Sean Longstaff

[HawK]

2023/2024 - Lamine Yarmal - 16 years old - 2136 minutes played

 

Edit - Only Gundogan has made more appearances this season in their whole squad.

 

 

Edited March 15, 2024 by HawK

[HawK]

2023/2024 - Lewis Miley - 17 years old - 1701 minutes played

 

13 less appearances than Yamarl and 415 less minutes played.

 

11 players have played more minutes than Miley this season.

[Matt1892]

6 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

The difference between 17 and 18 is a lot greater than the difference between 27 and 28; it's a critical period of growth as a human let alone a footballer. It's not a good comparator anyway, seeing as Miley has played far more football this season than Mainoo - at absolutely ridiculous intensity during some stretches, too.

 

Of course he was going to be rested as soon as it was possible for the manager to do so. 

As Hawk points out, Barcelona have played Yarmel consistently at 16 years of age so what is it we are protecting Miley from?

 

I am not saying he should be starting week in and week out by the way, what I am saying is leaving him out due to age in favour of someone you acknowledge is injured and offering nothing to the team is ridiculous.

 

What he should be doing is leaving Longstaff on the bench for Miley until after the International break to try and recover from the injury, I don’t think that is any way radical thinking.

 

 

[Yorkie]

1 minute ago, HawK said:

2023/2024 - Lamine Yarmal - 16 years old - 2136 minutes played

 

Edit - Only Gundogan has made more appearances this season in their whole squad.

 

3 minutes ago, HawK said:

2023/2024 - Lewis Miley - 17 years old - 1701 minutes played

 

13 less appearances than Yamarl and 415 less minutes played.

 

11 players have played more minutes than Miley this season.

 

What does any of this prove? That we shouldn't bother to take care with a young prospect?

 

Daftest thing about this debate is that he's still featuring in every game. The difference in contributions between him and Longstaff are negligible anyway. 

[HawK]

6 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

 

What does any of this prove? That we shouldn't bother to take care with a young prospect?

 

Daftest thing about this debate is that he's still featuring in every game. The difference in contributions between him and Longstaff are negligible anyway. 

 

It proves that age itself is irrelevant, if a player is ready, they're ready. I think you can make an argument for maturity, physical development, player's game not being rounded enough etc. (the further back you play from the front, generally the more experienced you need to be), but purely based on age alone you don't need to protect people.

 

Howe might have meant things like that behind protecting him over 'age', but I can only go one what he's actually said.

[Matt1892]

8 minutes ago, Yorkie said:

 

 

What does any of this prove? That we shouldn't bother to take care with a young prospect?

 

Daftest thing about this debate is that he's still featuring in every game. The difference in contributions between him and Longstaff are negligible anyway. 

If the difference is negligible and and he is featuring in every game anyway, why do you see it as the right move to start Longstaff when he is injured, rather than giving him a few games to recover?

[Yorkie]

Just now, HawK said:

 

It proves that age itself is irrelevant, if a player is ready, they're ready. I think you can make an argument for maturity, physical development, player's game not being rounded enough etc. (the further back you play from the front, generally the more experienced you need to be), but purely based on age alone you don't need to protect people.

 

Howe might have meant things like that behind protecting him over 'age', but I can only go one what he's actually said.

 

I take your point but imo it proves that Lamine Yamal is ready and absolutely nothing other than that.

[HawK]

Int it great that two people with a Joelinton avatar are taking opposing views on stuff on the internet. I love it

[Dokko]

Playing with injury so the club runs him into the ground. Lovely stuff. 

 

I'd be fizzing if I were a player the way they've been treated this season. 

[arnonel]

Sheesh, never through protecting one of our greatest prospects would kick up a backlash. 

Who knows how any of the players above will turn out, but there are 1000s of stories of "wonderkids" not being looked after and disappearing into obscurity.

Also, I trust Eddie to do the right thing by the lad, given he knows him and his family better than anyone on here.
People forget there is an actual human being under there. They would prefer to sacrifice him for the sake of their entertainment.

 

 

 

Edited March 15, 2024 by arnonel

[sushimonster85]

People moaning about the need to becareful with Miley's minutes need to see the bigger picture. The damage isn't done immediately, it gets felt later on in their career when they start to drop off at a younger age than the players who weren't playing week in, week out till their early 20's, rather than at 17/18. 

[Gallowgate Toon]

I'm not sure Barca are a positive example you want to use here, are they? I could just be thinking of Fati but feels like they've had a habit of introducing youngsters early who have struggled with injuries in subsequent seasons.

 

 

Edited March 15, 2024 by Gallowgate Toon

[Zero]

I just think that probably explains why our players always keep injured again shortly after “coming back”

 

I completely disagree with this approach. I mean, it’s actually very fortunate that a player can fully recover from any injury. Just think if Botman cannot back to his best (pre injury) and keep on like this. We should have a very solid CB who can be our centrepiece for the next 10 years. The injury might have ruined it already.

 

Its just regular league match FFS. I care both the player and our clubs future more than that 3 points. I would be fine if it’s cup final. But no.

[54]

49 minutes ago, HawK said:

 

It proves that age itself is irrelevant, if a player is ready, they're ready. I think you can make an argument for maturity, physical development, player's game not being rounded enough etc. (the further back you play from the front, generally the more experienced you need to be), but purely based on age alone you don't need to protect people.

 

Howe might have meant things like that behind protecting him over 'age', but I can only go one what he's actually said.

That not the point is it? Lamine Yamal is playing a lot, but that doesn't mean that its the right thing for him, just look at Gavi who by the age of 19 has 111 games for Barcelona, and 27 games for Spain, with barely a summers break, and he's now got a serious long term injury, that by all accounts is due to being over played at a point he was still developing as a person. 

 

Or Pedri who played 133 times before 21, and now has had back to back muscle injuries. Or Ansu Fati, who got over played and who's development has been massively stunted and he's now been farmed out to Brighton. 

 

"Protecting a player" isn't about the here and now, its about protecting players who are still developing, and maturing, to ensure their career doesn't get hampered by injuries and he is able to reach his full potential. 

[Parsley]

Once Willock's fully match fit, we'll hopefully see Longstaff rotate more with Miley. Until that point, I can understand Howe's rationale. 

[nufcjmc]

He was a wheel in a cog due to a good engine last season covering alot of ground and allowing the better players to do their thing. He has settled between passenger and liability this season not sure I get Howe saying he needs to play more to look better the exact opposite is happening. 

Even last season he got into such good areas and was totally ineffective in front of goal I wanted him replaced. I really hope Tonali coming back and Miley see him drop of the managers plans next season.

From the presser we aren't going to make major changes so going to have to spread the money but he is trying single handedly to highlight midfield as a weakness area which sadly his selling fee right now wouldn't resolve. 

[Vaj]

I think there is probably a middle ground between the two arguments personally. Miley hasn't started any of the last three games but Longstaff has started all three of them and has been the worst I have seen him in years in two of them (Blackburn and Chelsea), playing 90 minutes twice and 120 minutes in the cup.

 

If he is struggling with an injury he should not have played all three of these games and Miley could have started one of them instead and for me is one of my concerns for this season in terms of the amount of injuries there have been, you do wonder if some can be avoided by rotating a little bit more. 

[nufcjmc]

2 minutes ago, Vaj said:

I think there is probably a middle ground between the two arguments personally. Miley hasn't started any of the last three games but Longstaff has started all three of them and has been the worst I have seen him in years in two of them (Blackburn and Chelsea), playing 90 minutes twice and 120 minutes in the cup.

 

If he is struggling with an injury he should not have played all three of these games and Miley could have started one of them instead and for me is one of my concerns for this season in terms of the amount of injuries there have been, you do wonder if some can be avoided by rotating a little bit more. 

Sounds like iam arguing with own point in the defence of longstaff but get Howe's point Miley is Willocks planned sub as Willock has been away so long he can't last the 90 and Anderson is also incapable of more than a cameo so unless he throws Joe White in or Lewis Hall he cannot really win here I guess. He could do Bruno/longstaff and Miley and use Willock and Anderson as impact subs but we would be crying out for Willock to start as we know them as a 3 doesn't work. 

[AyeDubbleYoo]

35 minutes ago, nufcjmc said:

Sounds like iam arguing with own point in the defence of longstaff but get Howe's point Miley is Willocks planned sub as Willock has been away so long he can't last the 90 and Anderson is also incapable of more than a cameo so unless he throws Joe White in or Lewis Hall he cannot really win here I guess. He could do Bruno/longstaff and Miley and use Willock and Anderson as impact subs but we would be crying out for Willock to start as we know them as a 3 doesn't work. 

I think someone might have hit on what our problems this season have been

[HawK]

2 hours ago, 54 said:

That not the point is it? Lamine Yamal is playing a lot, but that doesn't mean that its the right thing for him, just look at Gavi who by the age of 19 has 111 games for Barcelona, and 27 games for Spain, with barely a summers break, and he's now got a serious long term injury, that by all accounts is due to being over played at a point he was still developing as a person. 

 

Or Pedri who played 133 times before 21, and now has had back to back muscle injuries. Or Ansu Fati, who got over played and who's development has been massively stunted and he's now been farmed out to Brighton. 

 

"Protecting a player" isn't about the here and now, its about protecting players who are still developing, and maturing, to ensure their career doesn't get hampered by injuries and he is able to reach his full potential. 

But with respect you're not talking about the 'point' either, maybe it's pedanticism on my part, but what I was saying is age alone isn't something you protect a player because of - it's age-related things. For every Pedri there's a Rooney, there's examples either way.

 

In this instance of not playing Miley and forcing Longstaff to play through injections though, I can't see how 'protecting' Miley is the right call here. 

[TRon]

Playing Longstaff through injury is a weird one. Could we not have found a midfielder on loan if things were really that bad?

 

Just confirms my suspicions that we wrote the season off in January basically.  Probably considered the cost of replacements for all the crocked players was going to do more long term harm than it was worth to try to salvage this one.

[Beth]

If Miley is 100% fit then we should be starting him ahead of Longstaff, there's only one game a week for the rest of the season ffs.

 

Longstaff is mid table championship standard who has played above himself but is now reverting to type. We should be peddling him to Boro for £10m in the summer.

[Tiotes Witch Doctor]

He's better than a championship player, could definitely be a starting CM at anyone from 13th downwards IMO.

[jackyboy]

I don't think it would take much for Longstaff to be injured. If he was out of breath or had a hole in his sock that would be an injury to him

[Pilko]

Mid table Championship standard   

 

We finished 4th in the Premier League a year ago with him as a mainstay and every time he dropped out of the side we looked shite. Goals in a cup semi-final and one against PSG this season too. But, according to some, he's not good enough if you wanted to push for a playoff spot against Norwich and Coventry.

 

He's in poor form and I want to see him sat down for a while as much as the next person, but some of these takes are mental.

 

I don't mind people saying they'd cash in for FFP purposes, I would too if we got a good offer but I think the most likely outcome is he becomes a helpful squad player who will show his usefulness when he has better, fitter, more confident players around him and he isn't shouldering the entire burden of a shattered side all season long.

 

Mid table Championship standard is the likes of Barlaser who we peddled for about 300 grand after a few cup games, not Longstaff with nearly 150 PL appearances under his belt FFS.