2017/18 Ademola Lookman

[Osamabindiesel]

Not really, it tells me that a young English prima donna player is at it again..

Or it tells you that our clueless manager had no plans for him so he decided to take matters into his own hands and choose a club that will give him a run. There is no way in hell Sam can justify leaving Lookman out for "not tracking back" when Bolasie is in the same boat. I would also say that accusations of him "not tracking back" are exaggerated because we are a shambles defensively and nobody wanted to blame Kenny.

 

[canuckblue]

Would he still be here if Unsworth had been given the job permanently? My guess is he would.

 

[LiamG]

Or it tells you that our clueless manager had no plans for him so he decided to take matters into his own hands and choose a club that will give him a run. There is no way in hell Sam can justify leaving Lookman out for "not tracking back" when Bolasie is in the same boat. I would also say that accusations of him "not tracking back" are exaggerated because we are a shambles defensively and nobody wanted to blame Kenny.

They will say he has one lung next.

 

[LiamG]

The thing with Lookman is I don't think most reasonable people think he should be starting every game.

But he should not have to go on loan to get game time. He's definitely good enough to have an impact on our side and has shown that in the flashes he has got on the pitch.

That's the crux of the issue.

I don't think the loan itself is a bad move, but is sums it up that Allardyce was fuming that Lookman hadn't gone to a Championship club to 'ply his trade' in the rough and tumble of the Championship, and he'd rather go to a CL-chasing club who play really good football.

Sam's mad at that, whereas he should be saying it's a great move, and doing all he can to encourage it. Lookman has taken the plunge of stepping out of his comfort zone and trying to show just what he can do. Good for him.

The issue is we aren't a good enough side for him not to be able to do that here. But he hasn't been given a prolonged run.

Another good reason to get rid of Sam

 

[LouReedwalkonthewildside]

I would play better to make sure that I can't be left out. He has done OK at times, that's it though really.

No manager refuses to pick players that are better than what he has got. Why would anyone do that? Maybe he doesn't do much in training? Who knows?

Doesn't seem to apply to Schneiderlin though mate, Davies is better than him.

 

[carolinablue232]

Doesn't seem to apply to Schneiderlin though mate, Davies is better than him.

A horses arse is better than him.

 

[NilSatisOptimum]

Your joking?

In lookmans shoes would you not be pissed off.

No.

I hope the experience is good for him jumping two leagues was looking too much for the lad. Taking a step back into easy league with less attention will be good for his develpoment and hopefully the homesickness does not grow being even further from home!

 

[Abraders]

Would he still be here if Unsworth had been given the job permanently? My guess is he would.

We'd also be in the bottom 3, Unsy barely selected this lad anyway.

 

[deipnosophist]

Would he still be here if Unsworth had been given the job permanently? My guess is he would.

You may be right, but I would be fearful for our fortunes were Unsy given the job permanently.

 

[Mickey]

Lads we had JJK right back and Cuco left back there's no way Mola could get game time because, although he's got a bit about him, he's lightweight and gets bullied easily by oppo fullbacks and is suspect defensively. Loan is the best thing for him.

 

[longers]

Hopefully get to see some more of him tonight !

 

[ClausThomsen]

Not playing in the current Everton team and playing good football in a team going for success could be of great benefit. Let the yard-dogs who hopefully won't be here next year sort out this seasons grind under BS.

 

[bluesb1970]

Would he still be here if Unsworth had been given the job permanently? My guess is he would.

Possibly he would still be playing for the bottom of the league side, yes.

 

[Eggs]

...i’m a fan of Lookman, I think he has all the ammunition to be a top player. What I don’t know is what his character is like. Perhaps that’s a factor in him not being here.

 

[ClausThomsen]

Don't want? Players who aren't getting game time in the 1st's need it to help them when they get do in.

I watched the Spurs - Newport replay today and Martin Tyler made the point that the Tottenham irregulars who looked rusty
aren't getting game time in the u21's or u23's. It doesn't make sense.

For example, I like watching Sambo in the u23's but that where Tosun should be at the mo, and it's where Lookman should
have been, along with a few others who are regular bench warmers but hardly ever play.

You can only have a set number of over-age players in the U23's matchday squad so it's inevitable that you can't give all older players game time there. And why clog up a development team with players you've decided aren't good enough and who will probably just go through the motions there with no benefit and could conceivably cause unrest outside the first team squad?

It seems that the U23 team is perceived as a punishment unless you're there to get back up to speed after an injury. The entire point of Niasse's spell there was seemingly to humiliate him and force him out of the club. Him rising above such pettiness and working hard was very much the exception.

As for Tosun then it may be seen that concentrating on working with the 1st team and getting familiar there is of more benefit than expending energy and risking injury at a much lower level of football.