's best at this year's World Cup, which features South Korea, North Korea and Japan.

"I know that the Korean players in England are doing very well and of course it excites a little bit your curiosity," Wenger said.

"The Korean players have done one important thing. There are very few Asian players who have made it in Europe and especially the Premier League but the Korean players look to adapt very well."

Wenger has been a big fan of United winger Park's since first coming across him in action for Dutch club PSV Eindhoven against Arsenal in the Champions League.

Park has given Wenger some uncomfortable moments after scoring in two of his last three games against the Gunners, including a crucial strike in last season's Champions League semi-final second leg at the Emirates Stadium.

Wenger is especially impressed with the 29-year-old's ability to combine endless energy with a priceless knack of scoring important goals.

"He made his name in Eindhoven first in the Champions League and when you play against him he is a very hard working player who sacrifices for the team but as well has some good skills.

"He has scored some important goals - unfortunately against us!. I am convinced by his quality, he has a top-level attitude."

Park isn't the only Korean to catch Wenger's eye. Lee has been a big hit for Bolton despite the club's struggles and new boss Owen Coyle has kept faith with clever midfielder since replacing Gary Megson earlier this year.

As a self-confessed football addict who spends much of his time at home watching matches from around the globe on television, the World Cup offers Wenger a golden opportunity to cast his eye over potential signings and he plans to travel to South Africa for the finals as a television analyst.

"I will look at every single player I can find but I go more because I love football and it is a good opportunity for me to watch the games, the countries I like and the football I like as well, and to see the evolution of the game," Wenger added.

"Before the evolutions of the game were brought from the World Cup, it is not the case any more. I think the innovations come from the clubs now."
 
He's the perfect squad player. His skills, if limited, are under rated, while he's versatile, selfless and tireless. It was so dissappointing to see the criticism he got last year, but I've always been a fan of his. Oh, and he sells a shitload of shirts.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.