14
Sarcasm isn't your strong point, is it? We are on to "top red" already? Wow.Is that something you discovered just now? I bet you checked every post of mine in this thread.
I'm not gonna get a "top red" medal now am I?
Then why are you arguing about something you have no idea how it works?
Sarcasm isn't your strong point, is it? We are on to "top red" already? Wow.
Is the FIFA rating system a secret now? I'm not sure you do actually, you disagreed with your own opinion
How are you still defending it?
Yeah I disagreed with my own opinion of him being a 75-82 level player and saying 82 is being generous for his actual quality. Go and get a lay down now, you've defended Lingard like a proper red knight.
I only need "sympathizer" and "fanboi" and I've got Bingo!It's not about how much is he rated. I knew his rating. I don't want to break it to you, but EA and KONAMI also, very often make proper ass of their ratings. In that same squad our best CB is rated as 81 while Bailly is at 82, Jones at 80. That's just a small example, and if you want it put at this way, Smalling is a much better CB than Lingard is a CAM ( or whatever his last positions is).How are you still defending it?
He is rated within the parameters you've said you think he is, and when that was revealed to you, it's "generous." Though why am I supposed logic has escaped you?
Red knight? Top Red?
Taken far too long but at least it's finally happened.
And can't even use the excuse of being mostly a sub. Disgraceful.
And Xhaka was 82, as was bleedin' Corluka. You've made an issue out of a light hearted rating. Pretty sad when you're that desperate to criticize one of our players. I won't reply again but knock yourself out with the last word.
Nah, keep it to yourself. You just had an urge to defend something even though there was no need, while embarrassing yourself on the way.
Fans arguing over a trivial rating Lingard has in a videogame,oh gawd.
The cafe has peaked here. I was questioning my own sanity. Are they really arguing over a FIFA rating ?Hopefully it’s a while as we’ll be a much better side if we persist with Mata is that role.
We could drop Lukaku and play Martial upfront. Lingard, Mata and Rashford/Sanchez behind.
I'd guess a while from that.Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
If only he had the consistent playing ability to back up having a 'brand'
Jesus, is movement the only and most important attribute our new attacker should posses? Because apart from that, Lingard is a worse footballer than Lukaku, and certainly a worse attacker. I mean what's the point, Lingard isn't good enough to start anywhere for Manchester United, never mind striker.
But we don’t have Harry Kane do we? I’m looking at options within what we have.
Sanchez is stronger, better at dribbling, better at finishing and has actually played the role many times in the past so I’d say he’s probably a better option within what we have.
You missed out one though. He's been bad.
Mata's performance at the weekend showed why Lingard should not be playing ahead of him at all. Be it at #10 or out wide.
As has Lingard this season. In fact i'd say this had been Lingard's worst start to a season, and that's saying something.
No we don’t, but why would someone think Lingard is a better option than Lukaku?
Lingard have played how many games? He's not been worse than Sanchez.
He has. At least Sanchez has contributed in ways of the winner against Newcastle and assists leading to goals. And I say this as someone who is very disappointed with Sanchez.
Sanchez has a goal and an assist in 437 minutes. Lingard, an assist in 420. The stats are no reason why Sanchez should be playing ahead of Lingard. The performances, neither.
Except one has been world class for years and the other never will never be. I'd rather take my chances on Sánchez potentially getting back to form than persevering with bang average Lingard. There is a reason we haven't missed Lingard at all while he has been injured, and the reason for that is because he actually isn't very good.
