I’ve played football at decently high level. One of my coaches was a former national team coach (I did not play at the national team level, haha), I’ve played with and against PL players (Man City, Aston Villa), Bundesliga 2 players, La Liga Segunda and full internationals (Denmark, Norway, England, USA). This was in my 20’s and in some cases, 30’s. I’m sure there are a lot of members of the Caf that have played at a semi-pro level and have played with similar level players. Playing at a decently high level, you can immediately see the stars on the pitch.
Experience is great to have all over the pitch. But there are a few positions where experience is very important (CB, DM, GK, CM to some extent), whereas experience is not as critical in most attacking positions. Your Joao Felix, Kaka, Messi, Ronaldo, Sancho, And Sterling’s of the world should be starting and playing regularly in their teens. And they did. And on any field I’ve played on, technique, movement and creativity win out, doesn’t matter the age.
My point is that we have nothing to lose at this point. We KNOW who Lingard and Mata are. They aren’t going to unlock well organized defenses because we’ve seen it. You’re saying, let’s not play Gomes because he doesn’t have experience. So, the alternative is a loss or tie because the other options are Lingard and Mata. Personally, I’d rather see a lot of Gomes (and by a lot, I mean 1500-3000 minutes) some of it in the PL, some of it in the Cups. Then we will really have an idea how good this kid could be. As an organization, it will allow us to either confirm he’s not good enough, or realize we have an absolute gem.... or even somewhere in the middle. Whatever the outcome, we can then move on as a team and prepare ourselves for the next transfer windows.
So, let me turn the question back on you, what levels have you played at, and more importantly, how does that even factor in to our debate here? I would posit that everyone’s opinion is valid to some extent. Why does playing at a high level enter into it?