Romelu Lukaku | Mourinho Part III | Roma watch
- Thread starter Samid
- Start date
Woeful misses. The Lukaku we became accustomed to
More buzzwords. Why does saying that Lukaku is a very good goalscorer annoy you? Do you hate the guy?
This is such an absurd and unecessary thread. Every time Lukaku scores, it pushes the narrative one way and every time he doesn't it does the opposite. He's gone and I really don't see the point of posters with opposing views constantly tussling on a game to game basis. I mean you chaps aren't even revisiting the discussion every bad/good run. It's as populated as a United peformance threat FFS.
This post sums it up.
This post sums it up.
No idea why a comparison with Rashford and Martial belongs in this thread. But it's fairly simple - history isn't everything. We had two forwards who were clearly more talented than him with the potential of being far better footballers (and we're already around his level). To that top that off, his levels - both of peformances and professionalism were crashing. While we should have definitely not sold him without a replacement, at the end of the day, our club was never going to keep someone as limited as him over two young, modern, skillful, complete forwards like Rashford and Martial who can play in multiple systems and positions to boot.
That he's a good goalscorer and someone we should not have sold without replacement I do not disgaree. Ole should have known better. And it's hardly as if Greenwood has gotten tons of chances too.
But like I said, this thread doesn't need these comparisons (not the place) nor does it need constant back and forth a after every Lukaku goal or brainfart.
Good player and he's gone. Let go people.
I reckon he'll end his career at around 400 goals and he will still be seen as a ridiculously bad player while in reality that are insane numbers. Pretty unfair considering he doesn't have the body of a typical football player. He is an athlete though everyone who thinks differently is wrong. I wish I had even a small of piece of his character (in getting as far as he got) and self believe.
It's because of his body that he actually became a footballer if he wasn't so big at a young age i very much doubt it he'd be playing top level football considering skill wise he looks like an amateur at times. Watching Lewa control the ball and then watching Lukaku trying to do that fecking hell
He should count himself very lucky
One of the most balanced posts in this thread. Lukaku wasnt the direction Ole and United wanted to go. Though, i would argue that a 1 in 4 scorer in league football like Rashford wouldn't be considered complete just yet. But he is young, and very talented so he can become great.
And you would lose that argument. Just an exampe last season in the league Rashford scored 10 goals and provided 6 assists while Lukuka scored 12 goals and provided 0 assists, Rashford is credited with 1.5 key passes per game while Lukaku is credited with 0.7 key passes per game. That's partially what completeness means, Rashford is a player that can score goals but also create them for others.
While I agree that his best quality is his «goalscoring-attribute», I’m not sure he is a great goalgetter. It seems like this has become an established truth. I think it is due to an impressive record (amount of goals) compared to his age and his record for the national team.
But is he really a «great goalgetter»? I think his finishing is average and his movement in the box leaves a lot to be desired. But of course, he is huge and fast and knows how to use it and that gets him quite a few goals.
He has played 19 079 minutes in the PL and scored 113 goals. One goal every 169 minutes. Our coach had one goal every 152 min. You could argue he benefited from playing at Man Utd in the entire period, but he was never on penalties and played quite a few minutes on the right and coming back from injuries. A few others;
- RvN had one goal every 128 minute
- Alan Shearer had one goal every 147 minute (and his numbers are «hurt» by the teams he played for and playing at a high age)
- Aubameyang has one goal every 122 minute in the PL
- Kane has one goal every 119 minute
At Man Utd, in what should be his peak years, he had one goal every 178 min. Not for a great side, but not that poor either.
In other words, his goal scoring record is not great. It is good or maybe just average? But not good enough to make up for his overall play.
But is he really a «great goalgetter»? I think his finishing is average and his movement in the box leaves a lot to be desired. But of course, he is huge and fast and knows how to use it and that gets him quite a few goals.
He has played 19 079 minutes in the PL and scored 113 goals. One goal every 169 minutes. Our coach had one goal every 152 min. You could argue he benefited from playing at Man Utd in the entire period, but he was never on penalties and played quite a few minutes on the right and coming back from injuries. A few others;
- RvN had one goal every 128 minute
- Alan Shearer had one goal every 147 minute (and his numbers are «hurt» by the teams he played for and playing at a high age)
- Aubameyang has one goal every 122 minute in the PL
- Kane has one goal every 119 minute
At Man Utd, in what should be his peak years, he had one goal every 178 min. Not for a great side, but not that poor either.
In other words, his goal scoring record is not great. It is good or maybe just average? But not good enough to make up for his overall play.
Last edited:
To be fair there isn't a lot of people arguing that he is great, if there is any. But there isn't a lot of people arguing that he is terrible either, your last sentence for me is the key, he is a good goalscorer but not a good enough overall player and with his record he would have to be great to justify a guaranteed role in a very good team which isn't the case and why his cost(wage and transfer fee) made him a sensible sell.
You are probably right. But I’ve seen the argument that «he will get you goals» being made several times and it seems to me that his record in the PL is a bit hyped. On the last page someone said that his goalscoring record is «very good». I would argue that it is closer to very average in the PL, and quite far from the «very good» goalgetters.
I agree.
Absolutely pointless thread.
Lukaku generates more debate than anyone on this site.
In that sense you have point, a funny thing about perception is that in the PL Lukaku has a worst record per minute than Giroud and I don't think that a lot of people rate Giroud that highly.
Not really, no. It's not easier either, i don't think, not in a general term, but it is different. I think for Lukaku it is easier in Italy, strikers of his type almost always do well in Serie A
Mind, Lukaku is a very good striker who scored plenty in england and would score plenty anywhere in general
Love how the finishing just gets worser and worser for him.
2:56 - nutmegged by a ball into the box by his own player
I'm genuinely not interested in discussing him vs. our current strikers, whether it was the right decision to let him go etc blah blah blah. He's gone. It's November, the milk isn't just spilled (if you think we were wrong to let him go) but it's started to turn into cheese on the kitchen floor. He's a player I've always liked watching for various reasons. I can't help but root for him.
Was comical but that ball was travelling at some speed through a sea of players, hard to criticize him for that.2:56 - nutmegged by a ball into the box by his own player
I watched the full match and this was actually one of his best games for Inter despite the misses. Much better than the one he scored twice in last week. Very involved, better holdup play, lots of good lay-offs, working more than usual.
But we're talking in the context of a top 6/ top 4 team. Lukakus goals record is being judged in the context of a top team in the PL, ie, he doesn't score enough to warrant starting as a 9 for a top team. Likewise Rashford, he doesn't score enough when judged against the Manes, Sterlings, Salahs of this world. They are complete forwards, Rashford isnt, not yet.
No one un this thread has claimed Lukaku is a great goalscorer. And you're comparing his record to RVN and Shearer? Why? They were far better goalscorers and strikers. No one has claimed he is even on their level.
Youre making a point that nobody in this thread has denied. He is a very good goalscorer, not great. Next, youll nmbe comparing his record to Ronaldos and Messis.
I don't know what your point is here. Rashford is a complete forward, being complete isn't about the output but the diversity of the contribution, Rashford is a young player with a diverse output and contribution, he provides as much goals as he scores when 26 years old Lukaku is almost exclusively someone that scores goals and don't really create for others or contribute to the build up.
He’s a passenger being outshone by Lautaro. He must have have thought he was going to be the main man.
Getting nutmegged from 15 yards away was a particular highlightWoeful misses. The Lukaku we became accustomed to
He has been much better recently. If he keeps his fitness levels up and Conte gives Barella and Sensi more games, I think he's a good bet for top goalscorer.
I get that you want to make this discussion in to semantic, but I dont think he is very good either. I compared him to a few great goalscorers since that should be the benchmark at Man Utd. And the difference was huge!
But I also compared him to Solskjaer, Aubameyang and someone mentioned Giroud. Even if you look at players signficantly below RvN, Kane and Shearer, and focus mainly on their peak years versus Lukakus peak years (22-26), their is a significant gap. And most of these players are better footballers too.
My point is that Lukaku might be a good goalscorer for an average team in the PL. But for a top team he is quite poor compared to what one should expect.
Its not semantics. You're making a retort to a point that nobody in this thread has made. Lukaku is not a great goalscorer for a top team in the PL, nobody has denied that. Hence his record doesn't compare with the best. We all know and see that. That doesn't take away the point made that he is overall a very good PL goalscorer. He has over 100 PL goals, before turning 26, and he got to 50 younger than the likes of Rooney. He has left his mark in the PL. He has started well in Italy, 9 in 12. Lets see if he can keep that up.
he’s also not a very good one
Overall a very good goalscorer? One goal every 175 min at Everton. One goal every 178 min for Man Utd. At his peak years. That is not very good in my opinion. Great goalgetters are at one goal every 130 min or less at their peak. Very good? I dont know. But not every 175 min.
He has scored a lot of goals at a young age due to being the main man and striker at a young age. Combined with a bit of luck in terms of injuries. I think people are mislead by the amount of goals. But being a good goalscorer should be more about frequency.
Yes, a very good goalscorer. I noticed how you omitted his record for a poor West Brom team. Lukaku scored 17 in just 20 starts, and averaged a goal every 118 minutes. But i see why you left it out. And, the 25 league goals he scored for Everton in his last season, a fantastic tally. The hate is really deep for this guy.
Rashford is definitely talented. But I wouldn't say the same about Martial, he is an awful player. I wd definitely pick Lukaku ahead of Martial.
I dont hate him at all. I just dont think he is a very good goalscorer. One goal every 165 min in total in the PL. One goal every 178 min for Man Utd. One goal every 175 min for Everton.
As of 23rd of March 2019 I checked how many goals Marcus Rashford had as a striker for Man Utd. It turned out he had played 1852 min as a striker for Man Utd at that point. Scoring 11 goals. That is one goal every 168 min. Minutes between the age of 18 and 22. And he is not even a striker. And definitly not a «very good goalscorer». And has not had the chance to play their regularly the same way Lukaku has.
If you think that one goal every 165 minutes is very good or that his record for Man Utd or Everton proves that he is, fine. I just dont agree.
(And yes, his record at West Brom was great, but he has failed to replicate it and it looks like «one off».)
The grammar police will be after you.Love how the finishing just gets worser and worser for him.
He has turned Inter into title challengers almost on his own. Brilliant player and a brilliant season from him so far. I don't think Inter will carry it on when they play against stronger sides in the league. We do miss him badly even if he played poorly last season.
Oh come on.
Sensi and Martinez have been better amongst others
And Conte maybe count for something.
Some stuff in this thread. Not "a very good goalscorer"? That's just getting a tad too ridiculous for my taste.
In what world is a guy who scored 100 PL goals at 24 years (!) of age not a "very good goalscorer". He is ranked 19th in terms of most PL goals EVER, achieved by playing for mighty West Brom, grand old Everton and one of the worst United sides in years. Of his 113 goals only 6 were pens, something that rarely gets mentioned.
He has a better PL goal per game ratio than Fowler, Sheringham, Hasselbaink, Torres, Drogba, Rooney, Yorke and Anelka. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_footballers_with_100_or_more_Premier_League_goals
He also has a better international goal per game ratio than Henry, RVP, David Villa, Dzeko, Klose, Lewandowski, Ibra and Rooney (Against crap teams yes, but it's the same opposition for all those players). In fact it's actually the best ratio for any modern European player with over 50 goals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_men's_footballers_with_50_or_more_international_goals
That's the guy some don't even want to call a "very good goalscorer"? Seriously? Ok.
I understand a lot of people don't like him because of what happened at United, but the fact you can even put his name in the debate next to those kind of strikers in terms of goalscoring (who i realize are all far better players than him so don't give me that) at least suggests he's probably, you know, good at scoring goals.
In what world is a guy who scored 100 PL goals at 24 years (!) of age not a "very good goalscorer". He is ranked 19th in terms of most PL goals EVER, achieved by playing for mighty West Brom, grand old Everton and one of the worst United sides in years. Of his 113 goals only 6 were pens, something that rarely gets mentioned.
He has a better PL goal per game ratio than Fowler, Sheringham, Hasselbaink, Torres, Drogba, Rooney, Yorke and Anelka. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_footballers_with_100_or_more_Premier_League_goals
He also has a better international goal per game ratio than Henry, RVP, David Villa, Dzeko, Klose, Lewandowski, Ibra and Rooney (Against crap teams yes, but it's the same opposition for all those players). In fact it's actually the best ratio for any modern European player with over 50 goals. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_men's_footballers_with_50_or_more_international_goals
That's the guy some don't even want to call a "very good goalscorer"? Seriously? Ok.
I understand a lot of people don't like him because of what happened at United, but the fact you can even put his name in the debate next to those kind of strikers in terms of goalscoring (who i realize are all far better players than him so don't give me that) at least suggests he's probably, you know, good at scoring goals.
He is everything, or at least the major part. After that Sensi and Martinez are the best players.
Lukaku carry Conte rather than the opposite.