Cleverley for me, started off fantastically well. He was highly rated and some fans argued why buy Sneijder when we have Cleverley. Then the cnut Kevin Davies happened. He still was good enough in our premier league winning campaign. Worked well with Carrick. Started against Real Madrid and held his own against the likes of Xabi Alonso.
Better player: Lingard or Cleverley
- Thread starter Eddy_JukeZ
- Start date
-
In the latest episode of the United Hour Podcast, Nik and Imran hold a long overdue conversation about United's awful league form with 1 win in 7. They discuss a disappointing draw at Bournemouth, a not so disappointing draw against Liverpool and a crushing defeat at Chelsea - Is time nearly over for Erik Ten Hag?
Then in a special second half of the pod, Nik welcomes Natalie ( https://twitter.com/natalie_17) to discuss the fortunes of Manchester United Women as they booked a place in the FA Cup Final after a historic first ever win vs. Chelsea.
Lingard when he was at the top of his game about 2 years ago did things Cleverley only could Dream of.
I used to think Cleverley really had it in him to become a key player for us. I never felt that way about Lingard. So, while Lingard obviously had the better United career and is the better player today, Cleverley was the better talent, in my opinion.
I would say Lingard's movement, vision, pace and dribbling are all better than Cleverley's tbf. I'm sure there are things Cleverley is better at too, although I couldn't name them. Couldn't pick him out of a lineup at all actually, the old invisible man!I didn't say Cleverley was easily better, I said they are both Watford-bench-warming standard. There is objectively nothing that Lingard is better at on a football pitch than Cleverley.
When we're done with this utterly redundant poll can the next one be to see if James is less shit than Obertan?
Cleverley played at a time when expectations were MUCH higher than for the entirety of Lingard's career. Hence the completely baseless "Lingard and it's not even close" comments in this thread: back in Cleverley's time we simply expected far more from our players.
Did we? I love John O'Shea for example but he was hardly a great player, just came in and reliably filled whatever spot we needed while the superstars did the work.
On balance though Lingard has an assist/game ratio of 0.07 in the Prem, compared to Cleverley's 0.06, and Cleverley plays much deeper. Also I don't have the numbers but I would bet Lingard's dispossessed stats and ball retention stats are atrocious compared to Cleverley's.I would say Lingard's movement, vision, pace and dribbling are all better than Cleverley's tbf. I'm sure there are things Cleverley is better at too, although I couldn't name them. Couldn't pick him out of a lineup at all actually, the old invisible man!
Cleverly comfortably.
He wasn’t a bad player just lost his confidence entirely and never got it back. We won the league with him as a starter.
He wasn’t a bad player just lost his confidence entirely and never got it back. We won the league with him as a starter.
Lingardinho, obviously.
There we go, some positives then for Clevz. Although I think he takes free kicks and corners sometimes so it wouldn't surprise me if the majority of his assists were from dead balls.
I was looking forward to seeing how Cleverley would develop and there were periods of time where he looked good, but just didn't seem to have that extra bit to cement his place for the long term. I do agree with @Siorac 's assessment of us demanding more from our players back in Cleverley's time, so I'm narrowly going to go for him. I think it's also easier for Lingard to look better stats wise (goals and assists) since he plays in a position that is more favourable to that. I think Cleverley's position is a harder one to master, is a lot more demanding and is also harder to look great in.
I'm going with a narrow vote for Cleverley, but I wouldn't say there's an easy outright winner. There are good arguments for both. Both had decent/good spells for us.
I'm going with a narrow vote for Cleverley, but I wouldn't say there's an easy outright winner. There are good arguments for both. Both had decent/good spells for us.
Pass.
The two players I have hated watching the most throughout my 26 years of watching united. Utter shocking. You could probably add Phil Jones and Danny Welbeck to that list too. How they get regular games is a joke.
The fact that Welbeck and Cleverly are now relegated proves my point even more. They were never united quality yet have premier league medals and started regularly what a joke! Lingard is championship level he wouldn’t even look good there either to be honest.
The fact that Welbeck and Cleverly are now relegated proves my point even more. They were never united quality yet have premier league medals and started regularly what a joke! Lingard is championship level he wouldn’t even look good there either to be honest.
Overall, I'd say Lingard is more talented.
If I'm the manager of a good team and need a substitute/3rd choice player that can create the odd moment of magic: Lingard is my pick.
If I'm the manager of a lower table team and needs a water-carrier who never really stands out: Cleverley is my pick.
If I'm the manager of a good team and need a substitute/3rd choice player that can create the odd moment of magic: Lingard is my pick.
If I'm the manager of a lower table team and needs a water-carrier who never really stands out: Cleverley is my pick.
Even though I rated Cleverley as a decent player the hype for him was,in classic English fashion,humorously knee jerked.
Clearly Lingard.
Probably closer than I initially thought but Lingard
Lingard is definitely the better Fortnite player
Not even close. Lingard every day.
Lingard and it ain't close. Cleverley was entirely useless, even Gibson was better than him. Of course, SAF made useless players look competent.
I was being sarcastic.
The more pertinent question is: who is the better marketer?
Ah, the mythical thinking. He was good for three games, got injured in the fourth match, missed a month (5 league games, though he played in a cup game before returning from the injury).
Honestly, it was a total non-factor. Players get injured for a month all the time. It was hardly such a bad injury that can change players career (Shaw vs PSV for example, when he lost a year), it was a standard injury that every player gets a few times in his career.
Ah fair enough mate, you can never be certain on here. Especially with a player like Lingard, scores two goals after 2 years of being awful and there will be people claiming he's a good player again.
The question should be : "who is less shit".
Actually I prefer Cleverley because we successfully get ride of him.
Actually I prefer Cleverley because we successfully get ride of him.
I honestly couldn't pick which one of them is worse, they're both among the poorest players to play 50+ games for United. So i'm not sure how people are so confident saying Lingard is better never mind by far.
Cleverley at least was a part of a title winning team. In my opinion Lingard wouldn't have lasted long at United if he'd came through 5-10 years earlier. When we were a good side competing for titles Ferguson would have probably shifted him on after 20-30 games i reckon.
Lingard by a country mile.
I'd completely forgotten about Cleverlys existence. Lingard.
I hope Cleverly doesn’t read this forum. He will read about how Lingard is one of the worst players who has ever played the game, and then read in the next thread how it’s no contest that Lingard is a better player than him.
And he had plenty of critics, despite being a reliable defender who started 40+ games in 08/09.
Lingard almost went an entire Premier League season without a goal or assist: that sort of output would have put him in the Obertan category in Fergie's teams and Obertan was quickly out on his arse.
Lingard is a much better player than he's shown recently, unfortunately caf memories are very short. He's never been a world beater but he was a good functional player who did have a moment or two of quality. Cleverley was fairly average tbf outside of about 6 games at the start of 2011/12.
1. Lingod
2. Clever Cleverley
3. Lingard
4. Crab Cleverley
5. Lingardinho
2. Clever Cleverley
3. Lingard
4. Crab Cleverley
5. Lingardinho
Cleverley. I think if SAF stuck around he would've made Cleverley into a much better player than what we see now, Moyes' tactics completely countered to the style of play Cleverley was geared to play and that ultimately made him regress.
You could see potential in a great fast passing style in the first few games in the 2011/12 season with Anderson, Cleverley, Rooney, Welbeck and Nani playing in the front together. That was the style of play suited to Tom.
He wasn't a great passer or amazing technically but I thought he had a really good idea of how to play one touch and the pass-move tactic. Reminds me of many Spanish midfielders we have been come through who are adept at playing that way.
Really had high hopes for him back then, and Welbeck.
You could see potential in a great fast passing style in the first few games in the 2011/12 season with Anderson, Cleverley, Rooney, Welbeck and Nani playing in the front together. That was the style of play suited to Tom.
He wasn't a great passer or amazing technically but I thought he had a really good idea of how to play one touch and the pass-move tactic. Reminds me of many Spanish midfielders we have been come through who are adept at playing that way.
Really had high hopes for him back then, and Welbeck.
Ah back to those 2 matches with Anderson when everything clicked, never to click again.
More disappointed how Welbeck turned out.
Nice Cleverly revisionism here. He was bang average,while Lingard is/was above average who ,unlike Cleverly,has continually produced fun moments for United post SAF.
So,Lingardinho wins.
So,Lingardinho wins.
Cleverley of course. you can kinda get away at being pointless in midfield where simply keeping the ball is enough and hoping your better players will do something with it. not with Lingard, as he plays in position where those better players usualy are. to put it simply, as a manager I would rather have unproductive central midfielder than unproductive offensive player in my team.
Lingard quite easily. Its easy to look passable as a midfielder in a team with Carrick and Rooney carrying most of the creative burden.
I mean, we literally finished 2nd with Lingard in the team.