[sdb4884]

Has there ever been a more over hyped player internally? his wages are astronomical for his average talent. I'd be astounded if he's still at this club in 3 years time once he gets found out.

 

[Alex99]

He's a squad player and it's all he's ever going to be. He works hard, can do a job at both ends of the pitch, and provides cover for a number of positions. He's got great link up with Rashford, Pogba and Martial, and can add pace to the side if needed. He's a local lad that loves the club, and gives 100% whenever he pulls the shirt on.

He's never going to be world class. He's never going to bag 15 goals and 15 assists in a season. He will, however, sit happily on the bench, playing when called upon to do a job. I'd much rather have Lingard in the squad than spend £25 million on a benchwarmer who may be a bit better. Not every player in a squad has to be a world beater, and I don't think you can ever overstate the importance of having local lads in the side.

 

[Van Piorsing]

If the club officials could move their collective arse and sign Jose his long-awaited wide players then probably we wouldn't have this discussion, today.

 

[Djemba-Djemba]

He's a squad player and it's all he's ever going to be. He works hard, can do a job at both ends of the pitch, and provides cover for a number of positions. He's got great link up with Rashford, Pogba and Martial, and can add pace to the side if needed. He's a local lad that loves the club, and gives 100% whenever he pulls the shirt on.

He's never going to be world class. He's never going to bag 15 goals and 15 assists in a season. He will, however, sit happily on the bench, playing when called upon to do a job. I'd much rather have Lingard in the squad than spend £25 million on a benchwarmer who may be a bit better. Not every player in a squad has to be a world beater, and I don't think you can ever overstate the importance of having local lads in the side.

But even that is just not true.

He almost never scores or assists. He offers no threat whatsoever.

 

[Siorac]

But even that is just not true.

He almost never scores or assists. He offers no threat whatsoever.

His goals per game ratio is almost exactly the same for United as Kieran Richardson's (11 in 83 vs 11 in 81). And Lingard started 61 games compared to Richardson's 44. And Richardson was shite.

 

[Alex99]

But even that is just not true.

He almost never scores or assists. He offers no threat whatsoever.

This is why I didn't say he bags goals or assists. He does a job. He links up very well with our pacier players and facilitates them better than a slower or less hard-working player would be able to.

 

[PepsiCola]

He's a bit shit in all honesty.

No business starting over Martial.

 

[NK86]

He's a squad player and it's all he's ever going to be. He works hard, can do a job at both ends of the pitch, and provides cover for a number of positions. He's got great link up with Rashford, Pogba and Martial, and can add pace to the side if needed. He's a local lad that loves the club, and gives 100% whenever he pulls the shirt on.

He's never going to be world class. He's never going to bag 15 goals and 15 assists in a season. He will, however, sit happily on the bench, playing when called upon to do a job. I'd much rather have Lingard in the squad than spend £25 million on a benchwarmer who may be a bit better. Not every player in a squad has to be a world beater, and I don't think you can ever overstate the importance of having local lads in the side.

What is that importance? People need to realize that the batch of '99 were important not because they were local but because they were brilliant. Lingard is no better than Cleverley in terms of his importance to this side.

 

[El Zoido]

He seems to be popular in the dressing room. Maybe he works hard in training and does as the manager instructs.

I don't get it either, he's so mediocre it's unreal. We've sold better players for peanuts in recent years. Dare I say Januzaj is a better player than Lingard, but we know all about his attitude issues. At least Lingard has the application so we can give him credit for that.

 

[Lawman]

He's a squad player and it's all he's ever going to be. He works hard, can do a job at both ends of the pitch, and provides cover for a number of positions. He's got great link up with Rashford, Pogba and Martial, and can add pace to the side if needed. He's a local lad that loves the club, and gives 100% whenever he pulls the shirt on.

He's never going to be world class. He's never going to bag 15 goals and 15 assists in a season. He will, however, sit happily on the bench, playing when called upon to do a job. I'd much rather have Lingard in the squad than spend £25 million on a benchwarmer who may be a bit better. Not every player in a squad has to be a world beater, and I don't think you can ever overstate the importance of having local lads in the side.

Firstly all our players work hard, secondly 3 goals and 1 assist all year is not doing a job at both ends, thirdly his link up play is average at best and finally he doesn't have better pace than either of Martial or Rashford who he kept on the bench. Lingard is a very poor player, give me a better squad player if we must but get rid of this guy.

 

[Siorac]

This is why I didn't say he bags goals or assists. He does a job. He links up very well with our pacier players and facilitates them better than a slower or less hard-working player would be able to.

'He does a job' and 'links up well' very suspiciously sounds like 'he does feck all that is tangible so we need to find some justification as to why it's not insane to play him'.

Like I said, play him when there's absolutely nothing at stake, use him as backup to rest better players. He should have no other function because his actual contribution to the games is minimal.

 

[Alex99]

What is that importance? People need to realize that the batch of '99 were important not because they were local but because they were brilliant. Lingard is no better than Cleverley in terms of his importance to this side.

Because their passion for the club spreads. If they really aren't up to scratch, obviously you don't keep them for the sake of it, but if they can do a job for you, which Lingard can, you should always be looking to fill out your squad with academy products rather than buying them in.

Firstly all our players work hard, secondly 3 goals and 1 assist all year is not doing a job at both ends, thirdly his link up play is average at best and finally he doesn't have better pace than either of Martial or Rashford who he kept on the bench. Lingard is a very poor player, give me a better squad player if we must but get rid of this guy.

First point simply isn't true. They don't all need to, but you do sometimes need someone who'll get up and down the pitch all game.

Again, never said anything about goals and assists.

His link up play is far better than average.

I never said he has better pace than Martial or Rashford. I said he provided pace.

'He does a job' and 'links up well' very suspiciously sounds like 'he does feck all that is tangible so we need to find some justification as to why it's not insane to play him'.

Like I said, play him when there's absolutely nothing at stake, use him as backup to rest better players. He should have no other function because his actual contribution to the games is minimal.

He's not a figures player. He won't ever be for us. He might rack up more playing more games in a different role elsewhere, but for Manchester United, he's always going to be the sort of player that allows the likes of Pogba, Martial, Rashford and Lukaku to do what they're best at, rather than shine himself.

As I said, he's a squad player. I don't particularly agree starting him last night was the best decision, but he certainly has his uses in a Manchester United side.

 

[drdoityourself]

The statement "he'll sit happily on the bench and never become a hassle" is something I've seen plenty of times in his threads but that's blatantly unproven. He's largely been in the team since he's broken through. Plus reports on contract negotiations stalling were many early last season, and he ended up with a bumper new deal after achieving very little in his career. So I am not convinced he'll accept this bench player role when he'll eventually be dropped by Mourinho.

 

[NK86]

Because their passion for the club spreads. If they really aren't up to scratch, obviously you don't keep them for the sake of it, but if they can do a job for you, which Lingard can, you should always be looking to fill out your squad with academy products rather than buying them in.



First point simply isn't true. They don't all need to, but you do sometimes need someone who'll get up and down the pitch all game.

Again, never said anything about goals and assists.

His link up play is far better than average.

I never said he has better pace than Martial or Rashford. I said he provided pace.



He's not a figures player. He won't ever be for us. He might rack up more playing more games in a different role elsewhere, but for Manchester United, he's always going to be the sort of player that allows the likes of Pogba, Martial, Rashford and Lukaku to do what they're best at, rather than shine himself.

As I said, he's a squad player. I don't particularly agree starting him last night was the best decision, but he certainly has his uses in a Manchester United side.

Sorry but the bold part is not true at all. He cannot be the main guy in any team because he is not prolific. The fact he cannot do it at United, where he has so many talented players around him, shows his lack of ability. He is not a Rooney of 2006-2008 who was sacrificed in a different position to allow Ronaldo to shine. Lingard is being played as part of a front 3. He is NOT enabling other players at all. All he is doing is breaking up our play thus doing the opposite of enabling.

 

[JoaquinJoaquin]

Genuine question here, not flaming just curious to see the responses...

Is Lingard the worst player to make 50 starts for United?

 

[LawCharltonBest]

Genuine question here, not flaming just curious to see the responses...

Is Lingard the worst player to make 50 starts for United?

Him and Blind are pretty close imo

I don't dislike Lingard. He's just a guy who's doing what he's paid to do. A product of the academy too. But he's just so bad. I literally don't understand what he's meant to be good at. Like if he was quick for example, I could say well that's why he plays. But he genuinely doesn't do anything well.

 

[Alex99]

Can't be arsed arguing this anymore. Another in a long line of mental scapegoats

 

[JoaquinJoaquin]

Can't be arsed arguing this anymore. Another in a long line of mental scapegoats

What are you talking about? He is a scapegoat because he isn't performing. How can you even argue that? He has been shockingly bad for a long time now, so he isn't going to get praise. When he plays well he will get praise from most, like Fellaini did last night.

 

[Alex99]

What are you talking about? He is a scapegoat because he isn't performing. How can you even argue that? He has been shockingly bad for a long time now, so he isn't going to get praise. When he plays well he will get praise from most, like Fellaini did last night.

He's scored cup final winning goals and still been slagged off immediately after, so that's not at all true

 

[JoaquinJoaquin]

He's scored cup final winning goals and still been slagged off immediately after, so that's not at all true

Mainly because his general performances have been rubbish throughout his career, and his form now is at the worst its been yet. He hasn't had a good game in a meaningful match in a long, long time. Chelsea was probably his last and he was poor for a long time up until that to. I cannot remember him ever having a run of 3-4 good games in a row ever, and this is a starter for us. You kicked off that he is being made a scapegoat, so do you genuinely believe that his performances have been good?

 

[Ish]

Him and Blind are pretty close imo

I don't dislike Lingard. He's just a guy who's doing what he's paid to do. A product of the academy too. But he's just so bad. I literally don't understand what he's meant to be good at. Like if he was quick for example, I could say well that's why he plays. But he genuinely doesn't do anything well.

You really think Blind's been that bad? I quite like Blind in all honesty.

 

[Alex99]

Mainly because his general performances have been rubbish throughout his career, and his form now is at the worst its been yet. He hasn't had a good game in a meaningful match in a long, long time. Chelsea was probably his last and he was poor for a long time up until that to. I cannot remember him ever having a run of 3-4 good games in a row ever, and this is a starter for us. You kicked off that he is being made a scapegoat, so do you genuinely believe that his performances have been good?

Given we're quite literally one game in it seems really, really fecking weird to be bringing up form. That said, I don't think he did a lot wrong in the run in last season. He wasn't spectacular, but a solid 6/10 in most games.

But which is it? A post ago you were telling me he'd get praise when he played well, but when I point out that he still gets stuck when he does, it's because he doesn't always play well.

 

[LawCharltonBest]

You really think Blind's been that bad? I quite like Blind in all honesty.

Rubbish player. A few nice passes completely mask his inept defensive awareness. If you were sad enough to look back over all the goals we've conceded over the past couple of years, watch Blind and see how many he has been responsible for.

He'll either do one of two things

1) Rush towards an attacking player for absolutely no reason (he doesn't even try to tackle, he literally just runs towards them and stops) which leaves a huge gap in the defense. We've conceded a lot of goals thanks to this gap being exploited.

2) Play an attacking player onside in their build up, when the rest of the defense have pushed up.

More people need to be made aware of his shiteness, because he gets away with it too much.

 

[JoaquinJoaquin]

Given we're quite literally one game in it seems really, really fecking weird to be bringing up form. That said, I don't think he did a lot wrong in the run in last season. He wasn't spectacular, but a solid 6/10 in most games.

But which is it? A post ago you were telling me he'd get praise when he played well, but when I point out that he still gets stuck when he does, it's because he doesn't always play well.

I brought up his form because you can't just forget the past as if it didn't exist. Maybe your happy to have the likes of Lingard starting and for us to sit in mediocrity though, each to their own.

A goal doesn't equal a good performance overall though. Some of the games he scored in he actually didn't have a great game or was brought on late (like the FA Cup final) so that may be why he didn't get alot of praise. When he played well in pre season and the odd game he did well in last season most logical people gave him praise. If he plays well then there is no reason for anyone to criticise, like Fellaini. No one actually wants him to be poor after all. I want him to prove me wrong.

 

[Scorpy]

Rubbish player. A few nice passes completely mask his inept defensive awareness. If you were sad enough to look back over all the goals we've conceded over the past couple of years, watch Blind and see how many he has been responsible for.

He'll either do one of two things

1) Rush towards an attacking player for absolutely no reason (he doesn't even try to tackle, he literally just runs towards them and stops) which leaves a huge gap in the defense. We've conceded a lot of goals thanks to this gap being exploited.

2) Play an attacking player onside in their build up, when the rest of the defense have pushed up.

More people need to be made aware of his shiteness, because he gets away with it too much.

Still remember him doing this against Chelsea at Stamford Bridge a couple of seasons ago and it ended up costing us the three points. Still boggles the mind.

 

[Alex99]

I brought up his form because you can't just forget the past as if it didn't exist. Maybe your happy to have the likes of Lingard starting and for us to sit in mediocrity though, each to their own.

A goal doesn't equal a good performance overall though. Some of the games he scored in he actually didn't have a great game or was brought on late (like the FA Cup final) so that may be why he didn't get alot of praise. When he played well in pre season and the odd game he did well in last season most logical people gave him praise. If he plays well then there is no reason for anyone to criticise, like Fellaini. No one actually wants him to be poor after all. I want him to prove me wrong.

Here lies the difference between scapegoats like Lingard, and other players.

Lingard does something good, something that changes the course of the match, but people still want to nitpick and find things to complain about because if they acknowledge that he's not actually that bad, it doesn't fit their narrative of him being an embarrassment/the worst player to pull on the shirt/a Championship player. It was the same with Fellaini up until very recently, and in the past has been true for the likes of O'Shea, Fletcher and Brown.

Someone else can come on as a late sub and score a match-winning goal and be lauded for their impact. Lingard comes on and does that and he'll get slated for putting in a poor cross or getting tackled.

Someone else can put in a solid-but-not-spectacular 6/10 performance for 4 consecutive matches and no one says anything. Lingard does it and he's not United quality and needs to be shipped out immediately because he's not skinning defenders, scoring screamers, or creating five chances a game.

There's always a "but" with Lingard. "He scored the winner but it's his first goal in a few months." It's a joke. You say you want him to do well, but you don't. Neither do any of the others who keep crying about his inclusion in the team. You're weirdly offended by the sheer audacity he has to not tell Mourinho he's shite and should leave.

I don't disagree with the sentiment that his numbers could be better, but there is a middle-ground to be found between "absolutely useless and doesn't do anything" and "amazing player," and I feel those who go nuts whenever someone dares defend Lingard assume they must think he's the latter.

 

[Djemba-Djemba]

I brought up his form because you can't just forget the past as if it didn't exist. Maybe your happy to have the likes of Lingard starting and for us to sit in mediocrity though, each to their own.

A goal doesn't equal a good performance overall though. Some of the games he scored in he actually didn't have a great game or was brought on late (like the FA Cup final) so that may be why he didn't get alot of praise. When he played well in pre season and the odd game he did well in last season most logical people gave him praise. If he plays well then there is no reason for anyone to criticise, like Fellaini. No one actually wants him to be poor after all. I want him to prove me wrong.

Case in point, he was terrible in the League Cup final against Southampton but scored a very nice goal.

Off the top of my head the only games I can think of post last Christmas where Lingard genuinely played well are Boro away, Chelsea at home and Palace at home on the last day of the season in a dead rubber. The run in last season he was fecking dreadful, he went something like 12 or 13 games without a goal or an assist.

End of the day I don't even blame Lingard. He's obviously not good enough to be playing as much as he does for Utd. This is all on Jose for constantly playing him.

 

[AndyJ1985]

Here lies the difference between scapegoats like Lingard, and other players.

Lingard does something good, something that changes the course of the match, but people still want to nitpick and find things to complain about because if they acknowledge that he's not actually that bad, it doesn't fit their narrative of him being an embarrassment/the worst player to pull on the shirt/a Championship player. It was the same with Fellaini up until very recently, and in the past has been true for the likes of O'Shea, Fletcher and Brown.

Someone else can come on as a late sub and score a match-winning goal and be lauded for their impact. Lingard comes on and does that and he'll get slated for putting in a poor cross or getting tackled.

Someone else can put in a solid-but-not-spectacular 6/10 performance for 4 consecutive matches and no one says anything. Lingard does it and he's not United quality and needs to be shipped out immediately because he's not skinning defenders, scoring screamers, or creating five chances a game.

There's always a "but" with Lingard. "He scored the winner but it's his first goal in a few months." It's a joke. You say you want him to do well, but you don't. Neither do any of the others who keep crying about his inclusion in the team. You're weirdly offended by the sheer audacity he has to not tell Mourinho he's shite and should leave.

I don't disagree with the sentiment that his numbers could be better, but there is a middle-ground to be found between "absolutely useless and doesn't do anything" and "amazing player," and I feel those who go nuts whenever someone dares defend Lingard assume they must think he's the latter.

One good thing every now and then does not equal a good player. Even the worst players pop up with a great goal now and then, doesn't mean they are great players. Overall, 95% of the time, he's a nothing player who wouldn't stand out in teams like West Brom and Stoke. The people who defend him are the ones who come up with nonsense like "big game player" and "he runs around a lot" and frankly it's clutching at straws. We should be aiming far higher than having a player who can run around and turns up in a handful of matches each season.

 

[IrishRedDevil]

A player that runs around a lot, with useless goals/assists output and no top qualities, getting paid 100k for the pleasure.

 

[gza the genius]

He shouldn't be starting but it's not his fault he is, I don't see how people can hold this against him. He's definitely a good squad player to have and I just can't see how people can disagree with that.

 

[Minimalist]

It's pretty obvious by now that Mourinho doesn't actually expect any great quality on the ball from him. He's the worker up there and nothing more (although he might smash one in from distance a few times a season).

The real question becomes is that the sort of player United should be fielding in 80-90% of our games? I accept there will always be matches when you need Phil Neville to shackle Vieira but not every match.

 

[SirScholes]

Just find it funny. Fellaini playing well so we all migrate to the lingard thread for a couple of weeks until fellaini has a poor performance and then he can be the reason we aren't doing well (instead of the truth, that mourinho isn't doing his job better)

its really not hard or funny, in fact I find extremely frustrating, neither are good enough for united, if given a choice id take Fellaini because he has a stand out attribute which is he is tall and a hand full where as lingard has nothing at all.

Lingard is the worst player I've ever seen survive 2 seasons at united

 

[Hawks2008]

I think Jesse might just have more apologists on this site than Danny Welbeck. Local lad syndrome....

 

[Alex99]

I think Jesse might just have more apologists on this site than Danny Welbeck. Local lad syndrome....

I'd have kept Welbeck too if he'd have been happy with being a bit-part player off the bench. I'd much rather rely on academy lads as squad players than fill the spots with moderately expensive signings. Welbz wanted to go though so we let him.

Cleverley was a different case because he was heavily featuring in a position that needed severe strengthening, and seemed to have an overinflated opinion of his own abilities.

 

[Lawman]

Can't be arsed arguing this anymore. Another in a long line of mental scapegoats

Or everyone else has a point and you're wrong. Fair enough.

 

[AndyJ1985]

He shouldn't be starting but it's not his fault he is, I don't see how people can hold this against him. He's definitely a good squad player to have and I just can't see how people can disagree with that.

In what way is he a good squad player to have? If he isn't good enough to be starting games, why is he good enough to come on as a sub? What will he do as a sub that he can't do as a starter? I mean a shit player is a shit player no matter how much or how little they play.

 

[Alex99]

Or everyone else has a point and you're wrong. Fair enough.

I backed down on that quite quickly to respond to someone but nice try though fella.

Weird that people have differences of opinion on something subjective though. Also bizarre that they might not want to devote time and energy into circular arguments. What is the world coming to?

 

[gza the genius]

In what way is he a good squad player to have? If he isn't good enough to be starting games, why is he good enough to come on as a sub? What will he do as a sub that he can't do as a starter? I mean a shit player is a shit player no matter how much or how little they play.

Well we just clearly aren't going to have a backup in every position that's just as good as the starter. A squad player is a squad player for a reason. We don't necessarily need Lingard to come in and make a huge difference. If he does that's great, if not, he provides stability in multiple positions. I do think he has very good link up play and covers well defensively. He's not a difference maker most of the time but that doesn't mean he can't do a job when called on.

 

[Alex99]

In what way is he a good squad player to have? If he isn't good enough to be starting games, why is he good enough to come on as a sub? What will he do as a sub that he can't do as a starter? I mean a shit player is a shit player no matter how much or how little they play.

Have you ever watched or played football? You can't have a squad of 25 starters because you're either constantly rotating the entire team to keep them happy, or you're going to have 14 players pissed off about a lack of football.

You need players that are going to be happy to play a smaller role, and there's few better candidates for that than lads who've grown up supporting the club and come through the academy.

 

[ike]

He shouldn't be starting but it's not his fault he is, I don't see how people can hold this against him. He's definitely a good squad player to have and I just can't see how people can disagree with that.

He get's blamed for starting. He get's the blame for earning 100k per week. He get's blamed for not being Mhykitarian.

What's the guy supposed to do? Say, "Hey Ed... sorry but I just dont' feel comfortable signing a contract for 100k per week. How about we keep it at 70k? And while you're at it. Can you add a rider to my contract to just keep me on the bench?"

No one here is saying he is a world beater. No one here is saying he didn't have a horrible game against Madrid. Certainly he wasn't the only player to not show up yesterday. No matter what he does he will always get a disproportionate amount of hate from certain United "supporters".

Should we have a better option on the wing? Most certainly. That's hardly his fault. We can only blame him for being massively inconsistent. And he's not the only guilty one.