Romelu Lukaku | Inter watch | Scores the decisive goal in a European final

Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
11,863
Location
Somewhere out there
Well the way you keep banging on about how’s he’s the 8th best (strike rate) you clearly rate him somewhat otherwise what is your point?
You’re confusing me stating FACTUAL evidence with my opinion of him as a player. Ha ha

fecking point has been the same all along, a poser questioned why he was scoring in Italy and the point was he has always scored, backed up by the facts.

What is your fecking point?
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
11,863
Location
Somewhere out there
I give up
So are you claiming he doesn’t have the 8th best strike rate in the Premier League ever?

Are you @Zlatan 7 claiming Lukaku didn’t score goals in the Premier League?

Are you claiming he’s not the Belgium highest scorer ever?

Are you claiming he’s only now scoring because Italy is weaker?

Are you claiming playing in a better side that wins 69% isn’t part of the reason he is scoring more?

Which of the above are you disagreeing on pal?
 

Stacks

Full Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
6,797
Location
Between a rock and the Nou Camp
Won't deny he was limited but he was good at Everton so it seems a disservice to say he can't play in the league if you adapt to his strengths. I suspect his head had completely gone by the second season and that's just as big of a problem as any technical limitations. Situation isn't entirely dissimilar to Di Maria who was/is a good player but it didn't work out.

Before anybody says it though, Di Maria is obviously a superior player.
1st Everton season he scored in 13 league matches out of 33. 2nd season he scored in 10 games out of 32. 3rd season scored in 14 out of 36 games. then 17 out of 37, then 15 games out of 34, then 9 games out of 32. now its 12 out of 22. He seems to be scoring in much more frequently for Inter than any other club including his best season at Everton. If he scores in just 5 more games he would of equalled his most consistent scoring season at the toffees in the league. he has 16 games to do that.
 

Zlatan 7

We've got bush!
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
5,036
So are you claiming he doesn’t have the 8th best strike rate in the Premier League ever?

Are you @Zlatan 7 claiming Lukaku didn’t score goals in the Premier League?

Are you claiming he’s not the Belgium highest scorer ever?

Are you claiming he’s only now scoring because Italy is weaker?

Are you claiming playing in a better side that wins 69% isn’t part of the reason he is scoring more?

Which of the above are you disagreeing on pal?
Are you ever going to answer a question presented to you or will you keep posting your same stats.

I asked what you thought of his amazing record of 1 goal and sometimes none a month over two years for us? And does that not slightly go against your stat and shows you stats can be skewed.

Your condescending way of posting is also funny so I like to engage. That’s all.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
11,863
Location
Somewhere out there
1st Everton season he scored in 13 league matches out of 33. 2nd season he scored in 10 games out of 32. 3rd season scored in 14 out of 36 games. then 17 out of 37, then 15 games out of 34, then 9 games out of 32. now its 12 out of 22. He seems to be scoring in much more frequently for Inter than any other club including his best season at Everton. If he scores in just 5 more games he would of equalled his most consistent scoring season at the toffees in the league. he has 16 games to do that.
How many games did Everton win compared to Inter Stacks?

I mean, “Striker scores more in more successful team” is hardly a groundbreaking bit of news.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
11,863
Location
Somewhere out there
Are you ever going to answer a question presented to you or will you keep posting your same stats.

I asked what you thought of his amazing record of 1 goal and sometimes none a month over two years for us? And does that not slightly go against your stat and shows you stats can be skewed.

Your condescending way of posting is also funny so I like to engage. That’s all.
Are you going to answer any of the questions I asked there? You seem to have a lot of problems with the facts I posted so which one do you disagree with?

I’ve already mentioned Rooney before when talking about striker droughts, I bet Wayne had loads of months every season where he didn’t score. It’s really not that weird, lot of strikers have them. Didn’t Harry Kane used to start every season with a 2 month drought or something mad like that?
 
Last edited:

Renegade

Full Member
Joined
Nov 11, 2009
Messages
4,038
I agree with this, If we had Lukaku he would have starved minutes that Greenwood is getting.

So Martial playing CF and Greenwood backup makes 2 players. Why is everyone getting emotional about this? City have Aguero and Jesus.

Pool have 2
Arsenal have 2
Spurs have 1

People will say Greenwood is too young but, wasn't Rashford first team at 18? Rooney? Ronaldo?
How many games has Greenwood played for us as a CF? Ole has been using him from the right.

Lukaku didn’t fit well with us but I blame the coaches. We know what his all about why attempt to use him or ask off him what his not capable off. That’s been our problem for years. Signing players with no idea how to use them.

Why did our “world class” coaches and nutritionist not work to get this asset we spent a fortune on in the best condition?

I was happy to see him go ultimately especially for the money we received but we didn’t do a good enough job with him. Now Inter are feeling the benefits.

I find it strange that usually the people claiming Serie A to be weak, praise the likes of Koulibaly and the things Ronaldo is doing.

Also I find the people being overly optimistic regarding Ighalo‘s signing but being happy we don’t have an option like Lukaku bizzare.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
5,588
How many games has Greenwood played for us as a CF? Ole has been using him from the right.

Lukaku didn’t fit well with us but I blame the coaches. We know what his all about why attempt to use him or ask off him what his not capable off. That’s been our problem for years. Signing players with no idea how to use them.

Why did our “world class” coaches and nutritionist not work to get this asset we spent a fortune on in the best condition?

I was happy to see him go ultimately especially for the money we received but we didn’t do a good enough job with him. Now Inter are feeling the benefits.
Yes, but his final position will be CF. He starts there cause Martial is being used as first choice CF.

Lukaku was signed by Jose and he used him the way he was supposed to. A new manager comes in and wanted to play a different style. Tbh, with the money we got and how I want United to play, Lukaku was not the right striker for us.

We always knew he would score goals, so I am not concerned with him scoring goals in Italy. We didn't do a good job but surely it comes down to the player as well to make sure he is the fittest he can be?
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
11,863
Location
Somewhere out there
I asked what you thought of his amazing record of 1 goal and sometimes none a month over two years for us? And does that not slightly go against your stat and shows you stats can be skewed.
He Premier League strike rate can’t be skewed @Zlatan 7, that actually impossible.

You do realise strike rate is a calculatio between games played and goals scored?

It’s a silly argument anyway, Lukaku is a goalscorer and has proven it over his career. There’s a reason teams have spent big on him 3 times already.

Doesn’t mean I wanted him leading the line for us for the next 3 years, just that he’s scoring as expected in a successful side that wins 69% of it’s games and plays to his strengths.

Not even sure how any of that is even slightly controversial?
 

Zlatan 7

We've got bush!
Joined
May 26, 2016
Messages
5,036
He Premier League strike rate can’t be skewed @Zlatan 7, that actually impossible.

You do realise strike rate is a calculatio between games played and goals scored?

It’s a silly argument anyway, Lukaku is a goalscorer and has proven it over his career. There’s a reason teams have spent big on him 3 times already.

Doesn’t mean I wanted him leading the line for us for the next 3 years, just that he’s scoring as expected in a successful side that wins 69% of it’s games and plays to his strengths.

Not even sure how any of that is even slightly controversial?
You are incredible :lol: Did the ole manager bounce have anything to do with that win percentage? You present it as if it was purely down to us having Lukaku.

You also present his premier league stats in a skewed way, where you don’t take his appalling record for Man Utd over 2 years into account. He consistently over two years only scored none, one or so a month with one purple patch when he joined that boosted his stats for his. The other times he hampered our attacks.

he may have had a good record at Everton where they played a totally different game under different expectations, for us, he was crap and you seem obsessed with using your stats to deny that.

I’m done now.
 

Vidyoyo

Self-confessed coffee shop chat-up expert
Joined
Jun 12, 2014
Messages
4,920
1st Everton season he scored in 13 league matches out of 33. 2nd season he scored in 10 games out of 32. 3rd season scored in 14 out of 36 games. then 17 out of 37, then 15 games out of 34, then 9 games out of 32. now its 12 out of 22. He seems to be scoring in much more frequently for Inter than any other club including his best season at Everton. If he scores in just 5 more games he would of equalled his most consistent scoring season at the toffees in the league. he has 16 games to do that.
Where did you get these from? Your stats are incorrect according to Wikipedia.

17 in 35 at West Brom(!)

15 in 31 - 1st season at Everton (on loan)
10 in 36 - 2nd season
18 in 37 - 3rd season
25 in 37 - 4th season

16 in 34 - 1st season with us
12 in 32 - 2nd season

Agreed he's scoring more frequently now and it's probably because he's playing in a worse league.

Are you going to answer any of the questions I asked there? You seem to have a lot of problems with the facts I posted so which one do you disagree with?

I’ve already mentioned Rooney before when talking about striker droughts, I bet Wayne had loads of months every season where he didn’t score. It’s really not that weird, lot of strikers have them. Didn’t Harry Kane used to start every season with a 2 month drought or something mad like that?
Yeah, Rooney was fairly well known for going through purple patches.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
11,863
Location
Somewhere out there
You are incredible :lol: Did the ole manager bounce have anything to do with that win percentage? You present it as if it was purely down to us having Lukaku.

You also present his premier league stats in a skewed way, where you don’t take his appalling record for Man Utd over 2 years into account.
Erm, what on Earth are you banging on about now man? the win-rate mentioned was at Inter (striker scores more in team that wins more) and yes, his PL strike rate includes his entire time in the Premier League, that includes United ffs :lol:

Are you playing dumb @Zlatan 7 ? Please tell me you are?
 

elánius

New Member
Newbie
Joined
Oct 17, 2019
Messages
121
I actually think it was a huge mistake to let him go and it was even bigger mistake to do it without at least average replacement.
Many people will say that he didnt work in United, but is this even true?

Lukaku and his first season 2017/18 - he played 51 games, scored 27 goals and had 9 assists, overall played 4071 minutes, so he needed just 150 minutes per goal, 113 minutes per goal or assist. He scored 16 goals in PL (#1 in MUTD and #6 in PL).

Can you really say this was bad season or not good enough for main striker for ManUnited? It was hist first season in top4 club, first season under Mourinho and for me he did absolutly fine.

If you want to compare him with season before that, look at Ibra. In season 16/17 he was our best goalscorer with 28 goals (and 10 assists) in 46 games, overall played 3847 minutes, so he needed 137 minutes per goal and only 101 minutets for goal or assist. He scored 17 goals in PL (#1 in United and #7 in PL). And I dont remeber anyone saying he had bad season, that he wasnt good enough for us and that we need a better striker. Actually peeople were angry because of his injury that we lost one of our best players (and I agree). So was his really so much better than Lukaku who was according to many people nothing more than flop for United? Or the big difference is that Ibra came for free? Well, yes, it can be, he did cost us nothing, but if we want to rate players based on their transfer fees, we can start with Maguire or AWB and it wont look good, same goes to Martial or even Pogba and so on.
Btw year before Ibra (15/16) our top goalscorer was Martial with 17 goals and only 11 in PL, but that was of course LvG´s last season.

I definitely agree that he did not succeed last season, but who actually did? After all that negativity from Mourinho who was finger pointing left and right but himself, after all those broken negative records while all of us thought it could not be worse (Ole proved us all wrong but thats not the point)...Lukaku definitely failed that season, but he was just one of many, even de Gea had his worst season since his very first one and only good player was Pogba (manye people would not even agree with this one, so maybe shaw?). But if you look at his all time record, it was more like an exception rather than his usual standard.

Romelu Lukaku's record across all competitions:
2012/13: 38 games, 17 goals
2013/14: 33 games, 16 goals
2014/15: 48 games, 20 goals
2015/16: 46 games, 25 goals
2016/17: 39 games, 26 goals
2017/18: 51 games, 27 goals
2018/19: 45 games, 15 goals

And look at numbers from last season of our offensive trio:
Lukaku with 45 games, scored 15 goals and had 4 assists, played 3001 minutes, so he needed 200 minutes per gol, 157 minutes gol or assist (overall in PL he needs 170 minutes per goal)
Rashford with 49 games, 13 goals and 9 assists, played 3291 minutes, needed 253 minutes per goal, 149 minutes for goal or assist (overall he needs 209 minutes per goal in PL). This season is above his average as he needs only 134 minutes per goal, but that mainly because of many penalty kicks he scored, he scored 14 goals, 5 of them from penalty kicks and without tthose 5 goals, he would be on his long-term average of 209 minutes per goal.
Martial with 38 games, scored 12 goals and had 3 assists, played 2327 minutes, needed 193 minutes per gol, 155 minutes for goal or assist (and his overall stat is 212 minutes per goal in PL).

So I agree that Lukaku had a bad second season (as well as the whole team). He also knew that he would not be Solksjaer´s first choice and was forced to play as RW or as a CF in diamond, where a substantial part of his work was defending on the wing. But he certainly didnt have a much worse season than Martial or Rashford who stayed as our main striker for this season. So why he was reated as flop, donkey, deadwood and so on and those two got guilt free pass and became our first choices for our starting XI?
And is one bad season (or maybe only half of the season) enough to write off proven striker in PL? Does he really didnt fit in Oles system? And what kind of system he wants to play? Kick and run? Well I am sure Lukaku can do that too and actually could have bette dribble succes than James (who has worst in whole PL) and we would have one more option for our attack.

And I actaully don't care that he wanted out. Pogba also wanted out. I dont care about their feelings. They are our employees, we should do what is the best solution for us, not for them. We bought them for big money and we paid them fortunes to play for us, so if we need them, they ll just stay here and do their best. He had a long term contract, we didnt need to sell him and we didnt have a replacement for him. IT was horrible decision and it of course back fired, because while we suffer big time in attack, he is enjoying himself in Inter and already broke some record over there.
Ffs he already proved himself in WBA, Everton, Belgian international team, now in Inter and I would even say in first season with us. Looks like every manager out there is able to use him and is happy to have him except for just one and thats Olé...
 

MalcolmTucker

Full Member
Joined
Jul 14, 2014
Messages
1,183
I actually think it was a huge mistake to let him go and it was even bigger mistake to do it without at least average replacement.
Many people will say that he didnt work in United, but is this even true?

Lukaku and his first season 2017/18 - he played 51 games, scored 27 goals and had 9 assists, overall played 4071 minutes, so he needed just 150 minutes per goal, 113 minutes per goal or assist. He scored 16 goals in PL (#1 in MUTD and #6 in PL).

Can you really say this was bad season or not good enough for main striker for ManUnited? It was hist first season in top4 club, first season under Mourinho and for me he did absolutly fine.

If you want to compare him with season before that, look at Ibra. In season 16/17 he was our best goalscorer with 28 goals (and 10 assists) in 46 games, overall played 3847 minutes, so he needed 137 minutes per goal and only 101 minutets for goal or assist. He scored 17 goals in PL (#1 in United and #7 in PL). And I dont remeber anyone saying he had bad season, that he wasnt good enough for us and that we need a better striker. Actually peeople were angry because of his injury that we lost one of our best players (and I agree). So was his really so much better than Lukaku who was according to many people nothing more than flop for United? Or the big difference is that Ibra came for free? Well, yes, it can be, he did cost us nothing, but if we want to rate players based on their transfer fees, we can start with Maguire or AWB and it wont look good, same goes to Martial or even Pogba and so on.
Btw year before Ibra (15/16) our top goalscorer was Martial with 17 goals and only 11 in PL, but that was of course LvG´s last season.

I definitely agree that he did not succeed last season, but who actually did? After all that negativity from Mourinho who was finger pointing left and right but himself, after all those broken negative records while all of us thought it could not be worse (Ole proved us all wrong but thats not the point)...Lukaku definitely failed that season, but he was just one of many, even de Gea had his worst season since his very first one and only good player was Pogba (manye people would not even agree with this one, so maybe shaw?). But if you look at his all time record, it was more like an exception rather than his usual standard.

Romelu Lukaku's record across all competitions:
2012/13: 38 games, 17 goals
2013/14: 33 games, 16 goals
2014/15: 48 games, 20 goals
2015/16: 46 games, 25 goals
2016/17: 39 games, 26 goals
2017/18: 51 games, 27 goals
2018/19: 45 games, 15 goals

And look at numbers from last season of our offensive trio:
Lukaku with 45 games, scored 15 goals and had 4 assists, played 3001 minutes, so he needed 200 minutes per gol, 157 minutes gol or assist (overall in PL he needs 170 minutes per goal)
Rashford with 49 games, 13 goals and 9 assists, played 3291 minutes, needed 253 minutes per goal, 149 minutes for goal or assist (overall he needs 209 minutes per goal in PL). This season is above his average as he needs only 134 minutes per goal, but that mainly because of many penalty kicks he scored, he scored 14 goals, 5 of them from penalty kicks and without tthose 5 goals, he would be on his long-term average of 209 minutes per goal.
Martial with 38 games, scored 12 goals and had 3 assists, played 2327 minutes, needed 193 minutes per gol, 155 minutes for goal or assist (and his overall stat is 212 minutes per goal in PL).

So I agree that Lukaku had a bad second season (as well as the whole team). He also knew that he would not be Solksjaer´s first choice and was forced to play as RW or as a CF in diamond, where a substantial part of his work was defending on the wing. But he certainly didnt have a much worse season than Martial or Rashford who stayed as our main striker for this season. So why he was reated as flop, donkey, deadwood and so on and those two got guilt free pass and became our first choices for our starting XI?
And is one bad season (or maybe only half of the season) enough to write off proven striker in PL? Does he really didnt fit in Oles system? And what kind of system he wants to play? Kick and run? Well I am sure Lukaku can do that too and actually could have bette dribble succes than James (who has worst in whole PL) and we would have one more option for our attack.

And I actaully don't care that he wanted out. Pogba also wanted out. I dont care about their feelings. They are our employees, we should do what is the best solution for us, not for them. We bought them for big money and we paid them fortunes to play for us, so if we need them, they ll just stay here and do their best. He had a long term contract, we didnt need to sell him and we didnt have a replacement for him. IT was horrible decision and it of course back fired, because while we suffer big time in attack, he is enjoying himself in Inter and already broke some record over there.
Ffs he already proved himself in WBA, Everton, Belgian international team, now in Inter and I would even say in first season with us. Looks like every manager out there is able to use him and is happy to have him except for just one and thats Olé...
Very comprehensive breakdown but ultimately it just highlights that even at his best, his goalscoring was average for us even without factoring in his all-round game and fitness issues. 16 and 12 league goals isn't good enough for such a limited player, especially when you consider that he only scored 1 goal in 20 games against the top 6 in the PL which is a joke.

He had 1.5 years to establish himself as our undisputed number 9 and he flopped. He had his chance and he came up short.
 

Paul_Scholes18

Full Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
8,045
And there is a reason he keeps getting moved on.
Cause we are stupid? We would have sold De Bruyne and Salah too.
Not the young ones Mourinho sold, but peak De Bruyne and Salah after we ended in 6th and them turning on Oles poor tactics.
 

sullydnl

Ross Kemp's caf ID
Joined
Sep 13, 2012
Messages
21,892
Since replacing him was never seriously on the agenda, I think it can even be said that selling him was a mistake.
Tbf, Solskjaer was asked whether we'd be signing a replacement for Lukaku if he went and Ole said we would. So I think it was fair enough for people to want him sold at that point.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
5,588
Cause we are stupid? We would have sold De Bruyne and Salah too.
Not the young ones Mourinho sold, but peak De Bruyne and Salah after we ended in 6th and them turning on Oles poor tactics.
Erm no because we haven't sold Rashford, Martial and other players we have bought at a very young age.

Lukaku was sold because he is not good enough for Manutd. Period.
 

Paul_Scholes18

Full Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
8,045
Erm no because we haven't sold Rashford, Martial and other players we have bought at a very young age.

Lukaku was sold because he is not good enough for Manutd. Period.
If you think our transfers have been great that is on you. Most of the players we sold have not turned into world beaters.
Although it is not like those that stayed have been brilliant and we could have used some of the players we sold.

Lukaku is a top striker and we could need one. People seem to be happy about selling players they do not like even though it cost us titles and a CL place potentially.
Bring some bloody players in before you sell would be my view.
 

Paul_Scholes18

Full Member
Joined
Sep 13, 2014
Messages
8,045
Does great at Everton

Does great for Belgium

Has very good first season at Utd

Fails under OGS

Does great at Milan

Hmm...
He never failed under Ole. Since Ole barely played him.
Once Martial got injured he got the chance.
Scored 6 goals in 3 games and helped Ole getting the job.
Then he got injured. Although he should have scored 1-2 goals vs
Arsenal and helped us win that game.

Failed under Mourinho near the end when he got the sack like everyone did.
Also not a great second half of the previous season either.
 

kouroux

45k posts to finally achieve this tagline
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
78,812
Location
Djibouti (La terre des braves)
Tbf, Solskjaer was asked whether we'd be signing a replacement for Lukaku if he went and Ole said we would. So I think it was fair enough for people to want him sold at that point.
I admit I was stretching it. However, Ole was obligated to say that to reassure the fans. He always tries to make things positive.
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
11,303
Location
And Solskjær has won it!
We finished with a 50% Premier League win-rate last season so there's no "not really" about it, we're on 36% now so we're clearly fecking worse.
Is the season finished already? What if we finish 4th, 5th or 6th?

Theres not that much between this season and last. Mediocre last season with Lukaku Mediocre this season without him.

Steve is very good at avoiding those questions, cause he knows full well we finished with a 50% Premier League win-rate last season and we're on 36% now so we're clearly fecking worse.

Better for him to just not reply.
Avoiding?

Oh sorry i do apologise that i didn't have the time to reply to you instantly. I'm gutted :(
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
11,863
Location
Somewhere out there
Is the season finished already? What if we finish 4th, 5th or 6th?

Theres not that much between this season and last. Mediocre last season with Lukaku Mediocre this season without him.
There's a load between this season and last so far. Shit last season, utter dog shit embarrassing this season.

I desperately hope we do finish 4th. Hell, I'd almost happily take 5th or 6th now as I'm worried we might finish 10th. Right now though we're absolutely miles worse, it's not even debatable.
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
11,303
Location
And Solskjær has won it!
There's a load between this season and last so far. Shit last season, utter dog shit embarrassing this season.

I desperately hope we do finish 4th. Hell, I'd almost happily take 5th or 6th now as I'm worried we might finish 10th. Right now though we're absolutely miles worse, it's not even debatable.
Bar the little run we had after Soskjaer came in i honestly don't see much difference.

And to be fair we have been held back this season by some long term injuries to key players.
 

Harry Harries

Full Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
4,046
Are we worse or not at the moment, yes or no ....
If we’re worse I wouldn’t say by a particularly big stretch, we were consistently inconsistent then and we’re the same now, though I certainly wouldn’t put any worsening in form down to the loss of Lukaku. No Pogba, no Herrera, McT out with significant injury, complete lack of adequate replacements for aforementioned departures, half of an entirely new defence, lack of additions in midfield and attack. Have people seriously forgotten how fecking unprofessional Lukaku was in his inability to keep himself at a decent level of fitness? Seriously? Unless your name is Wayne Rooney the absolute bare minimum expected at a club like United, competing in the most physically demanding league, is you keep yourself at the requisite level of condition. His petulant and shameful interviews (he’s been in the game longer than most and yet his attitude fecking stinks) is enough to tell you he never had what it takes to succeed at United. Bemoan the lack of replacement, agreed, but don’t cry because Lukaku no longer plays for United.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
11,863
Location
Somewhere out there
Bar the little run we had after Soskjaer came in i honestly don't see much difference.
I get your point stevo but I just can't agree; even in Mourinho destruction mode we still managed to win 7 in 17 before Ole came in. We've won just 9 in 25 this year and we've Chelsea away to come. :nervous:
Even in dogshit Mourinho mode I still fancied us much more to win a game than I do now, and the facts back that up.

I hope the returning injured players and Bruno make a big difference, but I've seen us play horrific games like Palace at home this season with everyone fit so I'm more pessimistic than I would normally be. On paper, Bruno coming in and Pogba, McTom returning should be an enormous boost.
 
Last edited:

VeevaVee

despite the protests, wears Ugg boots
Scout
Joined
Jan 3, 2009
Messages
38,479
Location
Manchester
No but I thought getting rid of him was setting us in the right direction. We are clearly worse, we have Odion Ighalo coming from the Chinese league. I'm not a Lukaku fan but getting rid of him without replacing him was stupid, better to have just kept him
We've played better football without him when Rashford and Martial are together. It's still not good enough, but far better than what we watched with Lukaku on the pitch.
 

kouroux

45k posts to finally achieve this tagline
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
78,812
Location
Djibouti (La terre des braves)
We've played better football without him when Rashford and Martial are together. It's still not good enough, but far better than what we watched with Lukaku on the pitch.
Far better is a stretch, we've been witness a lot of Rashford heroics this season and it's been great in that regard. However our football hasn't gotten that better.
 

Red_toad

Full Member
Joined
Oct 23, 2010
Messages
7,952
Location
DownUnder
Yes, but his final position will be CF. He starts there cause Martial is being used as first choice CF.

Lukaku was signed by Jose and he used him the way he was supposed to. A new manager comes in and wanted to play a different style. Tbh, with the money we got and how I want United to play, Lukaku was not the right striker for us.

We always knew he would score goals, so I am not concerned with him scoring goals in Italy. We didn't do a good job but surely it comes down to the player as well to make sure he is the fittest he can be?
He really didn’t. He continually played him as a back to goal target man. That simply isn’t Lukaku’s game.
 

RedRonaldo

Full Member
Joined
Aug 17, 2003
Messages
11,341
Well Lukaku has always been among one of top goalscorer n the league, at international stage, and even in WC. Nothing new there.

The only issue we have with him, is his poor first touch, overweight body size which makes him looks more clumsy when he made poor first touch, and you can say he is fat track bully who rarely scored against top teams too. That’s about it.

Overall speaking, he has always been one of top goalscorer around, hence we’ve paid 80m for him, and Inter has paid similar amount for him too. Under Ole we set up to play a more fluid system in attack, and Lukaku simply doesn’t suit that system. And he is fat.
 
Joined
Jul 31, 2015
Messages
11,863
Location
Somewhere out there
Well Lukaku has always been among one of top goalscorer n the league, at international stage, and even in WC. Nothing new there.

The only issue we have with him, is his poor first touch, OVERWEIGHT body size which makes him looks more clumsy when he made poor first touch, and you can say he is FAT track bully who rarely scored against top teams too. That’s about it.

Overall speaking, he has always been one of top goalscorer around, hence we’ve paid 80m for him, and Inter has paid similar amount for him too. Under Ole we set up to play a more fluid system in attack, and Lukaku simply doesn’t suit that system. And he is FAT.
You got fatphobia mate?
 

amolbhatia50k

Sneaky bum time
Joined
Nov 8, 2002
Messages
76,095
Location
india
Lukaku is a good goalscorer but a mediocre footballer. Theoretically he was a bad fit for us, but a decent one for Mourinho. Sadly neither he nor Mourinho worked out well for the club and werent what we needed. So I'm not really fussed about him leaving. I'm more bothered by our next manager (Ole) being so incredibly bad, he actually shows Mourinho and LVG (and their teams/players) in good light.

Could we have kept Lukaku? Sure. I mean I don't think he or Jose football is the one I want to see at United but anybody would want a strong goalscorer in their squad. But his level under last season Mourinho and Ole was just hopeless. On to better things for us hopefully once we get a manager as good as the one currently managing Lukaku.
 

romufc

Full Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2019
Messages
5,588
Lukaku is a top striker and we could need one. People seem to be happy about selling players they do not like even though it cost us titles and a CL place potentially.
Bring some bloody players in before you sell would be my view.
Yes having Lukaku and the others we sold has won us alot of league titles in the last few years.

Do you buy new furniture for your house before getting rid of the old one first?
 

stevoc

Full Member
Joined
Jun 11, 2011
Messages
11,303
Location
And Solskjær has won it!
I get your point stevo but I just can't agree; even in Mourinho destruction mode we still managed to win 7 in 17 before Ole came in. We've won just 9 in 25 this year and we've Chelsea away to come. :nervous:
Even in dogshit Mourinho mode I still fancied us much more to win a game than I do now, and the facts back that up.

I hope the returning injured players and Bruno make a big difference, but I've seen us play horrific games like Palace at home this season with everyone fit so I'm more pessimistic than I would normally be. On paper, Bruno coming in and Pogba, McTom returning should be an enormous boost.
We had some horrific games under Mourinho last season also lets not forget. I largely agree we're not very good right now, we've underperformed, we're wildly inconsistent and we're really bad against teams that defend deep in numbers.

But i am more positive about this team under Solskjaer than i was towards the end of Jose's time. A large part of our current problems stem from going into the season without enough quality in attack especially on the creative side, with the Fernandes singing confirming the club came to the same conclusion.

We went into the season short in midfield and attack hoping the likes of Pogba, McTom, Rashford and Martial stayed fit and had big seasons. So while we can say that was a huge risk at best and at worst really bad management. Those injuries to those key players for long stretches also can't be ignored when assessing our season and how good this team is right now.

Personally i think if those four had been fit all season we would be comfortably in the top 4 right now above Chelsea.
 

Annihilate Now!

...or later, I'm not fussy
Scout
Joined
Nov 4, 2010
Messages
38,485
Location
W.Yorks
He never failed under Ole. Since Ole barely played him.
Once Martial got injured he got the chance.
Scored 6 goals in 3 games and helped Ole getting the job.
Then he got injured. Although he should have scored 1-2 goals vs
Arsenal and helped us win that game.

Failed under Mourinho near the end when he got the sack like everyone did.
Also not a great second half of the previous season either.
Also coincided with him looking like a whale.

I don't get too torn up about us letting him go (not replacing him is what pisses me off) ... but seeing how much slimmer he looks for Inter does annoy me.