Jose Mourinho's latest comments on Troy Parrott leave more questions than answers

[mawspurs]

Tottenham manager Jose Mourinho has suggested Ireland striker Troy Parrott 'needs help' off the pitch, after he reluctantly gave him his second Premier League appearance in Sunday's 3-2 defeat against Wolves.

Source: Independent IE

 

[tcyrus]

Here we go !
Another luke shaw saga,

i think i'm paying for laughing at Man UTD fans,
when Mourinho became there manager

Karma is such a bitch !

 

[Jolmaster]

He doesn't score goals off the field Jose, just give the lad a chance, what've you got to lose

 

[Deleted member 27995]

He doesn't doubt his ability, away from the pitch is the individuals mentality by the sounds of it.

 

[JimmyG2]

If he's not 'fit'
in any way whatsoever
he shouldn't be
on the bench.
If he's 'fit
he should play
under our current difficulties.
Two minutes
at the end of a game
is a nonsense.

Typical bloody Mourinho
player mind games.

 

[Chedozie]

Maybe, he’s not good enough yet, he is only 17.

 

[Johnny J]

It's Spurs, so of course there's some problem or another preventing him from being part of the solution. Constant drama now at our club after a few years of stability.

 

[JC-Rule]

It was pointless bringing him on for 4mins in a losing game.

But, I trust Jose, in his position now, he just can't get an opportune moment to blood the kid.

Every game has a lot riding on it.

What we need is a game where we are coasting, with 30mins to go.

 

[Metalhead]

Maybe, he’s not good enough yet, he is only 17.

By the time he takes the pitch the hype will be at fever pitch.

 

[Metalhead]

If he's not 'fit'
in any way whatsoever
he shouldn't be
on the bench.
If he's 'fit
he should play
under our current difficulties.
Two minutes
at the end of a game
is a nonsense.

Typical bloody Mourinho
player mind games.

Just hypothesising but maybe it's all about gradually integrating him into the team and give him a feel for match day. That being said, I'm in the 'give Mourinho a chance camp' so I'm probably biased.

 

[yid-down-under]

Maybe, he’s not good enough yet, he is only 17.

18 now

 

[Shadydan]

The amount of reaching in here is hilarious.

 

[rez9000]

"Needs help"? Really? Lawks a mussy, who'da thunk it???

Whenever I look around at young men and women around the age of 18, I'm always struck by how capable and fully-rounded they all are. Every single one. I'm not sure if people are aware of this, but did you know that 18 year-olds are all fully prepared for what the world has to offer them? I've actually seen the metamorphosis happen. You go round to a friend's house for an 18th birthday party and as soon as the last candle on the birthday cake has been blown out a strange transformation occurs. Whereas before there slouched an awkward, hormonal, and in all likelihood priapic / aphroditic (that means horny) adolescent, suddenly a complete human exists.

And watch as they spring forth from their parents' tender shelter, totally equipped to take on all that life has to throw at them with absolutely no assistance needed. Adversity? That only happens to people below the age of 18, didn't you know that?

This is why all crimes are committed by people who are underage. Because as no 18-year-old ever needs assistance, they are all fully-functioning members of society and won't make mistakes. That's why teenage pregnancy actually doesn't exist. It's why universities are, in reality, a myth cooked up by the government. 18-year-olds don't need anything after the magical day of their 18th birthdays, least of all education, so why should there be a need for tertiary educational institutions?

All except poor lowly Troy. Aaaw, the little lamb. Bless him. He's the exception that proves the rule, you see. Unlike every other 18-year-old, he (engage ominous tone here) 'needs help'. It's enough to make your heart bleed for the poor chick. He must sit there, day in, day out, watching on as his totally independent friends wander off to contribute to society without any assistance from anyone and he must wonder as to why he's so damn different.

Maybe one day, poor Troy will become like his friends - needless of any assistance.

Or maybe one day, we'll live in a world free of shit journalism like the piece above.

 

[benaudere]

I am afraid Jose does not know how teenagers work isn't it? A teen like Troy wants to prove himself on the big stage. This has nothing to do with his attitude outside the pitch unless he is skipping training which I don't think is the case. Play your kids, allow them to learn from their mistakes and they will be stronger than ever.

Your current strategy of playing Lucas upfront is an absolute joke. He is definitely not a striker and anyone could see it except Jose. I think the only time we see Troy playing is when Jose loses his job which i hope is not too far away.

 

[1882andallthat]

Just hypothesising but maybe it's all about gradually integrating him into the team and give him a feel for match day. That being said, I'm in the 'give Mourinho a chance camp' so I'm probably biased.

He's already been used as a substitute against Burnley, giving a player 2 mins at the end of the game is hardly integrating a player to give them a feel of match day.
The only valid reason for bringing on a player with less than 5 mins to go is either to replace a player who can't play on or if it's that late in the game, say in the 88th minute onwards it's to waste a bit of time or to shore up a lead and then it's usually a defensive minded replacement. We were actually 3-2 down not 3-2 up.

You don't bring on a striker with 2 mins to go, they can hardly have any effect on the game unless they get lucky from a set piece that is put in the box. That's why fans were frustrated.

We created the sum total of flap all in that last 20 mins and created next to no extra pressure. Nothing was working for us in that last half an hour other than the fact that the game was swinging their way, we needed to try a different attacking option.

He should have been brought on with at least 15- 20 mins to go. If you go 3-2 down you have to try a different attacking strategy or you won't get back into it unless the other side gift you a goal, and as the home side the onus was even more on us to do so, knowing what was at stake. What possible harm could have been done by giving the kid a shot with 20 mins to go in those circumstances. I'm not buying into this it would have affected his confidence nonsense if he's given 20 mins instead of 2 mins. If it hadn't worked and it stayed 3-2 no one would have blamed him, and it would have hardly been his fault if our defence had shipped in a 4th whilst chasing it. The gamble was there to be taken and we didn't take it. He might have scored, who knows, but 2 minutes is neither one nor the other, a complete waste of time when we didn't have the time to waste.

 

[Freddie]

Very odd comment. If he has the general understanding of how to play up front then we should be using him because it will bring a much higher level of play out of those around him. Currently everyone seems to be struggling with the structure and we don't look fluid bar a few isolated plays. Exhibit A would be Benteke. Even at his very worst (and that was bad) I always felt Zaha and Townsend preferred him being there because his presence allowed them to do what they did best but struggled with Ayew in that role, who isn't a natural 9.

 

[Metalhead]

He's already been used as a substitute against Burnley, giving a player 2 mins at the end of the game is hardly integrating a player to give them a feel of match day.
The only valid reason for bringing on a player with less than 5 mins to go is either to replace a player who can't play on or if it's that late in the game, say in the 88th minute onwards it's to waste a bit of time or to shore up a lead and then it's usually a defensive minded replacement. We were actually 3-2 down not 3-2 up.

You don't bring on a striker with 2 mins to go, they can hardly have any effect on the game unless they get lucky from a set piece that is put in the box. That's why fans were frustrated.

We created the sum total of flap all in that last 20 mins and created next to no extra pressure. Nothing was working for us in that last half an hour other than the fact that the game was swinging their way, we needed to try a different attacking option.

He should have been brought on with at least 15- 20 mins to go. If you go 3-2 down you have to try a different attacking strategy or you won't get back into it unless the other side gift you a goal, and as the home side the onus was even more on us to do so, knowing what was at stake. What possible harm could have been done by giving the kid a shot with 20 mins to go in those circumstances. I'm not buying into this it would have affected his confidence nonsense if he's given 20 mins instead of 2 mins. If it hadn't worked and it stayed 3-2 no one would have blamed him, and it would have hardly been his fault if our defence had shipped in a 4th whilst chasing it. The gamble was there to be taken and we didn't take it. He might have scored, who knows, but 2 minutes is neither one nor the other, a complete waste of time when we didn't have the time to waste.

I do think that it's all about gradual integration. Maybe Mourinho is aware of the hype and doesn't want to put too much pressure on him. I don't think that there's any great mystery or conspiracy personally.

 

[1882andallthat]

I do think that it's all about gradual integration. Maybe Mourinho is aware of the hype and doesn't want to put too much pressure on him. I don't think that there's any great mystery or conspiracy personally.

To a degree I accept your point, but I would argue that giving him 20 mins rather than 2 is gradual integration when he's already been introduced in the Burnley game. Like I said in the post I don't think the manager or the fans would have blamed him if he didn't score the equaliser, anyone blaming Parrott if it doesn't pay off shouldn't be taken seriously but I think it was worth a gamble.
If we are 2-1 down on Wednesday in the cup against Norwich with 20 mins to go should we again wait until the 88th min to bring him on ?

 

[Metalhead]

To a degree I accept your point, but I would argue that giving him 20 mins rather than 2 is gradual integration when he's already been introduced in the Burnley game. Like I said in the post I don't think the manager or the fans would have blamed him if he didn't score the equaliser, anyone blaming Parrott if it doesn't pay off shouldn't be taken seriously but I think it was worth a gamble.
If we are 2-1 down on Wednesday in the cup against Norwich with 20 mins to go should we again wait until the 88th min to bring him on ?

If that's what Mourinho wants to do then I think that it's his perogative as manager. If we had Kane and Son fit and/or we were in good form then I don't think that people would be feeling the same. A lot of it is down to people being desperate for something to lift the season. TBF I've written it off so I'm quite happy to see him being integrated over a longer period.

 

[Freddie]

I do think that it's all about gradual integration. Maybe Mourinho is aware of the hype and doesn't want to put too much pressure on him. I don't think that there's any great mystery or conspiracy personally.

Is the hype really that much? More inclined to think Mourinho cares more about winning games but doesn't rate/trust him to do that.