Jump to: Man Utd 1:1 Chelsea
View full 2018-19 profile
Rubbish, it's a contradiction both can't be true.
I think Lukaku looked good in recent times and if it were up to me i'd keep him around. Still, if we really want to challenge for the title again we need someone better at the club.
Lacazette was one who got away, one of the main reasons why Arsenal won.
To be fair it’s been posted for weeks even while we were winning that he’s not good enough.
It just gets batted back by the fonts of knowledge defending Lukaku as ‘why moan, we won’ or ‘he scored And people still moan’
Bit arrogant that. Your font of knowledge isn't no deeper than anyone else's. In fact it's more likely to be wrong along with others because he's playing and being praised by the person most think on here to be our next manager. So your font is better than Ole's and his backroom staff?
More than happy to have the debate but let's not forget it's still based on opinions.
Used my favorite phrase there ‘let’s not...’
I didn’t mean it to be arrogant but it seems when someone hear voices an opinion that Lukaku is not good enough, there’s one or two who constantly go about how we are wrong and we don’t know anything, he’s top scorer this top scorer that.
As for Ole, of course he’s going to praise him ffs and if you haven’t noticed we’ve been ravaged with injuries too
I thought the same. Most of our other attackers wouldn't even get those chances. It's encouraging that he seems to get in to positions to score quite often in games. If he keeps getting those chances, I have no doubt he will score goals.
Yep but they might actually be right too and you might be wrong....like I said, don't mind the debate but losing brings out the worst in fans and these kinds of posts on here only seem to occur when we do. Not coincidence didn't read anything like this on Weds night? Whys that then cause these comments aren't about his performance on Sunday, just about his ability in general?
Seriously? After the euphoria of that result Wednesday you’re questioning why someone didn’t post goal scoring stats. Ok.
And yes those defending him may well be right. They seem to be certainly out numbered though. To be honest both sides Are just as bad and it seems to happen in every debate.
I’ll add to that point re PSG you brought up.
On Wednesday he scored and we won , people were happy, I praised him in this thread. Still doesn’t mean I think he’s good enough but he deserved praise.
Against arsenal he missed a few chances against a top side in important game and we lost. Of course his record against the top 6 is going to be brought up again, it’s directly related to the game we just watched
Yes cause why can you and others have it both ways but others can't? I have more respect for those who are less sheep like and stand by Rom when he isn't playing well than those who enjoy the euphoria of the match day thread when we win like Weds, to then turn up when we don't, posting the rhetoric of him not being good enough. It's called having your cake and eating it...
The only person that 'counts' is Ole at the mo. I agree though, both are equally bad and the truth is probably somewhere in the middle....
Umm ok so I don’t think he’s good enough but when he plays well and I praise him that’s wrong.
I should stick to my guns and keep slating him and you’d have more ‘respect’ for me that way.
Somehow I doubt that mate, as I said, if he plays well and people still question him it most definitely gets thrown back at them.
I think we’ll have to agree to disagree anyway.
My stance is as I’ve always said, was never keen on him, always behind him and supported him, would prefer him to be replaced by a different striker, will praise him if he does well even if I still doubt his quality. Simple really.
I also explained why the stats were brought up following arsenal in added post
Almost as though if you play for a team that creates a wealth of chances, something we haven't done prior to Oles arrival, then you'll score more goals as a striker.
For me it comes down to 3 things.
1. Are the majority of goals he scores goals any half decent striker could score?
2. Does he score goals in tight games where you might only get one chance?
3. Does he force his own chances, or chances for others, with his movement?
He has played in 26 league games where we have failed to score or only scored once i.e the tight games that win you leagues. He has only got 2 goals in those games.
We gave Lukaku two absolute sitters against Arsenal. The chances were there.
Actually, there is a statistic showing that in all the games Spurs have been goalless put together, Harry Kane hasn’t scored a single goal in any of them. Talk about not scoring when you need it the most!
One, let's not exaggerate. Chances Aguero would apparently put away, even though within the past month we've evidence of him missing a significantly easier chance. Go figure.
That's no exaggeration. They were absolute gifts, the cross from Shaw and the through ball he miscontrolled.
Every striker misses chances, but you wont find another video of Aguero missing one like without going back a significant amount of time.
I’m glad you are too young to have seen Andy Cole. (Or too old to remember)
I'm not too young to remember it was Glenn Hoddle that created that myth based on half a season of poor form at a new club followed by two broken legs. Andy Cole was a brilliant striker.
Its a myth he missed loads of chances actually
As I said, exaggeration.
You also won't find Lukaku missing a chance as easy as that, either. He missed from a similar position against us last year if I recall. Clearly, players like Aguero don't just need "one chance."
Ultimately, since Lukakus arrival here our service to him has been largely poor. In comparison, the likes of Aguero has had some of the most creative players in the game feeding him chance after chance, in a system that works. Invariably, a top striker will statistically perform better in a top team. He probably won't be our solution long term, but let's not devalue what he does contribute and what he is capable of because of it.
I think you think I'm trying to say he's rubbish and we should sell him immediately?
He's not, but he's not good enough for what we want to achieve and he doesn't match the calibre of striker we have traditionally had at the club. He's a player who will score loads of goals when we are playing well but he might as well not be there when we're having a difficult day. The best strikers will create something out of nothing in those games, and like i said before that's what you need to win leagues.
It was a fairly obvious miscontrol that allowed the keeper to close him down. He should have taken it into his stride with his right foot.
He got 4 chances in this game, scored 3 of them. Not sure about your point.
To have the balls to compare Cole to Lukaku
Cole had pace, decent ball control, could score from outside the box, overhead kicks, first time shots... He could score some outrageous goals.
Im still waiting to see Lukaku score an amazing goal. Will it ever happen?
@Brwned my posts from the start have been “Lukaku is not good enough, is inconsistent, has pretty terrible all around play and doesn’t score against top six. this is factual”
You: “even Ruud had droughts”
Me: “yeah, but Ruud and our other strikers before him still had a better strike ratio, better all around play, and chances are if I check goals against top tier opposition they outperform him too”
You: “haha you’re presenting evidence in a manner that pushes your narrative. context. goal droughts”
Me: “I mean you are the one that decontextualised my posts and boxed it to goal droughts”
You: “this is amusing”
Me: “let me push my agenda”
oh and for clarification, I wasn’t saying you’re the one with an agenda, I was comedically saying I am, hence the “we move”. I forget colloquialisms do not translate well to forums, and that is indeed my fault.
Creative post, had me engaged until the very end, emotions behind it are almost palpable, and the reference to ‘sheep’ was a nice touch, but erm, I have posted about Lukaku being poor before and when it’s all said and done, he’s still gonna be an inconsistent striker, with limited ability and that cannot be relied upon in big occasions.
He has scored some nice goals but I still dont see him as our main man since his all around game is not a joy to watch and breaks up too many opportunities. I prefer rashford up top.
“We need a special player who can reliably finish the one chance they will get.”
He didn’t get 1 chance that game. He got several, and so those misses aren’t as vilified as as it would be if he missed that one and only opportunity.
And you don’t get my point? This notion that if we had another striker he’d be putting away all these chances is stupid.
Tweet— Twitter API (@user) date
Tweet— Twitter API (@user) date
There are probably morons who would say Cavani isn’t good enough for us either. Ibra missed way more chances than Lukaku as well.
People keep comparing him to Aguero. Get it into your heads that we are NOT going to sign a striker on Aguero’s level. Get the feck over it.
Will have a career like Higuain. Puts up great looking numbers wherever he goes, but will never be considered a top tier striker because of his limitations. Should have bought Vardy. Cheaper, faster, more clinical, can play on the counter. Plus his age means he wouldn't have been a threat to Rashford, Martial and Greenwood.
But Lukaku did get 3 great chances against Arsenal and missed them all. So much for the idea that the problem is all down to a 'lack of service'. Aguero just fits better at City too, Lukaku won't fit into our team that way. That part isn't his fault, but it doesn't stop it from being true.
That's really damning! Every striker worth his salt has tended to be on the scoresheet even when his team failed to score a goal in the match. Honestly there is no point of arguing after that solid use of statistics right there.
Also the first question is rather ridiculous too: he has definitely been amongst the top scoring striker in the PL in several years. That's literally his strongest suit,and so no, a half decent striker wouldn't be able to get into the positions like him and finish like him.
Yes, as it is with Lukaku. Cole was a brilliant striker who had some down periods due to nerves/expectations (probably), injuries and sometimes changes in formation that didn’t make the best of him. Which is normal. His quality showed over time, though. He could make surprising mistakes in finishing, passing, or ball control, leading some to mistakenly think he was an erratic finisher or not all that in the build up.
Lukaku is at least as good, IMO, and he is as lethal as anyone. He doesn’t miss more chances than Agüero, though some people seem to think so. He also does things in build up, counterplay and positioning that no one else in our team can. But he needs to be used right. The three biggest chances against Arsenal - we don’t have anyone in our team that would make that run, shield that ball, open up that space. And the chance and a half Rashford got, I would prefer Lukaku at the end if both of them.
That's quite poor to be fair but would definitely like to see this for the seasons he has been at United. His time at Everton isn't comparable to a top club like us, but have a feeling it would be quite poor still. Although he has redeemed himself by scoring two at PSG.
Cavani is a better striker than Lukaku, lightyears ahead in this movement. He does miss alot but he also gets alot of chances due to his play
I'm not disagreeing.
Aguero missed a free header from six yards against Watford around the 30th minute. He is no God, he misses his own share of chances too. Every striker do, it just depends on how many chances you get.
A sack of potatoes is better than Lukaku.
I’m sure their goal rates are fairly comparable, both at club and international level. Even if Cole was known more as a goal getter than as an all-rounder (which I think doesn’t do him nor Lukaku justice).
But let’s be honest, Cole scored some peaches, yes, but that wasn’t really his strength. The ‘seemingly’ simple goals were what built his reputation before the youtube days.
Separate names with a comma.