Romelu Lukaku | Chelsea

MvG said:
Ronaldo won a Ballon d’Or at age 23. Ramos was in between RB and CB until around that age. Benzema was always a top player but took a backseat to Ronaldo as Rooney did. Never mind that they’re all levels above Lukaku. So who is the fan of willful misrepresentation ?
Click to expand...

So what? They all improved around ages 25-26, did they not? I didn't realise what you meant was "it's unreasonable to expect players to improve at that age unless there are mitigating factors".

And again, I'm not arguing Lukaku is better than or on the same level as any of them. The point is, they all improved around the same age Lukaku did - it's patently ludicrous to say that players can't get better.
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
So what? They all improved around ages 25-26, did they not? I didn't realise what you meant was "it's unreasonable to expect players to improve at that age unless there are mitigating factors".

And again, I'm not arguing Lukaku is better than or on the same level as any of them. The point is, they all improved around the same age Lukaku did - it's patently ludicrous to say that players can't get better.
Click to expand...

No. They didn’t. Good day to you, sir.
 
Robbie Boy said:
I hope @GifLord provides said review, for balance and nuance.
Click to expand...

I'll give spoilers to his possible posts.

Scenario 1: Lukaku misses a chance and Belgium lose...
"Luckakoo miss :lol: :lol: "
horse-ball.gif

Scenario 2: Lukaku scores and Belgium win...
.

.

.

.

.





giphy.gif
 
duffer said:
I'll give spoilers to his possible posts.

Scenario 1: Lukaku misses a chance and Belgium lose...
"Luckakoo miss :lol: :lol: "
horse-ball.gif

Scenario 2: Lukaku scores and Belgium win...
.

.

.

.

.





giphy.gif
Click to expand...

Come on, we know scenario two is wrong. He'll find a funny looking cross or control in the 59th min and caption it ' :lol: :lol: '
 
WeePat said:
We were down to 10 men at Anfield and we were forced into parking the bus against City. Hardly his fault that Chelsea couldn't get out of our own half against those teams, but even in those games, he wasn't useless. Admittedly he could have done better against Juventus. He played really well against Arsenal and Spurs. I suppose what I'm objecting to is the hyperbole. Well I thought it was hyperbole, but it seems people really mean it when they say he's totally useless.
Click to expand...

I understand what you mean by hyperbole. I think it depends on what you want from someone that cost £97.5m and £350k+ a week. In my opinion, when you get to that sort of figure you should be getting a player who is both able to impact the biggest games and drag the his team past any difficulties i.e. going down to ten men and/or when the team are having an off day.

In my experience of watching Lukaku he does neither and I cannot really remember many times he has done it in his career (I do remember a cup game against Chelsea for Everton and SAF's final game for WBA, but whilst those where good games, they weren't exactly six pointers/where silverware is on the line for his team.)

For me however all the evidence points to him being both a flat track bully and technically limited footballer. This at least is what I have seen throughout his career and I haven't been provided with any real evidence to counter it.

Now don't get me wrong there is value in having a flat track bully as he is handy in making sure those annoying 0-0's/1-1's against the likes of Burnley when they pitch in do not happen as frequently; I mean this season he probably got you 2pts against Zenit as that game would've probably been a draw; although equally is it any different to what the kind of thing Giroud is capable off the bench?

This said, when I watch Chelsea this year, I actually think their attacking play is worse than last season. I say this as whilst he is a better finisher than the others', his technical deficiencies mean that you're front line not as fluid as last season and not creating as many chances (although I do appreciate that Mount is very important to Chelsea as he is very good at harassing the opposition and dropping between the lines to offer the CM's an out ball to the forward line; so some of the issues going forward may be partly due to him being injured/looking fairly fatigued.)

Thus, for me at least, it is not so much that I think he is god awful, it is more that he really isn't a player that should be commanding such fees or even be playing for the likes of Chelsea and Utd as there CF1. Rather he is the type of player that is just a cut below and should really either be there CF2 and/or playing for the likes of Everton or in a league that isn't as demanding.
 
Genuinely think there was no defensive mistake on that goal. He just showed too much quality. The defender set him up in a tight angle and on his wrong foot, the keeper had covered the space and he still scored.
 
Great from Lukaku but am still looking at Lloris there.
 
Haters gonna hate. A semi against France, you got to give him his due when he shows up.
 
Dave Smith said:
I understand what you mean by hyperbole. I think it depends on what you want from someone that cost £97.5m and £350k+ a week. In my opinion, when you get to that sort of figure you should be getting a player who is both able to impact the biggest games and drag the his team past any difficulties i.e. going down to ten men and/or when the team are having an off day.

In my experience of watching Lukaku he does neither and I cannot really remember many times he has done it in his career (I do remember a cup game against Chelsea for Everton and SAF's final game for WBA, but whilst those where good games, they weren't exactly six pointers/where silverware is on the line for his team.)

For me however all the evidence points to him being both a flat track bully and technically limited footballer. This at least is what I have seen throughout his career and I haven't been provided with any real evidence to counter it.

Now don't get me wrong there is value in having a flat track bully as he is handy in making sure those annoying 0-0's/1-1's against the likes of Burnley when they pitch in do not happen as frequently; I mean this season he probably got you 2pts against Zenit as that game would've probably been a draw; although equally is it any different to what the kind of thing Giroud is capable off the bench?

This said, when I watch Chelsea this year, I actually think their attacking play is worse than last season. I say this as whilst he is a better finisher than the others', his technical deficiencies mean that you're front line not as fluid as last season and not creating as many chances (although I do appreciate that Mount is very important to Chelsea as he is very good at harassing the opposition and dropping between the lines to offer the CM's an out ball to the forward line; so some of the issues going forward may be partly due to him being injured/looking fairly fatigued.)

Thus, for me at least, it is not so much that I think he is god awful, it is more that he really isn't a player that should be commanding such fees or even be playing for the likes of Chelsea and Utd as there CF1. Rather he is the type of player that is just a cut below and should really either be there CF2 and/or playing for the likes of Everton or in a league that isn't as demanding.
Click to expand...

It's not really his fault clubs keep paying huge fees for him. He is what he is. A very good striker with a very good scoring rate throughout his career.

I have no problems with people not rating him highly. It is what it is. In fact I agree with a lot of the criticisms of his game, but the post from another poster I responded to that started our discussion to was pure hyperbole.
 
Yet again he’s unable to hold the ball up when the team is under pressure.
Lukaku improving his back to goal game in Italy surely has to be a meme at this point
 
Last edited:
He was much better than last few Chelsea games and scored a great goal.

Looked a bit tired though at times as he do not run a lot.

Similar to his United days his pressing is pretty poor.
 
cyberman said:
Yet again he’s unable to hold the ball up when the team is under pressure.
Lukaku improving his back to goal game in Italy surely has to be a meme at this point
Click to expand...
This is what annoys the hell out of me about commentary. Even tonight sky where saying they can knock it long as Lukaku is great at holding it up.
It’s a myth and I think it’s just based on his size.
He has improved and while he could of done more in the 2nd half he was isolated and even for the offside goal he took it well.
 
duffer said:
I thought he was pretty good tonight, all jokes aside.
Click to expand...

He was in the first half. I got off work at half time and got home at the 80’. Didnt get to see most of the second half. The offside goal, there is no way two guys sprinting are going to know who is a toe ahead. Eventhough offside it was a nice finish.
 
Well, he showed up for a big game, not bad.
 
MvG said:
You were saying, @duffer …

Quite a few zingers in there including comparisons to Drogba, Haaland and RvP amongst others. And you’d think Conte was some sort of mystic judging by some of the comments.

Turns out it was just the same player in a shit league.
Click to expand...
Perhaps if you weren't an precipitated bloke who seems to think everything outside the Premier League bubble is shit maybe you would be able to see that the majority of the posts were related with Conte coaching and certain aspects of Lukaku overall game and not pointless comparisons with other leagues.

By the way the same shit League you're talking about is the same one whose players had won the last Euros. Of course the Premier League is better, that wasn't the point.
 
Last edited:
SCP said:
Perhaps if you weren't an precipitated bloke who seems to think everything outside the Premier League bubble is shit maybe you would be able to see that the majority of the posts were related with Conte coaching and certain aspects of Lukaku overall game and not pointless comparisons with other leagues.

By the way the same shit League you're talking about is the same one whose players had won the last Euros. Of course the Premier League is better, that wasn't the point.
Click to expand...
Portugal won it in 2016 means nothing considering how shit Italy were for over 10 years
 
TheMagicFoolBus said:
Portugal won it with basically no one in the starting XI playing in Liga NOS. Italy won it with 8 or 9 starters from Serie A. Big difference.
Click to expand...
Is it? How?
Serie A has been dog shit for almost 10 years. Bar Juventus all other clubs in european competitions have been embarrassing. They did win the Euro's but it seemed kinda flukey. They barely beat Spain in the SF via pens and then did the same against England in the Final.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.