Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

  • Participation within this subforum is only available to members who have had 5+ posts approved elsewhere.

Ademola Lookman

Status
Not open for further replies.
TheBigIguana said:
Then Silva should have played him regularly. He was here the entire year and Silva decided it was better to persist with an underperforming Bernard.

Yes he wanted off but he still played well and it got him nothing. He had reason to be frustrated that year.
Click to expand...

He played him pre season, then Lookman switched off as he didnt want to stay.
 
catcherintherye said:
He played him pre season, then Lookman switched off as he didnt want to stay.
Click to expand...
Nah, that's just not true for me, every appearance he worked hard and did more than the people playing in front of him. It was bad management all the way. If you want to tell him he's a part of the team and squash his move it can't be a lie. Just let him go at that point.
 

TheBigIguana said:
Nah, that's just not true for me, every appearance he worked hard and did more than the people playing in front of him. It was bad management all the way. If you want to tell him he's a part of the team and squash his move it can't be a lie. Just let him go at that point.
Click to expand...

It's not really my opinion mate. He started that pre-season in situ, with Brands making it known publicly he, Richarlinson and DCL would be the 3 we wanted to build the team around. Silva liked him too. He then made out he still wanted to go, effort at training dropped. I think he made a bit of a mistake there, as he could have been a regular here but wanted to go. I'm not sure he ever really accepted that we had moved from Allardyce to Silva and the culture was changing.

He looks a good player, and him with Richarlinson and DCL would have been perfect. Brands was right to see the potential there 3 years ago.
 
Not watched much Fulham to be honest but when I do he looks by far their best player.

Not saying we shouldn't have sold him, however when you consider last season Bernard and Walcott played a lot of football in wide positions I think lookman would have bene a far better pick.
 
Carloblues said:
Not watched much Fulham to be honest but when I do he looks by far their best player.

Not saying we shouldn't have sold him, however when you consider last season Bernard and Walcott played a lot of football in wide positions I think lookman would have bene a far better pick.
Click to expand...
Bernard said get the big fella back.
 
catcherintherye said:
It's not really my opinion mate. He started that pre-season in situ, with Brands making it known publicly he, Richarlinson and DCL would be the 3 we wanted to build the team around. Silva liked him too. He then made out he still wanted to go, effort at training dropped. I think he made a bit of a mistake there, as he could have been a regular here but wanted to go. I'm not sure he ever really accepted that we had moved from Allardyce to Silva and the culture was changing.

He looks a good player, and him with Richarlinson and DCL would have been perfect. Brands was right to see the potential there 3 years ago.
Click to expand...
Brands may have said that but from the start the manager preferred Bernard and that never changed. If a player wants a move and you tell him no on the basis that you're going to play him a lot and then don't do that the player has every right to be aggrieved. Even more so if on the rare occasion he does play he's better than the guy keeping him out.

This same situation could pop up again if we try to force Kean to stay next season and it'll be bad management again.
 

TheBigIguana said:
Brands may have said that but from the start the manager preferred Bernard and that never changed. If a player wants a move and you tell him no on the basis that you're going to play him a lot and then don't do that the player has every right to be aggrieved. Even more so if on the rare occasion he does play he's better than the guy keeping him out.

This same situation could pop up again if we try to force Kean to stay next season and it'll be bad management again.
Click to expand...

Well I think you're conflating a lot here to be honest.

Bernard was only brought in at the end of that summer, a long time after Lookman's output had dropped and he had not only indicated he wanted to leave, but also dropped his effort levels in training. He was replaced by Walcott not Bernard. I think this was a mistake by Lookman. Had he knuckled down, he was in prime position to play and would have been in the team. More than Calvert Lewin, who continued to work hard.

Kean is a harder one, He is a number 9, very similar to Calvert Lewin but unfortunately nowhere near as good at present. So it's not easy.
 
catcherintherye said:
Well I think you're conflating a lot here to be honest.

Bernard was only brought in at the end of that summer, a long time after Lookman's output had dropped and he had not only indicated he wanted to leave, but also dropped his effort levels in training. He was replaced by Walcott not Bernard. I think this was a mistake by Lookman. Had he knuckled down, he was in prime position to play and would have been in the team. More than Calvert Lewin, who continued to work hard.

Kean is a harder one, He is a number 9, very similar to Calvert Lewin but unfortunately nowhere near as good at present. So it's not easy.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what your timeline is. Lookman went on loan because Sam flatly told him he wouldn't play and he indicated he wanted to return to RBL but Silva flatly said no you're important to our squad and proceeded to play Bernard always. And for the production dropping part he produced an awful lot in Germany. I know that doesn't always translate but given Bernard produced nothing it's not like he could have done worse. The stuff about his training came out in March which was at least 6 months after it became clear he was lied to about his place in the team.

We screwed up with how we handled Lookman. Kean is different because DCL is actually good but the concept is the same in that a young player wants to play and that it neither a bad thing or a fault when they want out to do so.
 
TheBigIguana said:
I'm not sure what your timeline is. Lookman went on loan because Sam flatly told him he wouldn't play and he indicated he wanted to return to RBL but Silva flatly said no you're important to our squad and proceeded to play Bernard always. And for the production dropping part he produced an awful lot in Germany. I know that doesn't always translate but given Bernard produced nothing it's not like he could have done worse. The stuff about his training came out in March which was at least 6 months after it became clear he was lied to about his place in the team.

We screwed up with how we handled Lookman. Kean is different because DCL is actually good but the concept is the same in that a young player wants to play and that it neither a bad thing or a fault when they want out to do so.
Click to expand...

I think there's a fair bit of revisionism here mate,

Lookman essentially left the club when he sent off by Allardyce. That was a mistake and Leipzig was a far better move for hom. I wrote this at the time, I understood his perspective and backed him up.

Where he went wrong, was he came back to Everton with the same attitude that he left- that we were being run by Allardyce and would not give younger players a chance. It was a mistake. Brands wanted to have him centralm in the squad, and so did Silva. In that pre-season he started games, and was on course to be 1st choice. Along wth DCL/Richarlinson they would have been the front line. Unfortunately, he didn't really want that, and he became a little pig headed and still wanted to leave.

As pre-season dragged on he lost his place to Walcott. Bernard then arrived.

In fairness to Bernard, it would also be unfair to describe him as "doing nothing" particularly in that 1st season. Bernard was good in a lot of games.

I agree with the idea young players want to play. Under Silva we had the youngest squad in the league playing games. Lookman wanted to leave, he didn't want to play. Kean wanted to play, but we couldn't drop another young striker who was just much better. In Kean's case it was unfortunate.

I do think we have to have some perspective, and we can't just fit events to suit a narrative. The Lookman situation was dissapointing, but it happens. The club made about 2.5 X what we paid for him for a lad that wanted away. We should have sold him the 1st summer Brands came for even more money than we did a year later.
 
Why are we pining over a nothing player?

The lad has some talent, he is also fairly ineffectual for large parts, he is in the Deulofeu bracket for me, sometimes tremendous but also plays at the likes of Fulham or Watford for a reason.

Anyway I reckon Vlasic was a bigger waste/loss than Lookman.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome

Join Grand Old Team to get involved in the Everton discussion. Signing up is quick, easy, and completely free.

Register
Back
Top