02 Sep 2023 07:57:59
Is Lingard a free agent? Are we still able to sign him? Probably a better sub than Fornals

{Ed001's Note - yes.}

1.) 02 Sep 2023
02 Sep 2023 13:43:15
Thanks Ed. Appreciated

{Ed001's Note - very welcome.}

2.) 02 Sep 2023
02 Sep 2023 17:16:10
I totally disagree KIB he done nothing for FOREST last season and struggled to make their starting 11 and after turning us down in favour of them basically for money imo we shouldn't be lining his pockets again imo if it happens and FORNALS for me isn't a winger which he's been asked to play for moyes I thought wingers were meant to have pace to go past people and get a cross in something FORNALS hasn't got so I'd keep FORNALS over LINGARD all day long.

3.) 03 Sep 2023
03 Sep 2023 09:37:25
Whorya48 We will end up with both players.
I might be in a minority but, having made many employment decisions in my life and realized after a short while they were the wrong ones, I have sympathy for Lingard and welcome him back if he brings something to the squad. He was attracted to an exciting project, most of us have at some stage in our life, some things work out some don't.

4.) 03 Sep 2023
03 Sep 2023 10:17:04
Not saying get rid of Fornals but if you had both on the bench then who would you bring on for benhrama?
Kudus/mubama for Antonio instead of Ings. A fit Lingard gives us depth with Europe. LW/attacking midfield/False 9. Lingard fits in and my understanding is we offered Lingard more money than NF. Not saying I didn’t feel snubbed too but here are now with no striker signed a free agent false 9 who clicks with Moyes isn’t a bad deal. I’m sure you’d swap Lingard for Ings right (especially wages)?

5.) 03 Sep 2023
03 Sep 2023 11:52:02
For me Lingard over Ings although not a lot between them!
⚒⚒⚒⚒⚒⚒

6.) 03 Sep 2023
03 Sep 2023 17:10:51
I’m no fan of Lingard, but I don’t think we should rush to judge him as a player in a Hammers shirt this season before it happens. Who knows, he might be fine in the West Ham set up. After all, I think Danny Ings is a good striker, but for West Ham he’s crap. The opposite could be true for Lingard.

7.) 03 Sep 2023
03 Sep 2023 23:21:35
I wouldn't touch LINGARD period I'm old school he turned us down once tell him to jog on he ain't good enough for forest so whys he good enough for WHUFC.⚒⚒⚒

8.) 03 Sep 2023
03 Sep 2023 23:30:21
Have sympathy for LINGARD he chose FOREST over WEST HAM because of his pocket so tell him to go and get his £120,000 a week or I will fill really sorry for him if he only gets £100,000 poor old JESSE what a difficult life you've had⚒⚒⚒

9.) 04 Sep 2023
04 Sep 2023 11:09:03
I might be mistaken, but I thought West Ham offered Lingard a higher weekly wage than Forest. Anyway, the depth of our squad is the important thing here, and Lingard (as I said, not my favourite person) has previously proved himself in the Moyes set up. Who knows what would happen this time? If we can get him for a reasonable weekly wage, and remember he helps fill the home grown stats, then what have we got to lose? After all, it’s the club that comes first.

10.) 06 Sep 2023
06 Sep 2023 13:24:03
Lingerie would score more goals than Inga for us. Even if the latter is nominally more of a striker. Facts speak louder than nomenclature.

11.) 06 Sep 2023
06 Sep 2023 20:29:03
Addendum to the above; bad guesses by computer on the players names. Not more examples of lame humour by myself.

12.) 07 Sep 2023
07 Sep 2023 00:42:15
Thank Christ for that!

13.) 07 Sep 2023
07 Sep 2023 01:07:18
Cheers ? big ears lol