In Defence of Jesse Lingard

Revan said:
I think that Scholesy used only the result when Lingard is on the pitch. For example, if Lingard is taken off while we are not winning, he doesn't count that as a win even if we win later that match.

How do you know that he is a late bloomer? Every young player who has ever come out of United's academy gets called a late bloomer here.

Also, he is 24.
Click to expand...

Think Fergie mentioned it once that lingard will be a late bloomer.
 
Hes an academy product and conducts himself impeccably both on and off the pitch. Yes, he does get some abuse (not nearly as much as the likes of Fellaini and Rooney though)

The "problem" with Lingaard is that hes terribly inconsistent, probably on of the most incositent players i've seen in red. In the very same match he can look like a world beater and 5 minute later look completely clueless.

If Jesse only could find a way to become more consistent, i'm sure he would not get such abuse
 
Not sure why this needs it's own thread. But I'll give my opinion on Lingard again for the purposes of it:

Lingard should be nowhere near a starter for this club if we truly aspire to be challenging for trophies. Too many people say 'he is a squad player' but he isn't, He starts far too many games to be labelled that IMO. Now if he was to be kept for Cup games and sub cameos etc I'd be fine with that. But as a starter his level is mid-table team if not lower (if truth be told). Jose likes people who will work for the team so that is probably why he keeps on getting picked, as what he brings to the table offensively is very limited.

Yes, he is local and loves the club. But so do 1,000's of members on this forum, doesn't mean they are good enough to play for us either.
 
drdoityourself said:
Lingard was first choice since breaking through last season, and he has started more PL games this season than Martial, Micky and Rashford. So you can't really call his role one that's hard being satisfied about. He'll probably drop down the pecking order now that those three are up and running, but so far he's been playing pretty regularly in a role that wouldn't unsettle many players.
You can't compare that with Schneiderlin and Depay, who have barely played this season.
Click to expand...
My point is, once the likes of Rashford, Martial and possibly on loan Pereira and Januzaj after this season, find consistency, Lingard will become a fringe man like Young is now. But unlike Schneiderlin or Depay, he won't angle for a move nor kick up a fuss. Which is invaluable to teams that want to be successful and have depth whilst doing so. Its for that same reason a Fellaini is still here and the superior Fletcher is captaining West Brom. Yet unlike the big Belgian, Lingard has plenty of room for improvement given how in experienced at EPL senior level he is.
 
JoaquinJoaquin said:
Not sure why this needs it's own thread. But I'll give my opinion on Lingard again for the purposes of it:

Lingard should be nowhere near a starter for this club if we truly aspire to be challenging for trophies. Too many people say 'he is a squad player' but he isn't, He starts far too many games to be labelled that IMO. Now if he was to be kept for Cup games and sub cameos etc I'd be fine with that. But as a starter his level is mid-table team if not lower (if truth be told). Jose likes people who will work for the team so that is probably why he keeps on getting picked, as what he brings to the table offensively is very limited.

Yes, he is local and loves the club. But so do 1,000's of members on this forum, doesn't mean they are good enough to play for us either.
Click to expand...

He starts because of the manager. It's not like he chooses to play himself. He is more than good enough to be a part of the squad. A squad player will play a good amount of games. The manager decides the starting XI and it doesn't happen based on nothing.
 
And the notion he 'isn't a squad player because he starts tol many games' is laughable. I suggest the author of the comment goes and find out how many games the likes of Fletcher and Oshra used to start for us. Fact is 9 out of 10 times Lingard could never make our strongest XI. Which is the definition of a squad player. It's fringe playets who in comparison rarely play.
 
prath92 said:
He starts because of the manager. It's not like he chooses to play himself. He is more than good enough to be a part of the squad. A squad player will play a good amount of games. The manager decides the starting XI and it doesn't happen based on nothing.
Click to expand...

Not sure what your point is here. Obviously he plays because the manager picks him?

I said why I feel Jose picks him, Because he works hard which away from home is kind of understandable. Offensively though he doesn't bring much to the table and is far too happy to take the easy option. Some people feel that if they are loyal to Lingard it makes them a 't0p red', a notion I find ridiculous.
 
Red Indian Chief Torn Rubber said:
And the notion he 'isn't a squad player because he starts tol many games' is laughable. I suggest the author of the comment goes and find out how many games the likes of Fletcher and Oshra used to start for us. Fact is 9 out of 10 times Lingard could never make our strongest XI. Which is the definition of a squad player. It's fringe playets who in comparison rarely play.
Click to expand...

It isn't really though is it. He started the last league game over Rashford who is in his best form for some time and Martial who was man of the match the previous game. A 'squad' player wouldn't be starting those games. Fletcher and O'Shea played different positions and there was times Fletcher was a starter for us so he cannot be compared anyways. A utility defender is always going to get a number of starts and that is why O'Shea did. Lingard has started games this season over the likes of Mkhi, Martial and Rashford on a number of occasions so to me that would put him more in the 'starter' role than a squad player.
 
JoaquinJoaquin said:
Not sure what your point is here. Obviously he plays because the manager picks him?

I said why I feel Jose picks him, Because he works hard which away from home is kind of understandable. Offensively though he doesn't bring much to the table and is far too happy to take the easy option. Some people feel that if they are loyal to Lingard it makes them a 't0p red', a notion I find ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Which is the point. If mourinho doesn't think he is good enough offensively he wouldn't play him. Young would also give hardwork and defensive work. But he isn't played either. Plus the way Mourinho plays, it's unlikely he selects players only because they work hard. Clearly he has attacking qualities that mourinho rates.
 
I've no real issues with him. Decent squad player, deserves game time every now and then in his own right and perfectly capable of covering in need of injury or rotation. Would like people to admit when he plays poorly though. If he walked onto the pitch, fouled himself and then walked off, there'd be an element who'd insist he had a decent game because of wanting to appear loyal to the traditions of the club they think a player like him represents.
 
Just gonna forward my post from his performance thread, more relevant here.

"

To me, he is a very valuable squad player who's willing to sit on the bench until called upon. He does a few things well, but nothing especially well. His attributes can make him useful for very particular situations. For example in yesterday's game, we knew that Sunderland will sit back for prolonged periods. Rather than utilising a direct 'beat your man and attack the space' dribbler (ala Martial, who also hasn't been in good form) against a deep sitting stubborn defence, Lingard was used to run around, move the ball here to there - recycle possession for others so to speak. In the second half as things got less congested, it was Martial time.

Against in-form West Brom away, it was his ability and willingness to run in behind (and everywhere else) that made him more useful than a significantly less mobile Mata. If Mhky was fit he'd obvs go in ahead of both - he sort of infuses what both players bring anyway.

He's not winning any Ballon D'ors, but he's a very good squad player that has his uses.

"
 
He is a squad player and a good one at that and some things i have observed from him:
  • He tends to make good runs that are varied and be on the same wave length as others.
  • Scores some very nice goals and sometimes at key moments
  • Lingard can be adaptable
He is good enough for us and probably adds some fun to the dressing room too
 
The issue with some posters is that they're only content with our squad players as long as they stay on the bench. The minute they come on for tactical or rotation reasons they see it as the demise of our great club.

The only exception to that is squad players with potential to become great but not every non-starter will have that level of ability.

Lingard is a decent back up and has a certain tactical usage. Every team needs them and when someone else comes through with better ability he'll be replaced.
 
JoaquinJoaquin said:
Not sure what your point is here. Obviously he plays because the manager picks him?

I said why I feel Jose picks him, Because he works hard which away from home is kind of understandable. Offensively though he doesn't bring much to the table and is far too happy to take the easy option. Some people feel that if they are loyal to Lingard it makes them a 't0p red', a notion I find ridiculous.
Click to expand...
There is nothing like that, he is home-ground player, comes from academy, fans always has soft corner for academy players and its understandable.
 
Massive Spanner said:
My question still stands. I assume you haven't answered because you can't.
Click to expand...

Look, I didn't take the FA cup goal into consideration by itself, I also compared his scoring record for United which is more impressive than Cleverly's (and yes they play different positions but goals are still contributions). Lingard has scored 9 and made 6 assists so far in his short career as a first teamer and thats a bigger contribution than the nothing player Cleverly managed
 
Loublaze said:
Look, I didn't take the FA cup goal into consideration by itself, I also compared his scoring record for United which is more impressive than Cleverly's (and yes they play different positions but goals are still contributions). Lingard has scored 9 and made 6 assists so far in his short career as a first teamer and thats a bigger contribution than the nothing player Cleverly managed
Click to expand...
That is literally the key part here. You can't ignore it or dismiss it when discussing goals. Lingard is expected to do that far more than a deep midfielder is.
 
He does go missing a lot in games. Few times this season you don't really notice he's there so irrelevant to the game he is. Not always but sometimes and more often than anyone else. He has to play really well to look worthy of a place in the starting line-up. If he has an average or a so-so game he can look the worst player on the pitch by a considerable margin.

Already think players younger than him are held to a higher standard. Martial, and Rashford being two. People are comfortable with calling them out for playing badly in a way they're not with Lingard yet, for some reason.
 
JoaquinJoaquin said:
It isn't really though is it. He started the last league game over Rashford who is in his best form for some time and Martial who was man of the match the previous game. A 'squad' player wouldn't be starting those games. Fletcher and O'Shea played different positions and there was times Fletcher was a starter for us so he cannot be compared anyways. A utility defender is always going to get a number of starts and that is why O'Shea did. Lingard has started games this season over the likes of Mkhi, Martial and Rashford on a number of occasions so to me that would put him more in the 'starter' role than a squad player.
Click to expand...
Very inaccurate. Fergie himself used to manage the playing time of his better players all the time. Mourinho himself came out and stated he was managing Martial's game time over the festive period, explaining where he was dropped so soon after that performance vs Boro. Whilst when it comes to Rashford, he too is a squad player so him being rotated with a Lingard doesn't realy indicate much, besides him being the only real alternative to Zlatan as a 9, who literally starts all the time. And we all know Lingard got starts ahead of Mikhitaryan due to his bedding in period. Going forward expect it to happen less when rotation isn't needed. Right now Lingard is in the same category of Rooney, Mata, Rashford, and Martial. They are not bonafide starters. Just like Fletcher and Oshea used to be. Or Sheringham and Solksjaer when Coke and Yorke were at the best. But that doesn't mean their game time will be super limited
 
Massive Spanner said:
That is literally the key part here. You can't ignore it or dismiss it when discussing goals. Lingard is expected to do that far more than a deep midfielder is.
Click to expand...

Ok. Lingard is expected to score goals and provide assists in his role and he has done well in this regard. Did Cleverly match this when considering what his job as a CM entailed? He was poor defensively (better suited further up the field), couldn't control the midfield and his passing range was limited. In other words he was a nothing player. Even Darron Gibson had one thing he was good at- long shots. Lingard has been better at his job overall than Cleverly was at his while at United and you can't really deny that
 
Loublaze said:
Ok. Lingard is expected to score goals and provide assists in his role and he has done well in this regard. Did Cleverly match this when considering what his job as a CM entailed? He was poor defensively (better suited further up the field), couldn't control the midfield and his passing range was limited. In other words he was a nothing player. Even Darron Gibson had one thing he was good at- long shots. Lingard has been better at his job overall than Cleverly was at his while at United and you can't really deny that
Click to expand...
Sure I can, that's why I'm doing that, that's what an internet forum is for. I think you're overrating Lingard and underrating Cleverley. Cleverley was average and Lingard is also average. The difference is Lingard is here right now so people feel inclined to be defensive about him due to the fact that he's an academy product.

People were also incredibly defensive of Cleverley when he was still here, and Welbeck too, but nobody has batted an eyelid since we fecked them off because it's obvious they weren't good enough and were mostly there to fill a void whilst we worked on improving their respective positions. Lingard is the same, for me, he'll be gone when we sort out our wide positions and after a few months nobody will give a toss.
 
Cooksen said:
He is a squad player and a good one at that and some things i have observed from him:
  • He tends to make good runs that are varied and be on the same wave length as others.
  • Scores some very nice goals and sometimes at key moments
  • Lingard can be adaptable
He is good enough for us and probably adds some fun to the dressing room too
Click to expand...

This.
 
Massive Spanner said:
Sure I can, that's why I'm doing that, that's what an internet forum is for. I think you're overrating Lingard and underrating Cleverley. Cleverley was average and Lingard is also average. The difference is Lingard is here right now so people feel inclined to be defensive about him due to the fact that he's an academy product.

People were also incredibly defensive of Cleverley when he was still here, and Welbeck too, but nobody has batted an eyelid since we fecked them off because it's obvious they weren't good enough and were mostly there to fill a void whilst we worked on improving their respective positions. Lingard is the same, for me, he'll be gone when we sort out our wide positions and after a few months nobody will give a toss.
Click to expand...

Cleverley was getting more flak than Lingard is now at the end of his time at OT. Im not underrating him, he was a nothing player. Afraid in the tackle and not aggressive enough to drive the ball forward. A real passenger. You're wrong about Lingard. IMO he'll be around longer than you think. I certainly don't see him being sold this summer at least
 
AndyJ1985 said:
You're not the first person to use the "not every player has to be world class" line, and I don't know where such a comment comes from. I'm well aware that we can't fill the entire squad with world class players, I've never advocated such a transfer strategy. I simply don't think Lingard is good enough for our squad and I believe we can improve on him without buying a world class player.
Click to expand...
That would set back the club around 10-15 million pounds. The money that can be used to fund this world class players we need. And he still counts towards the homegrown player rule.
It's funny how now Fletcher, Park and Phil Neville are now regarded as good players. I swear I still remember posters here saying they're not good enough, not United quality, I think the words that are used back then.
I thought after scoring the winning goal in the FA Cup, a competition who we haven't won in ages, people would get a bit easy on him a bit. I guess I was wrong. But I guess I should've known after the shite O'Shea got, after he: played midfield half a season and got us to second place, scored a winner against Liverpool, and generally being a good professional throughout his time at the club
 
seems a nice lad, respects the club, gives his all, not good enough.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
I can @Mainoldo, and I'll start with Park.

At the same age Park Ji-Sung was about to be signed by Sir Alex after first impressing in the 2002 World Cup (semi-finals) and also making the semis of the CL in 2004-05, where thanks to his strong performances, Park was chosen, along with Andriy Shevchenko, Adriano, Samuel Eto'o, and Ronaldinho as one of the nominees for the 2005 UEFA Best Forward award.

Fletcher at aged 24, (season In the 2008–09 season) was our standout midfielder and first choice. The following season he was named in the PFA Premier League Team of the Year.

Phil Neville was first choice United left back by the time he was the same age as Jesse. Jesse is definitely closest to Phil, but I don't see Jesse ever being first choice so in that sense he'll never reach the heights of Phil.
Click to expand...
Players developed at different rates. Their role in the United squad is similar though, squad players for United. Fletcher has probably one season where he could claim to be first choice players, but for the most of his career, he's a squad player.
 
Loublaze said:
Cleverley was getting more flak than Lingard is now at the end of his time at OT. Im not underrating him, he was a nothing player. Afraid in the tackle and not aggressive enough to drive the ball forward. A real passenger. You're wrong about Lingard. IMO he'll be around longer than you think. I certainly don't see him being sold this summer at least
Click to expand...
Cleverley was a protected resource on Caf for some time. I might have been the first one to heavily criticize him (giving him a grade of 0/10 after some match) and people attacked me from all the flanks. Interestingly, the same defense that is used for Lingard was used for Cleverley: 'he is a good squad player', 'you cannot have a squad full of world class player', 'players like Fletcher, Park and O'Shea contributed here a lot' and 'he is a late bloomer'.

Now, Lingard is better than Cleverley and thanks the Lord, he is starting less than him, but the defense on both of them has been pretty much identical. Then after some time, Caf decided that he's shite. If Lingard continues this way, the same thing will happen for him.
 
Massive Spanner said:
Yeah at the end of his time at OT.
Well, I'm not, because I've predicted something I think will happen. I'll be wrong if it doesn't happen.
Click to expand...

I followed that up by stating that its my opinion.

Revan said:
Cleverley was a protected resource on Caf for some time. I might have been the first one to heavily criticize him (giving him a grade of 0/10 after some match) and people attacked me from all the flanks. Interestingly, the same defense that is used for Lingard was used for Cleverley: 'he is a good squad player', 'you cannot have a squad full of world class player', 'players like Fletcher, Park and O'Shea contributed here a lot' and 'he is a late bloomer'.

Now, Lingard is better than Cleverley and thanks the Lord, he is starting less than him, but the defense on both of them has been pretty much identical. Then after some time, Caf decided that he's shite. If Lingard continues this way, the same thing will happen for him.
Click to expand...

In what way? If he continues in the way he's played this season he'll be here for longer than you think. 3 goals and 3 assists this season and on track to match or best his achievements last season (6 goals and 3 assists). Thats not a bad return for a backup player and you sir can't deny that
 
I've picked up the impression that Zlatan seems to like him in the team, no ego, does what he's told gives him service.

That's a good enough reason to play him.
 
Loublaze said:
In what way? If he continues in the way he's played this season he'll be here for longer than you think. 3 goals and 3 assists this season and on track to match or best his achievements last season (6 goals and 3 assists). Thats not a bad return for a backup player and you sir can't deny that
Click to expand...

First, he hasn't been a backup player, he has been starting as much if not more than Martial, Rashford, Mata and Mkhitaryan.
Second, the output is not that bad to be fair, but he's general all round play is.
Third, young players like Rashford and Martial will likely improve, we will likely get back Pereira (there is talk that it might happen right now), we might sign some other winger etc etc (in fact, likely all these will happen), and Lingard's time here might be over. He might be good enough for a team challenging for the fourth spot, but is he good enough for a team challenging for the league and the title?!
 
Revan said:
First, he hasn't been a backup player, he has been starting as much if not more than Martial, Rashford, Mata and Mkhitaryan.
Second, the output is not that bad to be fair, but he's general all round play is.
Third, young players like Rashford and Martial will likely improve, we will likely get back Pereira (there is talk that it might happen right now), we might sign some other winger etc etc (in fact, likely all these will happen), and Lingard's time here might be over. He might be good enough for a team challenging for the fourth spot, but is he good enough for a team challenging for the league and the title?!
Click to expand...

What makes people here think Lingard can't improve as well? You know this is only his second season as a first team player right? Fergie did predict that he'd be a late bloomer.

“Jesse Lingard is going to be some player,” he said three years ago.


“He is 19, came through our youth system and is built like Jean Tigana was for France.


“But he never got into the limelight there until he was about 24, and I think that will be the same with Lingard.


“He will become a player when he’s 22 or so. As an attacking midfielder he has got a really good talent. I think he will be a player we have high hopes for, definitely.”

Is it because the other players you mention are younger and more naturally gifted? Lingard is 24. Still young. Not a kid but young with very little experience and lots of room for improvement, far from his peak potential. Pereira is a real talent but he has all to prove when he comes back as well. Both LVG and Mourinho started Lingard in their first competitive games in charge. With LVG maybe it was forced by the injury crisis but he trusted him to start anyway- but then Blackett started too but he did ok. In Mourinho's case it was the comm shield against Leicester which we all know is a glorified friendly but no doubt the game itself is always played with a competitive spirit and the teams usually reflect who we'll see starting in the league the following week. If not for being injured after that game Lingard might've been involved in the first few games of the season. Mourinho started him the minute he returned from injury without match fitness against City- a mistake in hindsight but you can see that the manager trusts him. Even after the criticism both he and Mkhitaryan took after that game from Mourinho, Lingard was still restored to the starting lineup against Leicester (after missing the defeat to Watford) and he scored against them again.

Lingard would be a valuable squad player to any of the top 6 teams. I can see Klopp working with him. They have Wijnaldum who isn't much better than Lingard. In fact Lingard has shown more end product with his lesser minutes on the field than Wijnaldum who is a regular and apparently good enough for a team chasing for the title. I can also see Pochettino putting him to good use and Wenger would probably look at Lingard's link up play as a positive. We also have Conte who has done wonders with Victor Moses when others gave up. If LVG, Mourinho, Fergie and the England NT selectors all see something in Lingard I wonder why you'd automatically assume the other top managers wouldn't either. Btw you can say the same thing about my opinion but surely its not a forgone conclusion that he wouldn't get into any of those sides
 
Last edited:
Wijnaldum is playing as a midfielder, backing up a front four. Lingard is playing in front three. Comparing their productivity is unfair.
 
You've simply got to have squad players who are (a) happy to be part of a rotational system and (b) have enough quality to help win games when they play. Fergie was the master of building such squads, which is why he won so many league titles.

Lingard is a great squad player to have. Incredible work rate, bleeds Utd, and has enough quality going forward to make a difference. Blind is that same caliber of squad player imo.
 
simonhch said:
You've simply got to have squad players who are (a) happy to be part of a rotational system and (b) have enough quality to help win games when they play. Fergie was the master of building such squads, which is why he won so many league titles.

Lingard is a great squad player to have. Incredible work rate, bleeds Utd, and has enough quality going forward to make a difference. Blind is that same caliber of squad player imo.
Click to expand...

I agree. Its when he starts ahead of someone like Mata that annoys me
 
I thought he played pretty well for England - even though Malta and Slovenia are hardly world-beaters. Frustrating that he doesn't play as well for us.
 
There's a bit of the Welbeck's about him - hard worker, good professional, splits opinion.

I personally think that he lacks the quality to be a long term starter here, but you need played like him in your squad over a season. The likes of Phil Neville, Nicky Butt, Wes Brown and John O'Shea all did well here during a sustained period of success.

All that said, its frustrating at time when he starts ahead of other seemingly more talented players who offer more of a threat going forward.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.