14
This is it:
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.
Lingard has a similar level of versatility and already has a better statistical output in terms of goals and assists than Ashley.
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.
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.
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.
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. You must know welbeck pretty well yourself so.'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'?
Why do you keep referring to him as Ashley? Do you know him personally?
I wish.
Neither should be playing full back next season but aren't you the one who who were talking about being 'similar level of versatility'.
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.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.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'?
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 
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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.
Finally!! Thank you! I have been asking this because I also want to hear your opinion.
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
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Yeah it says a lot when ppl have to get this creative.Proper footballer
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.Bizarre isn't it. Well Rio said it so y'know.....Proper footballer
