11101
Full Member
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2014
- Messages
- 21,819
This game is Lukaku in a nutshell. Responsible for the two big chances of the game. The game remains 0-0.
Own goal.I haven’t opened this thread for months, as there’s I think an overly and unnecessarily nasty tone to conversation about Lukaku in general, so forgive me if this has been asked a number of times but - how can you score the ‘decisive’ goal in a game your team loses?
Think you answered your own question in the first part.I haven’t opened this thread for months, as there’s I think an overly and unnecessarily nasty tone to conversation about Lukaku in general, so forgive me if this has been asked a number of times but - how can you score the ‘decisive’ goal in a game your team loses?
OK let's forget about Serie A and we can focus on his PL record for us and Everton.
18/19 - Man Utd - 32 games - 12 goals - 178 minutes per goal
17/18 - Man Utd - 34 games - 16 goals - 179 minutes
16/17 - Everton - 37 games - 25 goals - 131 minutes
15/16 - Everton - 37 games - 18 goals - 175 minutes
14/15 - Everton - 36 games - 10 goals - 228 minutes
13/14 - Everton - 31 games - 15 goals - 171 minutes
In that time he scored 11 goals in 66 games against the top 6.
As you can see, his goalscoring form in his last season for us was actually on par with the majority of his seasons and falls at 177 minutes per goal on average.
For reference, last season in the PL, Ings was 128 minutes per goal and Chris Wood's was 175 minutes per goal and they played for weaker sides than Martinez's 'poor' Everton side.
In two years how many hat tricks did he get against any team? I forget.
are you advocating spending up to £90m for a striker who we can only play against bottom half PL teams?
this was your post I was replying to. Remember you mentioned hat tricks.I know what you mean. It seems as if goals-against bottom-half teams don't count....like when we were getting beaten or drawing often last year against the bottom of the league teams. If for example, Lukaku was scoring a hattrick against those teams, imagine how much closer we would have ended to Liverpool.
I didn't realize only hattricks count as goals to win a game. I better get down to learning some basics of a game of footie.
As for spending 90 million on a striker to score against bottom-half teams? I don't give a damn who he scores against, as long as he helps us win games. Winning games that you should gets you up the league table, not choosing who you win against. Otherwise, we end up as a bottom half team ourselves like the current position we find ourselves in.
So you are saying the goals against weaker sides don't count? Nice try, especially when we are drawing or losing against these "weaker" teams week in week out.
I will point out to your reasoning, how many goals did Lukaku score in his first season at United when Maureen was playing something decent? Forget the Italian league for a moment, how many goals has Lukaku scored in England, including all the goals for a poor Everton side?
You seem to have trouble following your own arguments, first embarrassing yourself with the above hattrick blunder and now this, so let me break it down for you simply. You said...
So I showed you exactly how many goals he scored in the PL for us and Everton - I'll do it again just so you can attempt to take it in:
18/19 - Man Utd - 32 games - 12 goals - 178 minutes per goal
17/18 - Man Utd - 34 games - 16 goals - 179 minutes
16/17 - Everton - 37 games - 25 goals - 131 minutes
15/16 - Everton - 37 games - 18 goals - 175 minutes
14/15 - Everton - 36 games - 10 goals - 228 minutes
13/14 - Everton - 31 games - 15 goals - 171 minutes
That's an average of 177 minutes per goal. For context, Burnley's Chris Wood scored at 175 minutes per goal and Ings scored at 125 minutes per goal last season and they played for worse teams than Mourinho's United and Martinez's Everton. Are you saying we should sign them too?
this was your post I was replying to. Remember you mentioned hat tricks.
you were asking whether his scoring hattricks against the lower teams would help? Just pointing out that he didn’t score 3 goals against ANY team in 2 years - so how can you use that as you hypothetical barometer/ and argument?
fans shouldn’t look at the table until we are at least a dozen games into the season. Doing so, means stupid people make assumptions/ overreact/ yearn after past players who were never good enough based on a false position. for the avoidance of doubt, I’m taking about stupid people in general, no one in particular.
Not having any kind of trouble at all, just stating the obvious. Lukaku has scored goals for whichever team he has played for except Chelsea where he was not given a chance. Who the feck cares who he scores against, as long as he scores. Something we have difficulties with, no matter who we play against.
As for Woods Ing and, if they can score, why not. We're not in a position to turn our nose up at anyone who will help us win games, games our team needs to win.
:cough: :cough:His international goals record is phenomenal. No doubt someone will claim that Belgium have somehow found a way to only ever play crap teams.
Not just Belgium. International football somehow magically favours crap players. Apparently. Just take a look at the Dan James thread.His international goals record is phenomenal. No doubt someone will claim that Belgium have somehow found a way to only ever play crap teams.
Not just Belgium. International football somehow magically favours crap players. Apparently. Just take a look at the Dan James thread.
Oh please stop. He plays for Belgium's golden gen. Must be really tough having the likes of De Bruyne, Hazard and co providing assists for him.Yup. Yet somehow the best players in club football are also the best players in international football. And vice versa. Go figure.
Very flawed analysis. First, you are comparing his average stats over 6 seasons with stats for Ings and Wood in one season. Try using Ings and Wood's stats over the last 6 seasons and you will see a huge difference. Secondly, in his time at United Lukaku came from the bench quite a lot, esp in his last season. Your "matches" stats for him include several appearances from the bench for as little as the last 10 minutes. On the other hand, Ings and Wood virtually play 90 minutes every match. He hit 34 club goals last season, and has already hit 7 goals in 5 matches this season, in addition to his impressive record 57 goal tally for Belgium so far (5 in the last 4 games). And he is still 27. At the right team with the right support, Lukaku is an absolute beast. Barring injury, I expect his stats to get even better.You seem to have trouble following your own arguments, first embarrassing yourself with the above hattrick blunder and now this, so let me break it down for you simply. You said...
So I showed you exactly how many goals he scored in the PL for us and Everton - I'll do it again just so you can attempt to take it in:
18/19 - Man Utd - 32 games - 12 goals - 178 minutes per goal
17/18 - Man Utd - 34 games - 16 goals - 179 minutes
16/17 - Everton - 37 games - 25 goals - 131 minutes
15/16 - Everton - 37 games - 18 goals - 175 minutes
14/15 - Everton - 36 games - 10 goals - 228 minutes
13/14 - Everton - 31 games - 15 goals - 171 minutes
That's an average of 177 minutes per goal. For context, Burnley's Chris Wood scored at 175 minutes per goal and Ings scored at 125 minutes per goal last season and they played for worse teams than Mourinho's United and Martinez's Everton. Are you saying we should sign them too?
I’m not a Lukaku fan at all. I was underwhelmed when we signed him and glad when we got rid of him.Yup. Yet somehow the best players in club football are also the best players in international football. And vice versa. Go figure.
Oh please stop. He plays for Belgium's golden gen. Must be really tough having the likes of De Bruyne, Hazard and co providing assists for him.
He's a nothing player without support. If he was born 10 years earlier he'd be a laughing stock yet now he's lauded by some as one of the best strikers of the 2010s
And if you looked at his goal scoring record for the national team - at least 40goals came against cannon fodder the likes of Panama, Estonia, Gibraltar, Tunisia, San Marino...
Didn't just score one against Luxembourg and Gibraltar though... hat-tricks?!
Because he doesn't do it against top teams!!!I’m not a Lukaku fan at all. I was underwhelmed when we signed him and glad when we got rid of him.
The amount of energy some people expend on rubbishing his achievements is extraordinary though.
Sure he isI know you’re on some weird vendetta against him in this thread so I can’t be arsed getting into a back and forth with you. I’ll just say that he’s making a fool of you with each goal he scores. And he is scoring a LOT of goals.
I’m not a Lukaku fan at all. I was underwhelmed when we signed him and glad when we got rid of him.
The amount of energy some people expend on rubbishing his achievements is extraordinary though.
From the wikipedia link above, Romelu Lukaku for his NT
In the last 5 years (-> 2016): 47 games played, 46 goals scored. Impressive!
Harry Kane for example (Tonight's game not included):
Since 2016: 43 games played, only 29 goals scored.
Games played in the last 2 UEFA Nations leagues: 12
Goals scored in the last 2 UEFA Nations League against the likes of Spain, Croatia, Belgium, Netherlands, Switzerland, Denmark, Iceland: 1
Games played in the last UEFA Euro 2020 qualifying: 8
Goals scored (vs Montenegro, Czechia, Bulgaria and Kosovo): 13
Stat Padding.
Lukaku is definitely better than any strikers United have at the moment. Obviously United have had better strikers in the past, but you need to name the specific past strikers you are comparing him with because he is also better than some of them.Maybe one day he scores a goal without this or another Lukaku thread getting bumped.
We all knew before we bought him that he is a good player and can score goals, that’s why he cost so much money.
But nothing will change the fact that in terms of quality he is clearly way below the top strikers we have had at United over the years and decades.
And way below other top strikers. The way some people talk one could think he was David Villa.
I'm struggling.Lukaku is definitely better than any strikers United have at the moment. Obviously United have had better strikers in the past, but you need to name the specific past strikers you are comparing him with because he is also better than some of them.
Very flawed analysis. First, you are comparing his average stats over 6 seasons with stats for Ings and Wood in one season. Try using Ings and Wood's stats over the last 6 seasons and you will see a huge difference. Secondly, in his time at United Lukaku came from the bench quite a lot, esp in his last season. Your "matches" stats for him include several appearances from the bench for as little as the last 10 minutes. On the other hand, Ings and Wood virtually play 90 minutes every match. He hit 34 club goals last season, and has already hit 7 goals in 5 matches this season, in addition to his impressive record 57 goal tally for Belgium so far (5 in the last 4 games). And he is still 27. At the right team with the right support, Lukaku is an absolute beast. Barring injury, I expect his stats to get even better.
A sensitive soul
We get it.How is it flawed when I literally list the minutes per goal for each season? All the information is there. You can pick any season he was in England and Ings still had a better goal to minute ratio than him last season. Pick either of his seasons with us and Chris Woods still had a better goal per minute ratio last season.
Also in his first season for us, he played 90 minutes in pretty much every game and still only managed a goal every 179 minutes - he actually had a better ratio in his second season when he wasn't an undisputed starter for the whole season so your point makes absolutely no sense anyway.
If Lukaku is better than any of our current strikers explain how all 3 of Martial, Greenwood and Rashford had a better goal ratio last season than him when he was here?
His international goals record is phenomenal. No doubt someone will claim that Belgium have somehow found a way to only ever play crap teams.
Thats true but his record in the EPL was alarmingly worse than any of the other decent strikers. Like shocking. It was a consistent theme through his time in England. His own Belgium teammate took a swipe at him for hiding. Can this Belgium golden generation truly challenge with a striker that disappears as soon as they get to the "tougher" parts of the tournament? Ask yourself; could Belgium still win games and get to the same stage of each competition without Lukaku's goals? I think they could even with Batsuayi. They have the supporting castConfirming the quite frankly astonishing idea that strikers tend to find it easy to score against crap teams and hard against good teams.