Difference is, Bruno was half the price and was brought as a somewhat unknown at top European level football. Lukaku on the other hand was a known donkey at PL, CL and top level international football and somehow people thought beating up on poor Serie A sides meant he had developed.
Romelu Lukaku | Chelsea
- Thread starter RDCR07
- Start date
It's hilarous how people thought the Lukaku we saw at Everton and Utd was magically going to be different on his return to Chelsea. Even in Italy he regularly went 3 or 4 games without scoring, his current drought is a fairly regular thing with him. He will still score 20+ goals but most of those will probably be goals that round off wins, rather than goals that decide games.
It’s hilarious how your best defence of Lukaku is to point at another player.
The criticisms of Lukaku seem a bit false.
In the 19 league games they played last season after Tuchel joined, they won 6 games by 1 goal, drew 5, and lost 2 by 1 goal. So 13 of their 19 games had a 1 goal margin.
This season they've won 6 of 9 with a 2+ goal margin. They've went from 2/3 of their league games being tight to 2/3 of their games being comfortable.
Lukaku was brought in to make tight wins comfortable, ultimately guarding against tight draws and losses that lose the league more than big games. They didn't need a striker to turn the tide in big games: they beat City, Liverpool Leicester and Spurs, drew against us, and won the CL. They needed a striker to rack up a few extra points in games like Leeds, Wolves, Southampton or Brighton, which saw 1 goal across the 4 games. Judging him on everything but that is just petty.
In the 19 league games they played last season after Tuchel joined, they won 6 games by 1 goal, drew 5, and lost 2 by 1 goal. So 13 of their 19 games had a 1 goal margin.
This season they've won 6 of 9 with a 2+ goal margin. They've went from 2/3 of their league games being tight to 2/3 of their games being comfortable.
Lukaku was brought in to make tight wins comfortable, ultimately guarding against tight draws and losses that lose the league more than big games. They didn't need a striker to turn the tide in big games: they beat City, Liverpool Leicester and Spurs, drew against us, and won the CL. They needed a striker to rack up a few extra points in games like Leeds, Wolves, Southampton or Brighton, which saw 1 goal across the 4 games. Judging him on everything but that is just petty.
Not really, those are expectations from a Cavani like or even Ighalo like signing who are expected to add few goals and replace your first choice striker, and not club record signing in his best years.
I am pretty sure Chelsea fans expect more than that.
And this season they have drawn with the Dippers and lost to City. Further to that 35 year old Giroud is out pacing Lukaku's Serie A goal scoring record from last season.
Nah that's crap.
Every pundit around were creaming themselves when he came back as suggesting he's this great big game player who's going to elevate this Chelsea side to another level.
He's exactly the same limited player as he always was...
Absolute shitbox of a player, clear for all to see.
Perhaps Tuchel and Conte know more than we do?
Perhaps Tuchel and Conte know how to use Lukaku and how to get wins with him in the team, while Ole doesn't?
When you are trying to assemble the best possible team, you need some specific ingredients, depending on your specific plan. You don't really need the best of the best in every single position, this is usually not feasible, and sometimes it is really not the best for the team. You need the right ingredients, and you need to know how to use every player to the benefit of the team. Obviously, the most important role is to get goals, easy goals, tap-ins whatever, but get some goals especially against mediocre teams. That's how you don't lose to Aston Villa at home, you have someone like Lukaku who scores a couple.
Perhaps Tuchel and Conte know how to use Lukaku and how to get wins with him in the team, while Ole doesn't?
When you are trying to assemble the best possible team, you need some specific ingredients, depending on your specific plan. You don't really need the best of the best in every single position, this is usually not feasible, and sometimes it is really not the best for the team. You need the right ingredients, and you need to know how to use every player to the benefit of the team. Obviously, the most important role is to get goals, easy goals, tap-ins whatever, but get some goals especially against mediocre teams. That's how you don't lose to Aston Villa at home, you have someone like Lukaku who scores a couple.
What I’m saying is those two things are not mutually inclusive. Taking Chelsea to the next level means turning those lost points in small games to wins, in turn winning them the title. That’s the next level. They didn’t need a striker to win big games for them to reach the next level. I doubt the reason Chelsea bought him or the reasons pundits praised his signing had anything to do with big games. Where’s the articles suggesting that?
Why did I get a notification for this?
Chelsea are doing well without him.
Chelsea proving a well coached and well balanced team will get goals from everywhere and don’t even need a star striker.
Well they have struggled in the big games with him, and their play has gone up a notch since he's been injured, so I'm not sure about that. I could see Tuchel dropping him for certain games when he comes back and we all know how well he reacts to that.
Deleted his Twitter account for too many insults and abuse by Chelsea fans
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Why would any Chelsea "fans" insult him when he's not even played recently due to injury!
Don't make no sense. Can't blame him for deleting his Twitter, on of the worst things in this era.
Why is he getting abuse?
“You’re a grown-ass man, deal with it.”
There’s the soft mentality again.
Dzeko is underrated generally. I remember when we played Wolfsburg you could see the talent - he also turned into a bit of a bogeyman for us annoyingly as well at City. From memory he wasn’t always first choice at City but generally has a good record wherever he’s gone.
Because it’s the internet? I had a YouTube channel with 150 subscribers and was getting abuse and death threats. I didn’t even show my face, it’s just the nature of humanity and people being able to hide behind their screens. The internet is dehumanising and there are a lot of arseholes out there. God knows what it’d be like for someone globally famous.
Social media is a fecking dump.
twitter mathematics, injury to player + team winning without him = player is a fraud and i must tell him as such
Good for him.
Pretty much
4 goals in 10 PL+CL games. Thankfully City lost interest, another bullet dodged. Lukaku and Kane.
I'd suggest banning every person who abuses their own team's players online from the ground but lets be honest, anyone abusing their players on Twitter probably isn't a match-going fan.
Think Kane would have had a good season. He was trending downwards a bit for a couple of season, but last season he seemingly reinvented himself and had a great season. Think he could have continued that form for City, had City been willing to stump up the cash/Levy been willing to deal.
I don't understand why anyone would waste their time going to player's account just to abuse them.
Anyways you answered it, because it's internet.
More like United fans who still hold a grudge against him and still haven't got over it, pretending to be Chelsea fans...
Dunno, for the injury probably
Yes, works like this
To be fair we didn't lost much with him either.
Can't help but feel sad about this especially as he hasn't really been bad for Chelsea.
Sad, not his fault that Chelsea lost the plot and thought he had developed in Italy.
Disappointing he got injured and strengthened Chelsea isn't it ?
Reinvented himself in Italy, or something 
Chelsea and strikers, eh?
Cant polish a...Reinvented himself in Italy, or something
cacku