Ademola Lookman is a key player for Atalanta. Gian Piero Gasperini’s public criticism of him was unnecessary and sparks broader questions of a generational divide in soccer.
The Atalanta boss openly questioned Lookman’s ability to take penalties. Lookman responded with a statement defending himself. This situation highlights an issue in modern soccer: managers criticising players in public.
Gasperini vs. Lookman
Gasperini expressed disappointment after Lookman missed a penalty in the UEFA Champions League clash with Club Brugge (2.80) which saw the Italian side knocked out of the tournament. The Atalanta coach suggested that Lookman was not suited to take spot-kicks, describing him as having a “frankly terrible record even in training”. His words drew attention to the player’s mistake instead of supporting him.
Lookman responded publicly. He defended his record from the penalty spot. He also made it clear that he would continue to back himself in such situations.
“In truth, I have dealt with many difficult moments during my time here – the majority of which I have never spoken about because in my opinion the team must always be protected and must come first,” Lookman responded.
“This makes what happened last night even more hurtful. Along with our incredible fans, we as a team are hurting too with last night’s result.”
Lookman also said that the team’s “designated penalty taker had asked him to take the spot-kick.
This exchange raised eyebrows. It showed how a manager’s words can affect a player. It also sparked debate about whether such criticism should be public.
Ten Hag vs. Sancho
Lookman’s case is not unique. Erik ten Hag publicly questioned Jadon Sancho’s training levels. The Manchester United winger did not take the criticism lightly.
Sancho responded by effectively accusing his manager of lying. He suggested that he was being unfairly singled out. This led to a long-running saga that saw him frozen out of the squad.
Sancho’s case is an example of how public criticism can escalate. It damaged the player-manager relationship. It also made the situation harder to resolve.
The Impact of Public Criticism
Public criticism of players has always been controversial. However, in the age of social media, its impact is even greater. Fans and pundits amplify a manager’s words.
A single comment can lead to widespread abuse. Social media platforms magnify every discussion. Players already deal with immense pressure. When their own manager singles them out, it can make matters worse. This is why modern coaches must be careful.
Keeping Criticism In-House
Managers have every right to expect high standards. They can criticise players when necessary. But these discussions should happen behind closed doors.
Dressing room conversations are more constructive. They allow for direct feedback without outside interference. Public criticism often does more harm than good. This was always the case in soccer. However, social media has made the consequences worse. Players now face a level of scrutiny that previous generations never experienced.
Why Modern Coaches Must Adapt
The game has changed. The way managers handle players must change too. Social media has added a new layer of complexity.
Managers must consider the potential fallout before criticising a player publicly. They should ask whether their words will help or harm the situation. In most cases, keeping issues in-house is the best approach.
Lookman and Sancho’s experiences highlight a growing problem. Coaches must evolve with the times. A well-handled situation can build trust instead of breaking it.
Conclusion
Public criticism of players is risky. Gasperini and Ten Hag’s cases prove this. In modern soccer, managers must choose their words carefully. Social media amplifies every mistake. Players do not need extra pressure from their managers. Keeping discussions private is often the best approach.
The game is changing. Managers must change with it. Protecting players in public is more important than ever.
