Lukaku

[hafnia]

Even when Lukaku was there at the beginning of the season they were trying to bring in another forward (Rooney) to strengthen their squad. Costa isn't anything to do with Lukaku. He's Eto replacement. It really is that simple.

I think its as clear as day that Lukaku is about as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit at stamford bridge.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...t-say-why-hes-at-Everton-and-not-Chelsea.html

 

[mythbuster]

Because it's questionable whether Torres is a footballer, let alone a striker.

I'd have Torres on a free and 50k a week, thanks very much. Don't know what's gone on with him at Chelsea, but somewhere inside the lad, there's a very, very good striker.

 

[neil999]

I think its as clear as day that Lukaku is about as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit at stamford bridge.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...t-say-why-hes-at-Everton-and-not-Chelsea.html

matters not, look what went on between mourinho and fabregas and hes ended up there..

 

[Dithering Dougie]

I think its as clear as day that Lukaku is about as welcome as a fart in a spacesuit at stamford bridge.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/sport/fo...t-say-why-hes-at-Everton-and-not-Chelsea.html

On yeah shock horror Mourinho in a rare clash of personalities with a football player.

 

[RaleighBlue]

I'd have Torres on a free and 50k a week, thanks very much. Don't know what's gone on with him at Chelsea, but somewhere inside the lad, there's a very, very good striker.

Torres has 2009 inside of him?

He's lost it. He will never be top level again.

 

[Tubey]

Even when Lukaku was there at the beginning of the season they were trying to bring in another forward (Rooney) to strengthen their squad. Costa isn't anything to do with Lukaku. He's Eto replacement. It really is that simple.

Eto'o leaves. Down to two strikers.

Lukaku returns. Back to three strikers.

Costa signs. Up to four strikers.

Lukaku leaves. Back to three strikers.



So, with the above in mind, can you see why Costa arriving is relevant to Lukaku?

 

[Dithering Dougie]

Eto'o leaves. Down to two strikers.

Lukaku returns. Back to three strikers.

Costa signs. Up to four strikers.

Lukaku leaves. Back to three strikers.



So, with the above in mind, can you see why Costa arriving is relevant to Lukaku?

So who did we miss out on Lukaku to?

Bet it was Spurs wasn't it? Bloody Spurs always pinching our targets. Incidentally Tubey can you tell me who won the World Cup I can't be arsed watching any more and obviously with your powers of seeing into the future you'll know.

 

[mythbuster]

Torres has 2009 inside of him?

He's lost it. He will never be top level again.

And we haven't signed a ready-made top level striker since Lineker/Cottee. I'd fancy a CONFIDENT and HAPPY Torres to put away chances. Remember, Arteta and Pienaar were having an unhappy time before we signed them......

 

[mythbuster]

So who did we miss out on Lukaku to?

Blackburn bought him mate. They paid £5 million plus £8.5 million signing Jordan Rhodes.

 

[Tubey]

So who did we miss out on Lukaku to?

Bet it was Spurs wasn't it? Bloody Spurs always pinching our targets. Incidentally Tubey can you tell me who won the World Cup I can't be arsed watching any more and obviously with your powers of seeing into the future you'll know.

I'm not looking at the future, I'm looking at the past. Chelsea last season, under Mourinho, three strikers. Real Madrid from 2011 onwards, under Mourinho, three strikers - Morata, Higuain, Benzema. He uses three strikers. Lukaku would not have been allowed out on loan and Ba would not have been available for sale in January when Rooney was coming in if he wanted any more than three strikers. They play with two wide inside forward and one striker.

 

[mythbuster]

I'm not looking at the future, I'm looking at the past. Chelsea last season, under Mourinho, three strikers. Real Madrid from 2011 onwards, under Mourinho, three strikers - Morata, Higuain, Benzema. He uses three strikers. Lukaku would not have been allowed out on loan and Ba would not have been available for sale in January when Rooney was coming in if he wanted any more than three strikers. They play with two wide inside forward and one striker.

Didn't Mourinho sell Balotelli? Would you say no to him? All titishness aside like, which Rom doesn't have?

 

[Tubey]

Didn't Mourinho sell Balotelli? Would you say no to him? All titishness aside like, which Rom doesn't have?

In terms of quality, absolutely. But you can't disregard his character - it depends on the dressing room Martinez is looking to build.

Not that it's even worth discussing as he's out of our range obviously!

 

[Tree13]

I'd have Torres on a free and 50k a week, thanks very much. Don't know what's gone on with him at Chelsea, but somewhere inside the lad, there's a very, very good striker.

LOL.

Just LOL.

 

[Dithering Dougie]

I'm not looking at the future, I'm looking at the past. Chelsea last season, under Mourinho, three strikers. Real Madrid from 2011 onwards, under Mourinho, three strikers - Morata, Higuain, Benzema. He uses three strikers. Lukaku would not have been allowed out on loan and Ba would not have been available for sale in January when Rooney was coming in if he wanted any more than three strikers. They play with two wide inside forward and one striker.

Okay then how about Ba and Lukaku are both sold as you've implied surely there's only one man they'd turn to, because the more I hear about this Bony the more I think he's a combination of Dixie Dean and Superman.

 

[matty1878]

We won't sign him.