Remove this Banner Ad

Traded #26 Luke Parker

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

d05af3810baa11138a15ef8d759b18c8


Luke Parker
Luke Parker has plenty of football ahead and has already compiled a resume packed with impressive achievements. Since landing at the Sydney Swans via the 2010 AFL Draft, he has won a 2012 premiership medal, earned All Australian selection and won two Bob Skilton medals. In 2015, he was added to the club’s leadership group at the age of just 22, and has led the team as a co-captain alongside Josh Kennedy and Dane Rampe since 2019. While Parker is among the league’s elite midfielders, his strong marking and expert game awareness make him a genuine threat when rotating through the forward line.

Luke Parker
DOB: 25 October 1992
DEBUT: 2011
DRAFT: #40, 2010 National Draft
RECRUITED FROM: Langwarrin (Vic)/Dandenong U18

www.sydneyswans.com.au

Official AFL Website of the Sydney Swans Football Club. All the latest news, videos, results and information.

Official AFL Website of the Sydney Swans Football Club
www.sydneyswans.com.au www.sydneyswans.com.au
 
Last edited by a moderator:
ashep said:
He was named in our bests in 3 of the last 6 games he played. Any suggestions that he's not best 22 or doesn't fit into our current side, or is well behind a similar player in Adams is by definition under appreciative.
Click to expand...


Not really, that's just your measure . That was last year and Adams wasn't on the list.

I mean the bests -- he was in the bests in the final for instance and was crap , 2 lucky goals.

Anyway not here to shit on him, but this appreciation for him or otherwise is neither here nor there, he isn't currently in the team and wasn't pre suspension, so it's not unreasonable to suggest he stay out.

What he did in the past years doesn't get him a spot imo, maybe the club will disagree , we shall see.

But this thread is the Adams one who is playing well , and like someone else said originally they were probably rostered on to both play together . No reason they still can't . We just need to pick the side that maximises our chances to win, if Parker is in it then great.
 
Last edited:
Wheresbuddy said:
I'm not writing Parker off until I see him playing in our current midfield. His hack kicking was in part due to playing in an inside group often on it's heals due to an average ruck. With Grundy there, we are constantly on the move forward and he is creating the space and time for our inside mids to get to work.
Click to expand...
Dunno, in one of his VFL highlight packages where he had a dominant game he did it like 6 times. It's just the way he plays.

The reality is Parker has been the main man in quite a poor performing midfield since Josh Kennedy left. We had been outplayed in both the offensive and defensive side of centre bounce contests until his absence (and i don't think it's as simple as blaming the ruckman, Hickey was outstanding at times). It was a consistent nagging issue, and the evidence is as close as last year in a team that was coming off a GF appearance. The bloke busts his backside and carried the team at times through brute force but it's an unsustainable style of game. He's too significant a player to be expected to come in and just adjust to a simplified role. 100% guaranteed take it to the bank his addition will change the way our midfield is currently operating, and that's the last thing we want or need tbh.

We've found a midfield that is ticking like clockwork. That's it, that's the end game, there's no looking back in this caper. We've got the best performing team in a decade it must simply stay the way it is unless something falls off. And it's the same equation for Mills too, he was also part of a poor performing midfield, lucky we know he's a definite upgrade in the back half. I'm shit scared to see him in the midfield too, tbh i've always seen him as overrated in the middle, and again proof is in the pudding. We've forgotten how quickly that ball was pinging out of the middle into the oppos forward line last year, it was quite pathetic to watch at times, and Mills and Parker were our main men.

At the end of the day you're not going to gain much even if Parker did improve our performances further, we're already red lining. However you do risk flinging the wheels off completely. It's just unnecessary. It's time to move on and keep him purely for injury cover.
 
Last edited:

Log in to remove this Banner Ad

Not having a go at anyone specifically, but I don't quite understand the barracking for Parker - or any individual, really - to be in the team. I'd understand having a certain player in mind who you think would improve us in an area where we needed improving. But look at how the team is going. At what point does the trust & faith transfer from those who have delivered in the past, to those who are delivering now?

If we are getting the wins and everyone is performing their role, then I really couldn't care which of the 22 out of 44 blokes on the list are in the team, as it will be the players most deserving of it.

Parker doesn't fit that bill. No doubt he's been enormous for our club over the journey, and we have many reasons to be grateful for Parker. But the team being 12-1 and 3 games clear on top of the ladder is not one of them. This is not to discredit what I'm sure are great contributions off-field in a leadership sense, but has he contributed as much to our team's performance as Adams, Wicks, Jordon, Hayward, whoever else? No he has not.
 
caesar88 said:
Not having a go at anyone specifically, but I don't quite understand the barracking for Parker - or any individual, really - to be in the team. I'd understand having a certain player in mind who you think would improve us in an area where we needed improving. But look at how the team is going. At what point does the trust & faith transfer from those who have delivered in the past, to those who are delivering now?

If we are getting the wins and everyone is performing their role, then I really couldn't care which of the 22 out of 44 blokes on the list are in the team, as it will be the players most deserving of it.

Parker doesn't fit that bill. No doubt he's been enormous for our club over the journey, and we have many reasons to be grateful for Parker. But the team being 12-1 and 3 games clear on top of the ladder is not one of them. This is not to discredit what I'm sure are great contributions off-field in a leadership sense, but has he contributed as much to our team's performance as Adams, Wicks, Jordon, Hayward, whoever else? No he has not.
Click to expand...
Yep everyone has quickly forgotten the sheer number of centre clearances we were losing with such ease last year with Mills and Parker as the main mids. Even against poor sides. It was embarrassing at one stage.
 
zyzzbruh said:
Yep everyone has quickly forgotten the sheer number of centre clearances we were losing with such ease last year with Mills and Parker as the main mids. Even against poor sides. It was embarrassing at one stage.
Click to expand...
I don't know that Mills deserves to be in that conversation. I'd argue he oversaw pretty much the only two periods over the last 5 or so years where we looked competitive out of the centre (first month of 2021 & last few months of 2022.)

I'm in favour of playing Mills in defence but he's undoubtedly a gun mid IMO.

But agree with your overall point. I wouldn't be messing with what we have going on at all.
 
caesar88 said:
I don't know that Mills deserves to be in that conversation. I'd argue he oversaw pretty much the only two periods over the last 5 or so years where we looked competitive out of the centre (first month of 2021 & last few months of 2022.)

I'm in favour of playing Mills in defence but he's undoubtedly a gun mid IMO.

But agree with your overall point. I wouldn't be messing with what we have going on at all.
Click to expand...
Please bear with me.
At the moment we seem to be doing OK at centre clearances but much better at stoppages. I'd that correct caesar88 ?
There seems to be quite a bit of analysis going into our CB work but less going into our stoppage work. Reading your FT analysis it seems to me that quite a range of players are getting first hands (and EFT) at stoppages.
My take on Mills' and Parker's history is that we were crap at CB but not too bad at stoppages.
Adams isn't doing a lot of CBAs. The main attendees are Heeney, Rowbottom and Warner.
If Mills and Parker return why would we change our CB tactics? They are a relatively small chunks of time (albeit important) and Mills and Parker can be elsewhere at that time or make occasional visits.
Getting to the point, I don't think CBAs are a valid reason why either of them should or shouldn't be in the team.
 
Without undervaluing Parker (or Adams - who is going great), it is hard to see how we fit them (and Mills) into the same team. I am pretty receptive to the logic that everything is humming along brilliantly and we shouldn't mess with it too much. Parker may just have to wait for an injury or rotation/management of players policy to get a run.

However Mills is a different case. He's easier to fit into the side in front of the likes of Roberts and Campbell and even Fox. He can play the same role as they do but hopefully better. It's harder to do that with Parker - the only role he's competing to do better than the incumbent (IMO) are Adams and maybe Rowbottom's roles. However I'd be loathe to drop either of them (especially Rowy) for Parker when we're having such success. The other thing with Mills is that he is the club captain. Parker stepped back from the captaincy specifically because he's coming to the end of his career but Mills is in his prime and his form when he last played was entirely deserving of his spot (although, of course, so was Parker's).

In short, I support Adams continuing, I support Mills return, and I am vexed by Parker. I feel there has to be a way of getting Parker in but it's hard to see what it is. He's a mid and our midfield rotation is verging on oversubscribed already. Parker's exclusion also promotes continual evolution and regeneration of our team.

I'm too sentimental to entirely agree with you, caesar88 that it doesn't matter who's in the team all that matters is the results. I am connected with the playing group and have been on the journey with them and want to complete the journey with them and share the success. If you could assemble an AA team of players from other clubs and put them in Swans' jumpers and let them play out the rest of the season for us and win a flag for the club's trophy cabinet that wouldn't feel very meaningful for me. There are so many stories that will be completed by the playing group we know and love winning the flag that would just be missing if we won a flag without them.
 

Remove this Banner Ad

caesar88 said:
Not having a go at anyone specifically, but I don't quite understand the barracking for Parker - or any individual, really - to be in the team. I'd understand having a certain player in mind who you think would improve us in an area where we needed improving. But look at how the team is going. At what point does the trust & faith transfer from those who have delivered in the past, to those who are delivering now?

If we are getting the wins and everyone is performing their role, then I really couldn't care which of the 22 out of 44 blokes on the list are in the team, as it will be the players most deserving of it.

Parker doesn't fit that bill. No doubt he's been enormous for our club over the journey, and we have many reasons to be grateful for Parker. But the team being 12-1 and 3 games clear on top of the ladder is not one of them. This is not to discredit what I'm sure are great contributions off-field in a leadership sense, but has he contributed as much to our team's performance as Adams, Wicks, Jordon, Hayward, whoever else? No he has not.
Click to expand...

Hmmn. The debate about Parker sees me on the other side of the JPK coin.

Imo Blind Freddie and I could see JPK was close to gone in 2021 and possessed a skill set out of whack with our then developing game style. The abuse I copped was pretty remarkable. Tho it brought not a jot of satisfaction I was unfortunately proven correct. My view about JPK being a great Swan remains unchanged.

Luke Parker is another great Swan and all of us want the best possible ending for him. I hope he fulfils his contract and reckon he has plenty of quality footy left.

I reckon he has at least another year or two. Why, I hear the naysayers say? Parker has always been three players- an untidy bash and crash merchant at Centre clearances, a canny player at throwins and bounces and a skilled organiser and player in general play.

Before the busted arm I was convinced he was going to play more forward, with minimal CBAs. With Paps he is the smartest bloke in the room.

Plenty of others dont see he has much of a future. Some more or less are writing him off now. I believe this is premature, especially sight unseen.
 
Callipygian said:
Without undervaluing Parker (or Adams - who is going great), it is hard to see how we fit them (and Mills) into the same team. I am pretty receptive to the logic that everything is humming along brilliantly and we shouldn't mess with it too much. Parker may just have to wait for an injury or rotation/management of players policy to get a run.

However Mills is a different case. He's easier to fit into the side in front of the likes of Roberts and Campbell and even Fox. He can play the same role as they do but hopefully better. It's harder to do that with Parker - the only role he's competing to do better than the incumbent (IMO) are Adams and maybe Rowbottom's roles. However I'd be loathe to drop either of them (especially Rowy) for Parker when we're having such success. The other thing with Mills is that he is the club captain. Parker stepped back from the captaincy specifically because he's coming to the end of his career but Mills is in his prime and his form when he last played was entirely deserving of his spot (although, of course, so was Parker's).

In short, I support Adams continuing, I support Mills return, and I am vexed by Parker. I feel there has to be a way of getting Parker in but it's hard to see what it is. He's a mid and our midfield rotation is verging on oversubscribed already. Parker's exclusion also promotes continual evolution and regeneration of our team.

I'm too sentimental to entirely agree with you, caesar88 that it doesn't matter who's in the team all that matters is the results. I am connected with the playing group and have been on the journey with them and want to complete the journey with them and share the success. If you could assemble an AA team of players from other clubs and put them in Swans' jumpers and let them play out the rest of the season for us and win a flag for the club's trophy cabinet that wouldn't feel very meaningful for me. There are so many stories that will be completed by the playing group we know and love winning the flag that would just be missing if we won a flag without them.
Click to expand...
Super post.
Ditto on Mills. In form (and there's no reason he shouldn't be) he will offer more than the player he most likely replaces.
The Parker situation is one I doubt we ever thought we would face because I doubt we ever foresaw Heeney as our dominant midfielder. That has been the game changer in the makeup and structure of our midfield.
Horse has, I think, already shown his hand on this by leaving Parker in the Ressies when he was fit. A tough call but the right one, at least for now.
 
caesar88 said:
Not having a go at anyone specifically, but I don't quite understand the barracking for Parker - or any individual, really - to be in the team. I'd understand having a certain player in mind who you think would improve us in an area where we needed improving. But look at how the team is going. At what point does the trust & faith transfer from those who have delivered in the past, to those who are delivering now?

If we are getting the wins and everyone is performing their role, then I really couldn't care which of the 22 out of 44 blokes on the list are in the team, as it will be the players most deserving of it.

Parker doesn't fit that bill. No doubt he's been enormous for our club over the journey, and we have many reasons to be grateful for Parker. But the team being 12-1 and 3 games clear on top of the ladder is not one of them. This is not to discredit what I'm sure are great contributions off-field in a leadership sense, but has he contributed as much to our team's performance as Adams, Wicks, Jordon, Hayward, whoever else? No he has not.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what there is to not understand about people wanting players in the side who they think will make the team better.

You can disagree that Parker improves the side, but part of supporting a team is supporting the individuals that comprise that team, building attachments to certain players and wanting to see them contribute to the team's success. "Who cares who played as long as we win" really doesn't align with my idea of supporting a footy club at all.

Sure, winning a flag is the ultimate goal, and yes, you pick the team that gives you the best chance to do that however there are people who simply disagree with your statement that Parker isn't "deserving" of a place in that side. From my perspective I think there are 4 or 5 players in the current side whom Parker would instantly offer more than. I also think the fact that he lost his spot solely due to injury and had dominated at VFL level adds to his case.

Being 12-1 is great but that doesn't mean you stand pat and just assume that form will hold. The exact same logic could be applied to Mills but I have a suspicion you'll want to find a place for him.

Everyone has a different opinion but I don't think it's difficult to see people's perspective.
 
Last edited:
ashep said:
I'm not sure what there is to not understand about people wanting players in the side who they think will make the team better.

You can disagree that Parker improves the side, but part of supporting a team is supporting the individuals that comprise that team, building attachments to certain players and wanting to see them contribute to the team's success.

Sure, winning a flag is the ultimate goal, and yes, you pick the team that gives you the best chance to do that however there are people who simply disagree with your statement that Parker isn't "deserving" of a place in that side. From my perspective I think there are 4 or 5 players in the current side whom Parker would instantly offer more than. I also think the fact that he lost his spot solely due to injury and had dominated at VFL level adds to his case.

Being 12-1 is great but that doesn't mean you stand pat and just assume that form will hold. The exact same logic could be applied to Mills but I have a suspicion you'll want to find a place for him.

Everyone has a different opinion but I don't think it's difficult to see people's perspective.
Click to expand...
I don't think it's such a bad thing to say I don't understand a particular perspective. I thought the whole point of a site like this was to share our perspectives and then exchange them.

I shared mine. Didn't say that it was going to be popular, or even that it was right, it was just where I was at in regards to Parker. If you thought I was denigrating the other perspective, then either I worded it poorly or you misinterpreted it.

I even asked the question, "At what point does the trust & faith transfer from those who have delivered in the past, to those who are delivering now?"

Because that's really the crux of the issue I think.

We've played 13 games of the season and have an incredibly cohesive, well-functioning game-plan & system that's a decidedly different level to what we've played in previous years. I don't know who your 4 or 5 players are that you think Parker would offer more than, but what I do know is that they'd be more familiar with and experienced in that game-plan & system than Parker, who is yet to play in it.

It seems an incredible risk to assume that Parker is going to be better than those players, and that's what I'm just not able to wrap my head around at the moment. Doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong. I'm just not getting it.

Hope that kind of explains it.
 

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

caesar88 said:
I don't think it's such a bad thing to say I don't understand a particular perspective. I thought the whole point of a site like this was to share our perspectives and then exchange them.

I shared mine. Didn't say that it was going to be popular, or even that it was right, it was just where I was at in regards to Parker. If you thought I was denigrating the other perspective, then either I worded it poorly or you misinterpreted it.

I even asked the question, "At what point does the trust & faith transfer from those who have delivered in the past, to those who are delivering now?"

Because that's really the crux of the issue I think.

We've played 13 games of the season and have an incredibly cohesive, well-functioning game-plan & system that's a decidedly different level to what we've played in previous years. I don't know who your 4 or 5 players are that you think Parker would offer more than, but what I do know is that they'd be more familiar with and experienced in that game-plan & system than Parker, who is yet to play in it.

It seems an incredible risk to assume that Parker is going to be better than those players, and that's what I'm just not able to wrap my head around at the moment. Doesn't mean I'm right and you're wrong. I'm just not getting it.

Hope that kind of explains it.
Click to expand...
I think the “when does transfer of trust and faith happen?” aspect nails it.

We saw it last year with the “are we better without Buddy?” debate - which some took as sacrilegious to even raise.

But AFL is a ruthless game & at some point, it (the transfer of faith) does happen - it’s just that different supporters transfer at different times.

Hell, I was probably the last to transfer faith away from Dyl Stephens (Punts was the first!)
 
Dubai Quacker said:
I think the “when does transfer of trust and faith happen?” aspect nails it.

We saw it last year with the “are we better without Buddy?” debate - which some took as sacrilegious to even raise.

But AFL is a ruthless game & at some point, it (the transfer of faith) does happen - it’s just that different supporters transfer at different times.

Hell, I was probably the last to transfer faith away from Dyl Stephens (Punts was the first!)
Click to expand...
Interesting to see it as a question of faith. I get what you're saying but I just see it in a more clinical kind of way. Can player B do a better job than player A? I still have plenty of attachment to the players and wish them well but in the case of Stephens (as an example) quite early on felt there were shortcomings that would curtail his career. I would have been happy as to be wrong but.... so I was looking for ways to improve him or replace him. All in my mind of course.
Not through any shortcoming the team MAY have moved past Parker. Same deal, improve or replace.
 
Dubai Quacker said:
I think the “when does transfer of trust and faith happen?” aspect nails it.

We saw it last year with the “are we better without Buddy?” debate - which some took as sacrilegious to even raise.
Click to expand...
Definitely one of those people who found it hard to move off Buddy being such a legend of the game but when you see the results this year it is hard to argue.

Buddy accepted his retirement with grace and all class from the Swans as well.

Look, I would love Parker to be a seamless fit if/when he comes back into the side and we keep dominating especially in the middle. We still win by 30-40pts a game regardless. But I can understand the match committee not wanting to change a winning formula as well and not dropping bottom 6 players off a single bad game when Parker is available. We have to respect that.
 
Daniel B said:
Parker would make a great grand final sub IMHO. He has loads of experience, smarts, and could play a role for one quarter as needed. Better than most of our other subs this year.
Click to expand...
Plenty of water to flow under the bridge before that happens. 10 more games. Parker will be back for about 6 of those. Then finals. Don't count the great man out yet.

What a problem to have!!
 

Remove this Banner Ad

Similar threads

robbieando
    • Like
Swans Board Cricket Thread - Ashes 25/26
42 43 44 45 46
Replies
1K
Views
25K
Kennedy Parker
Kennedy Parker
Ticky009
    • Like
Player Watch #26 Riley (Miami) Bice
15 16 17 18 19
Replies
451
Views
27K
caesar88
caesar88
B
    • Like
Aussie Cricket WTC and Ashes 25/26
Replies
17
Views
1K
bedford
B

Remove this Banner Ad

🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.

Back
Top Bottom