Romelu Lukaku | Chelsea

11101 said:
:lol:

You're kidding right? Ferguson wouldn't have gone near a player as limited as Lukaku. This is the man who shipped Ruud Van Nistelrooy out once the goals were no longer enough. Not a chance in hell he would have bought this, or any, version of Lukaku.
Click to expand...
Sir Alex played with Hernandez who made Lukaku look like Van Persie.
 
giorno said:
This whole Lukaku didn't fit Ole's way of playing malarkey is honestly just that. Ole simply preferred Martial and Rashford, that's all there is to it. At the time it was fair choice

That Lukaku went on to massively improve, and turned into one of the very best strikers in the world is down to Conte's coaching and his own willingness to put in the work

This version of Lukaku would fit just fine at United. The 17/18 version would do well too, if not as well as Cavani
Click to expand...
Cavani is a rotational player who barely plays every other game and even he hasn’t done it for us against the big sides. Our options at 9 isn’t good enough but that doesn’t mean Lukaku is.
Are we forgetting how much our inside forwards struggled with Lukaku up top? Ole has got our forwards purring since Rom left. He was sold because Ole didn’t think he fitted in and he hasn’t exactly been proven wrong with the improvement in our forward play.
 
“Lukaku is beneath us”!

*Starts Martial who jogs around the pitch not contributing to a Southampton draw*
 
11101 said:
Fergie never signed a player as limited as Lukaku to lead the frontline. Nobody even close.
Click to expand...

That's not what you said. You said " Ferguson wouldn't have gone near a player as limited as Lukaku" and "Not a chance in hell he would have bought this, or any, version of Lukaku.". You didn't say he wouldn't have bought him to lead the line, and these 2 sentences I quoted are absolute bollocks I'm afraid. It implies that Lukaku are worse than the worst player Fergie signed.
 
Berbasbullet said:
You genuinely think you’ll get Haaland in January?
Click to expand...
Why not? Latest rumours suggest genuinely only three teams could get him and one of those chelsea. Other than us city and man utd. If you are having the chance then why not us.
 
cyberman said:
Cavani is a rotational player who barely plays every other game and even he hasn’t done it for us against the big sides. Our options at 9 isn’t good enough but that doesn’t mean Lukaku is.
Are we forgetting how much our inside forwards struggled with Lukaku up top? Ole has got our forwards purring since Rom left. He was sold because Ole didn’t think he fitted in and he hasn’t exactly been proven wrong with the improvement in our forward play.
Click to expand...
I don't remember Martial or Rashford struggling with Lukaku in 17/18. 18/19 sure, but your whole team struggled and there were issues that clearly went beyond what happened on the pitch. Cavani is doing fine for you without being exceptional. Lukaku was the same in 17/18

The current version of Lukaku *is* exceptional and would do well anywhere, for anyone. Even though he's no Lewandowski, of course
 
RooneyLegend said:
Well those didn't really play much however there was a time Cheech was our first choice striker.
Click to expand...
And he ended up there because he exceeded expectations. The guy was brought in for sth like 8m from the Mexican league, clearly as an experiment/back up to Berbatov, who wasn’t pulling up trees at the time.
 
Rajiztar said:
Why not? Latest rumours suggest genuinely only three teams could get him and one of those chelsea. Other than us city and man utd. If you are having the chance then why not us.
Click to expand...
I don’t see why you’d sign him when you just signed Lukaku. I’m not sure how they’d both get in your side. Lukaku ain’t sitting on the bench.
 
Berbasbullet said:
I don’t see why you’d sign him when you just signed Lukaku. I’m not sure how they’d both get in your side. Lukaku ain’t sitting on the bench.
Click to expand...

I don’t see us getting Haaland. At least this go around. I really hope he doesnt play in the PL next. He has monster striker written all over him.
 
Rajiztar said:
Why not? Latest rumours suggest genuinely only three teams could get him and one of those chelsea. Other than us city and man utd. If you are having the chance then why not us.
Click to expand...

You think you’ll go for Haaland after just spending 100m on Lukaku?
 
giorno said:
I don't remember Martial or Rashford struggling with Lukaku in 17/18. 18/19 sure, but your whole team struggled and there were issues that clearly went beyond what happened on the pitch. Cavani is doing fine for you without being exceptional. Lukaku was the same in 17/18

The current version of Lukaku *is* exceptional and would do well anywhere, for anyone. Even though he's no Lewandowski, of course
Click to expand...
Cavani’s good run of form coincided with Bruno goals and assists drying up in the league. A fixed striker in the box forced Bruno to sit back a bit and he lost that little spark. That would be Lukaku but all season long.
Rashford and Martial did struggle. It’s why they only came alive when 1 was subbed on for another. Whoever started with Lukaku got boxed out but when the game opened up the sub played well.
I saw two years of this. We didn’t imagine things and it’s a bit weird that non Ud fans are trying to tell us differently to be honest.
 
Berbasbullet said:
I don’t see why you’d sign him when you just signed Lukaku. I’m not sure how they’d both get in your side. Lukaku ain’t sitting on the bench.
Click to expand...
We are already building the transfer kitty for one big signing in my opinion. If latest rumour about Zappa is true then we are negative 20 mn in this window despite we won cl and all the money we got.

Tuchel also not a rigid system type manager. He can use both Lukaku and haaland if he wanted to in 5-3-2 system. Not about benching either player.If it's good for team then Chelsea will be in for him. It's upto the player to choose which team he want play.
 
Last edited:
Berbasbullet said:
I don’t see why you’d sign him when you just signed Lukaku. I’m not sure how they’d both get in your side. Lukaku ain’t sitting on the bench.
Click to expand...
You can play with 2 strikers you know. Its allowed
 
el3mel said:
That's not what you said. You said " Ferguson wouldn't have gone near a player as limited as Lukaku" and "Not a chance in hell he would have bought this, or any, version of Lukaku.". You didn't say he wouldn't have bought him to lead the line, and these 2 sentences I quoted are absolute bollocks I'm afraid. It implies that Lukaku are worse than the worst player Fergie signed.
Click to expand...

I kind of figured for 100m it was a given I wasn't talking about a backup signing.
 
Why is all the coverage so wierdly over the top positive ?

He is same player he was at Everton, good poacher, inconsistent contrition in build up, plays well selectively. No reason to be so certain that has changed
 
Cassidy said:
You can play with 2 strikers you know. Its allowed
Click to expand...
But do you think that Tuchel is likely to play with Haaland and Lukaku as a two? I mean, I guess if abramovich bought him he'll fit them in together but I can't see Chelsea going with them both up top...
 
Crashoutcassius said:
Lukaku would have got roasted for missing that at United, but he wasn't very good at United so I guess what you are saying holds up
Click to expand...
It was a really good save in fairness. I'm no great fan of his, but him and Martial are not even comparable as number 9s atm.
 
Pickle85 said:
It was a really good save in fairness. I'm no great fan of his, but him and Martial are not even comparable as number 9s atm.
Click to expand...
Of course yes. And it was a good save. Just remarking how wierdly positive the media coverage was today around Lukaku, before and after the match. When he didn't take that chance that he should take, they just said he was so strong or something
 
Crashoutcassius said:
I think a lot of strikers would have got roasted from missing uncontested header from 5 yards. Depends on the agenda that they are trying to spin, which is kinda my point.
Click to expand...
Nobody would have said anything if your team earned three points. Of course if chelsea drew because of Lukaku miss the header then scrutiny was inevitable. All the strikers in the world miss sitters.

Werner missed three chances in cl final yet most of chelsea fans wouldn't bother about it because we won in the end otherwise Werner out brigade came out in full voice.It will happen always if teams failed to win.
 
Rajiztar said:
Nobody would have said anything if your team earned three points. Of course if chelsea drew because of Lukaku miss the header then scrutiny was inevitable. All the strikers in the world miss sitters.

Werner missed three chances in cl final yet most of chelsea fans wouldn't bother about it because we won in the end otherwise Werner out brigade came out in full voice.It will happen always if teams failed to win.
Click to expand...
Yes that is a fair point, that they won. Didn't think of it like that. And as the duffer fella said, it all fits a neat media narrative that he had a flawless debut.
 
Just watching the highlights there, and it's absolutely sickening how the commentators are circle jerking Lukaku. He was tackled and lost the ball, commentators: "Lukaku decided to let the ball run there", also no mention of his pricetag, or the fact that Chelsea have brought him back for an absolutely incredible amount of money. I dont think I've seen a United game Pogba has played in to this day where it isnt mentioned that we bought him back for 89m and various arguments as to why he hasn't justified that price.

Honestly don't think I can watch another Chelsea game this season. Unbearable.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.