[amolbhatia50k]

That's true but to critiscize lingard because we have no top players is just unfair on him. To me, he is a slightly better version of welbeck (he is a better finisher), yet people cry about how welbeck would have helped us and at the same time go on about how bang average lingard is when he plays.

This is it:

I agree with your thinking - he most certainly can become Park like in his importance to our squad - but the problem is that our squad doesn't have a Rooney/Ronaldo atm. Which places a lot of responsibility on players like Lingard to "carry the load" etc. Hence the disappointment.

I think that people largely don't have anything against Lingard, it's just that seeing someone "who can be our Park" starting week in week out without the flair and class required to make up for the lack thereof in that type of player, frustrates people.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Also, I find the claim that he is better than Welbeck very debatable. I'm someone who finds the whole Welbeck drama utterly tedious, but he was definitely a better player IMO than Lingard presently is. He had (and still has) much greater ability on the ball. Lingard is younger so let's see how he develops over the next couple of years.

 

[DWelbz19]

I've read some people here said Lingard is similar but better option than Ashley. It seems that these people are underestimating what Ashley did last season. Both are different players, playing style and quality. If Lingard can pull out the same performance what Ashley did last season from now then he's currently better option but he's not. Even at his age, Ashley was still much better player than Lingard at Aston Villa.

Lingard's playing style is much more effective in the middle not winger. The only reason why he can play as a winger because of his pace.

Lingard has a similar level of versatility and already has a better statistical output in terms of goals and assists than Ashley.

 

[Ish]

Also, I find the claim that he is better than Welbeck very debatable. I'm someone who finds the whole Welbeck drama utterly tedious, but he was definitely a better player IMO than Lingard presently is. He had (and still has) much greater ability on the ball. Lingard is younger so let's see how he develops over the next couple of years.

Yeah it is debatable indeed. I'd lean towards Welbeck as well but as you mentioned - he's also had a few more years to develop.

That's true but to critiscize lingard because we have no top players is just unfair on him. To me, he is a slightly better version of welbeck (he is a better finisher), yet people cry about how welbeck would have helped us and at the same time go on about how bang average lingard is when he plays.

It's not as simple as that though. People aren't criticizing Lingard because we lack top players. They're criticizing him because he's not a top player. After all, he's playing for Manchester United, it's expected that they're special players. Yet, besides Martial, non of the others have really wowed.

Compounding matters are that Lingard plays in a position where it's almost a prerequisite to be very creative/attacking. But yeah, I'm hoping he kicks on and makes it at United - but there's going to be a few variables which will need to be in his favor as well.

 

[Mike09]

Lingard has a similar level of versatility and already has a better statistical output in terms of goals and assists than Ashley.

What kind of level of versatility are you talking about? Ashley is a much better full back than Lingard. Ashley is a much better winger than Lingard. If you are talking about goals and assists Ashley had scored more goals and assists when he was at the same age. In term of recent performance I am sure we are all agree that Ashley last season was way better than Lingard this season. Both players are completely different players and playing style. One who likes to dribble, beat players and launch cross which is more typical of winger. And the other who likes to make through pass and moving around which is typical of central attacking mid. I don't see Lingard as a similar player with him, neither a better option except for his age only.

If we want to use a comparison, it should be Mata not Ashley. Mata and Lingard spent most of the time as a right winger. But their best position is no 10. Both are limit players but Lingard has pace while Mata has technique.

 

[DWelbz19]

'Much better fullback' - neither should ever be playing there next season.

As for being a better winger, again that's debatable. Young can beat his man and put endless crosses in but nothing ever amounts. Lingard is far more intelligent in his positioning, and as I said has already surpassed Young (who was apparently one of our best attackers last year) in goals and assists. Who cares about what Young was doing 'at his age'? I'm comparing them at this club, I don't care what Young was doing at Villa or wherever he was. And no, I don't agree that Young's performances last season were better than what Lingard has delivered this year.

Why do you keep referring to him as Ashley? Do you know him personally?

 

[dirkey]

'Much better fullback' - neither should ever be playing there next season.

As for being a better winger, again that's debatable. Young can beat his man and put endless crosses in but nothing ever amounts. Lingard is far more intelligent in his positioning, and as I said has already surpassed Young (who was apparently one of our best attackers last year) in goals and assists. Who cares about what Young was doing 'at his age'? I'm comparing them at this club, I don't care what Young was doing at Villa or wherever he was. And no, I don't agree that Young's performances last season were better than what Lingard has delivered this year.

Why do you keep referring to him as Ashley? Do you know him personally?

You must know welbeck pretty well yourself so.

 

[OzKangarooney]

https://www.instagram.com/p/BDVgJBMQcmW/

Jessie with Jaap, P.Neville and Barthez when he was young

 

[DWelbz19]

You must know welbeck pretty well yourself so.

I wish.

 

[Mike09]

'Much better fullback' - neither should ever be playing there next season.

Neither should be playing full back next season but aren't you the one who who were talking about being 'similar level of versatility'.

As for being a better winger, again that's debatable. Young can beat his man and put endless crosses in but nothing ever amounts.
Lingard is far more intelligent in his positioning,

Hahahha, You made me laugh I'm 100% sure I have post this twice that Lingard is a proper footballer because he uses his brain. His movement and positioning are good and that's why his best position is in the middle not as a winger. And Ashley is a winger. So like I already said it's an invalid comparison to see which one is better. Both of them are different players, playing style and even their best position is different.

and as I said has already surpassed Young (who was apparently one of our best attackers last year) in goals and assists. Who cares about what Young was doing 'at his age'? I'm comparing them at this club, I don't care what Young was doing at Villa or wherever he was. And no, I don't agree that Young's performances last season were better than what Lingard has delivered this year.

It's true, I don't wanna talk about 'at his age' either. But if I didn't mention it I know people will make an excuse of 23 or 24 years old Lingard is more favorable. If you don't like it then we can drop it.
However I like how you are mentioning goals and (4?) assists, and being someone who used to like and supported Welbeck myself and you probably as well in my opinion goals and assists aren't the only things you can judge in football. Judging player's performance based on goals and assists is a lame and both of them aren't even striker. And it's shocking as well that the fact if you think Lingard this year is better than Ashley's performance last season. If you only watch the goals instead of watching what they have done in full 90 minutes so far then I'm not surprised.

Why do you keep referring to him as Ashley? Do you know him personally?

Why would you care about this? Is that an issue for you? One of the silliest question I've ever heard . I like to call Ashley as an Ashley or Young. I usually call Adnan as Adnan or Januzaj. I even call Bastian as Basti or Schweinsteiger or sometime Schweini. And I am sure so many United fans out there have done the same. You also did refer him as 'Ashley' on your first post

 

[Godfather]

Also, I find the claim that he is better than Welbeck very debatable. I'm someone who finds the whole Welbeck drama utterly tedious, but he was definitely a better player IMO than Lingard presently is. He had (and still has) much greater ability on the ball. Lingard is younger so let's see how he develops over the next couple of years.

It's not debatable, it's just not true. Jesse is still a very average player. Who knows what his ceiling is. Can't see him becoming a regular starter for us in the future.

 

[Robbie Boy]

I'm as far from a Welbeck fan as there is but yes, he's definitely better than Lingard. I wouldn't even say it's 'debatable' in the slightest.

 

[Robbie Boy]

@Mike09 to be fair, you started calling him a 'proper footballer' the same time that Tweet from Rio calling him the exact same thing was posted.

 

[Mike09]

@Mike09 to be fair, you started calling him a 'proper footballer' the same time that Tweet from Rio calling him the exact same thing was posted.

Yea but it's true that he is a proper one.

 

[Robbie Boy]

Yea but it's true that he is a proper one.

I don't really know what a 'proper footballer' is so I'm unfortunately not in a position to comment.

 

[Mike09]

I don't really know what a 'proper footballer' is so I'm unfortunately not in a position to comment.

I don't see the point you mentioned me and commented about my 'proper footballer' post either.

 

[Robbie Boy]

I don't see the point you mentioned me and commented about my 'proper footballer' post either.

You have brought it up a few times and I was merely pointing out that you said it after the Rio tweet. So you're just saying what Rio said but trying to make out it's your point, which it isn't.

 

[Mike09]

You have brought it up a few times and I was merely pointing out that you said it after the Rio tweet. So you're just saying what Rio said but trying to make out it's your point, which it isn't.

I'm sure I did say 'twice' not 'a few times'. Which I did. And for someone who doesn't know what a 'proper footballer' is, I can see that you misunderstood my post from the beginning.

 

[Robbie Boy]

I'm sure I did say 'twice' not 'a few times'. Which I did. And for someone who doesn't know what a 'proper footballer', I can see that you misunderstood my post from the beginning.

I think I may have been taking the piss our of you with the not understanding a 'proper footballer' thing. Like, it's some phrase that Rio used, wow. You have used it a few times now and it looks as though you're attempting to claim that it's your opinion when in fact you said it pretty much straight after the Rio tweet. You could have at least referred to the tweet.

 

[Mike09]

I think I may have been taking the piss our of you with the not understanding a 'proper footballer' thing. Like, it's some phrase that Rio used, wow. You have used it a few times now and it looks as though you're attempting to claim that it's your opinion when in fact you said it pretty much straight after the Rio tweet. You could have at least referred to the tweet.

So you know what is a 'proper footballer'? Mind explain to me what is a proper footballer? If you can give me your view of that 'proper footballer'. I'll give you the reason why I called Lingard as a 'proper footballer' which I already did a few times before this post and it's not based on Rio Ferdinand's post. And to be honest I've been posting 'that reason' in Lingard's red cafe forum so many times before Rio's tweet.

 

[Robbie Boy]

So you know what is a 'proper footballer'? Mind explain to me what is a proper footballer? If you can give me your view of that 'proper footballer'. I'll give you the reason why I called Lingard as a 'proper footballer' which I already did a few times before this post and it's not based on Rio Ferdinand's post. And to be honest I've been posting 'that reason' in Lingard's red cafe forum so many times before Rio's tweet.

Well a quick search of proper footballer in this thread comes up with the Rio tweet and you saying it a day later. It's clearly a phrase that's open to interpitaton to be honest.

 

[Mike09]

Well a quick search of proper footballer in this thread comes up with the Rio tweet and you saying it a day later. It's clearly a phrase that's open to interpitaton to be honest.

Come on man. That's not the answer for my question. Alright let's just make it simple. Do you know what is a 'proper footballer'? All I want is yes or no. If you said yes then please explain it to me (either in one sentence or longer version I don't mind).
If you don't answer it (yes or no) then I can't explain to you the reason why I called Lingard as a 'proper footballer' because you don't read people post properly. And to be honest I might need to make this clear again it's not based on Rio's tweet.

 

[Robbie Boy]

Come on man. That's not the answer for my question. Alright let's just make it simple. Do you know what is a 'proper footballer'? All I want is yes or no. If you said yes then please explain it to me (either in one sentence or longer version I don't mind).
If you don't answer it (yes or no) then I can't explain to you the reason why I called Lingard as a 'proper footballer' because you don't read people post properly. And to be honest I might need to make this clear again it's not based on Rio's tweet.

There's no such phrase.

 

[Mike09]

There's no such phrase.

Do you even read? Can you answer it please? Look! I even said 'please'. I don't think it's hard to say yes or no. I've been explain that 'proper footballer' in my definition on Lingard's forum on red cafe many times.

 

[Robbie Boy]

Do you even read? Can you answer it please? Look! I even said 'please'. I don't think it's hard to say yes or no. I've been explain that 'proper footballer' in my definition on Lingard's forum on red cafe many times.

I answered. There's no definition. It's open to interpretation. I could say Bale is a proper player and someone else could say Ozil is a proper player, or Thiago Silva etc. It's a throwaway phrase that I've heard (not frequently) over the years that doesn't relate to any particular genre / style of player. The person that utters the phrase is obviously of the opinion that the player they describe as such, is the correct definition.

Like when you copied Rio, sorry, I mean, like you're of the opinion that Lingard is a 'proper player'. It means feck all but you are trying to state in unequivocal terms, that your definition is correct. You think Lingard is a 'proper footballer' because he's intelligent etc; that's fab and all but means nothing. It's merely your opinion and the phrase holds no weight whatsoever.

 

[Mike09]

I answered. There's no definition. It's open to interpretation. I could say Bale is a proper player and someone else could say Ozil is a proper player, or Thiago Silva etc. It's a throwaway phrase that I've heard (not frequently) over the years that doesn't relate to any particular genre / style of player. The person that utters the phrase is obviously of the opinion that the player they describe as such, is the correct definition.

Like when you copied Rio, sorry, I mean, like you're of the opinion that Lingard is a 'proper player'. It means feck all but you are trying to state in unequivocal terms, that your definition is correct. You think Lingard is a 'proper footballer' because he's intelligent etc; that's fab and all but means nothing. It's merely your opinion and the phrase holds no weight whatsoever.

Finally!! Thank you! I have been asking this because I also want to hear your opinion.

Alright so now I'll explain mine. You think there is no definition, but IMO there is definition. My definition of proper footballer is a footballer who knows the basic, I am not talking about being able to pass the ball or something because that is obvious stuff that footballer needs to have. That basic means using brain when playing (which is intelligent) and don't stay static and always moving around but not being headless chicken. And my view on Lingard has never change. As a proof:

His movement off and on the ball is his biggest asset. He did very well at his role today. Lingard's movement, work rate and pace + Mata's technique and pass. I think it will be a very good number 10 if we can combine them .

Definitely in the middle. He's a good proper footballer, what I meant by proper footballer means he uses his brain. He knows when to pass the ball, likes to make forward through pass and his movement on and off the ball is very good. On top of that for bonus he has pace, high work rate and from our own academy which is free. I don't think he should be our starter but he's very decent to have in squad. He doesn't beat players often and doesn't do crossing and his crossing is not good anyway so he's not a winger to me.

I'm 100% sure I have post this twice that Lingard is a proper footballer because he uses his brain. His movement and positioning are good and that's why his best position is in the middle not as a winger. And Ashley is a winger. So like I already said it's an invalid comparison to see which one is better. Both of them are different players, playing style and even their best position is different.

As the one before Rio's tweet: I can't provide it because they were in newbie forum and full member have no access to it. But you should get what I meant of my definition of 'proper footballer'. I don't copy Rio's tweet without understand the meaning of being 'proper footballer'. Just because I interpreted it in the same word as Rio (proper footballer) because IMO it's a better word to describe player but that doesn't mean I copy him because I have my own definition as a proper footballer and it's different with what Rio tweeted. For example people called Smalling as a beast this season after Rio said it, and not many people mentioned Rio's comment. They have their own definition of beast on Smalling.

 

[Robbie Boy]

Finally!! Thank you! I have been asking this because I also want to hear your opinion.

Alright so now I'll explain mine. You think there is no definition, but IMO there is definition. My definition of proper footballer is a footballer who knows the basic, I am not talking about being able to pass the ball or something because that is obvious stuff that footballer needs to have. That basic means using brain when playing (which is intelligent) and don't stay static and always moving around but not being headless chicken. And my view on Lingard has never change. As a proof:

As the one before Rio's tweet: I can't provide it because they were in newbie forum and full member have no access to it. But you should get what I meant of my definition of 'proper footballer'. I don't copy Rio's tweet without understand the meaning of being 'proper footballer'. Just because I interpreted it in the same word as Rio (proper footballer) because IMO it's a better word to describe player but that doesn't mean I copy him because I have my own definition as a proper footballer and it's different with what Rio tweeted. For example people called Smalling as a beast this season after Rio said it, and not many people mentioned Rio's comment. They have their own definition of beast on Smalling.

Well again, that's just your opinion on the phrase.

 

[Mike09]

Well again, that's just your opinion on the phrase.

But it is true. Rio did say about movement but only Lingard's off movement. I described and defined it differently and much more detail. I can't see that as a copy. That's the point is.

 

[Robbie Boy]

But it is true. Rio did say about movement but only Lingard's off movement. I described and defined it differently and much more detail. I can't see that as a copy. That's the point is.

But another persons interpretation of a 'proper footballer' might be pace and muscle like Bale. The phrase hasn't got any clear definition.

Lingard certainly isn't everyone's cup of tea so I can't see too many agreeing with the assertion that he's a 'proper footballer'. I would personally say he's a tidy hardworking player. To some, that might mean a limited player who isn't good enough while to others, it might be the perfect squad player.

 

[Charlie Foley]

My definition of 'proper footballer' would be someone who has a natural understanding of the game, and just 'gets' positioning, timing etc on a field. As opposed to someone who is merely a tremendous athlete but with no footballing brain. Obviously, you need technique too, but I think it's possible yo have all the technique and not be a 'proper footballer', for example those guys who are great at keepy ups but shite in a match. Awareness, timing, positioning are all key components of what I would see as a 'proper footballer', on top of the obvious technique.

Examples I would give are Scholes, Muller, Redondo as a less mainstream pick maybe. Don't think you have to be at that level of course, there are 'proper footballers' at Sunday League level.
Edit: I appreciate no one asked, just thought I'd join in

 

[Mike09]

But another persons interpretation of a 'proper footballer' might be pace and muscle like Bale. The phrase hasn't got any clear definition.

Lingard certainly isn't everyone's cup of tea so I can't see too many agreeing with the assertion that he's a 'proper footballer'. I would personally say he's a tidy hardworking player. To some, that might mean a limited player who isn't good enough while to others, it might be the perfect squad player.

I don't see being a proper footballer needs to have pace and muscle, it doesn't make any sense. Being a proper striker isn't just about goals but also intelligent and movement. Being a proper keeper isn't just about great saves or reflex but also need to be smart and good in his positioning, Carrick and Scholes aren't exactly pacey or muscle but they are a proper footballer because they use their brain and knows what they are doing. Park Ji Sung is a proper professional footballer, Rio said being a proper defender needs to defend with his brain instead of body.

Being limited because of they lack the technical and physical gift but that's not about being a proper footballer. Being top class or world class footballer is different with being just a proper footballer.

 

[Charlie Foley]

Someone who's not a 'proper footballer' would be Theo Walcott.

 

[Mike09]

Someone who's not a 'proper footballer' would be Theo Walcott.

Exactly. And he has so much pace but not intelligent enough to be a proper footballer.

 

[dirkey]

Exactly. And he has so much pace but not intelligent enough to be a proper footballer.

I believe you're missing the poster's point completely. You're defining what a proper footballer is, by your definition. But, you're also stating that this is in fact a definitive definition of the term, proper footballer. But there simply isn't one. He used pacy and muscular to illustrate his point that other people could use that definition to define proper footballer.

Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it's incorrect. Just like if someone doesn't agree with your definition of a proper footballer doesn't mean it's incorrect. As he stated, correctly in my opinion, it's basically a throwaway phrase that can mean anything.

 

[Mike09]

I believe you're missing the poster's point completely. You're defining what a proper footballer is, by your definition. But, you're also stating that this is in fact a definitive definition of the term, proper footballer. But there simply isn't one. He used pacy and muscular to illustrate his point that other people could use that definition to define proper footballer.

Just because you don't agree with it doesn't mean it's incorrect. Just like if someone doesn't agree with your definition of a proper footballer doesn't mean it's incorrect. As he stated, correctly in my opinion, it's basically a throwaway phrase that can mean anything.

Not really, you might need to read the point of his and my discussion at first post. That's what I have been saying because he missed my point from the start. Rio has his own define of being a proper footballer on Lingard. And I have my own define of being a proper footballer on Lingard. But he defined it as me copying Rio. I don't see it as a copy if they both have different explanation.

 

[Robbie Boy]

I don't see being a proper footballer needs to have pace and muscle, it doesn't make any sense. Being a proper striker isn't just about goals but also intelligent and movement. Being a proper keeper isn't just about great saves or reflex but also need to be smart and good in his positioning, Carrick and Scholes aren't exactly pacey or muscle but they are a proper footballer because they use their brain and knows what they are doing. Park Ji Sung is a proper professional footballer, Rio said being a proper defender needs to defend with his brain instead of body.

Being limited because of they lack the technical and physical gift but that's not about being a proper footballer. Being top class or world class footballer is different with being just a proper footballer.

Huh? You're completely missing the point here. I didn't say having pace and power makes a 'proper footballer'. My point is that you've amassed a set of attributes that you associate with Lingard and used those attributes to describe a 'proper footballer'. That's merely your definition and someone else's definition might mean something completely different.

 

[amolbhatia50k]

Proper footballer

 

[Godfather]

Proper footballer

Yeah it says a lot when ppl have to get this creative.

 

[izec]

this thread. Can we leave him alone and get on with it? For this season he is fine, Januzaj and Depay dont deserve to start, they got their chances and failed. He isnt the most talented player ever, but he does a job currently and looks like he gives a shit at least.

 

[Robbie Boy]

Proper footballer

Bizarre isn't it. Well Rio said it so y'know.....