Install the app
How to install the app on iOS

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.

Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.

 

Lukaku

Status
Not open for further replies.
Tubey said:
Bizarrely, when Lukaku played wide in that game, he was 10x more effective as he didn't have to play back to goal, which he's as useful as Michael Owen at. So he was running in on goal from his starting position with a ball to feet.

And therein lies the issue - we look like we play a link up forward when pushing sides back to get the wide areas into play, and Lukaku has been at best mediocre and at worst downright terrible at it.

We need a striker to play with technical ability to hold a ball up and an ability to run the six yard box for wide deliveries. I'll get laughed at here but Lacina Traore is massively more suited to our style of play from Christmas onwards than Lukaku is - before Christmas, during our transition, Lukaku benefited from Everton being a counter attacking side adjusting to a new system, so it's skewed peoples thoughts on him.
Click to expand...

But on what evidence Tubes? His Anzhi days or the game he played in? The goal was lovely but he was like Bambi on ice in the first half before he was taken off.
 
Tubey said:
Bizarrely, when Lukaku played wide in that game, he was 10x more effective as he didn't have to play back to goal, which he's as useful as Michael Owen at. So he was running in on goal from his starting position with a ball to feet.

And therein lies the issue - we look like we play a link up forward when pushing sides back to get the wide areas into play, and Lukaku has been at best mediocre and at worst downright terrible at it.

We need a striker to play with technical ability to hold a ball up and an ability to run the six yard box for wide deliveries. I'll get laughed at here but Lacina Traore is massively more suited to our style of play from Christmas onwards than Lukaku is - before Christmas, during our transition, Lukaku benefited from Everton being a counter attacking side adjusting to a new system, so it's skewed peoples thoughts on him.
Click to expand...

He looked like his first touch was that good his second was a tackle, in the brief cameo's we've seen of him, so I don't see how you can say that tbh.
 
orly said:
But on what evidence Tubes? His Anzhi days or the game he played in? The goal was lovely but he was like Bambi on ice in the first half before he was taken off.
Click to expand...

When I've watched him for Anzhi. He's poor in the air, but has a fantastic first touch and is rapid.

If he's here next season, look for him to receive the ball to feet, lay off, immediately turn and look to get in behind. Problem with Lukaku is that all of that doesn't happen - the ball goes into feet and usually that's the last of it as it bounces 10 yards away.

All I'm saying is that if we do sign Lukaku, we have to build the squad and the style of play around him as a focal point. We'd have to switch the focus from wide play to getting the ball into a creative attacking mid in Barkley and look to play in front of Lukaku in the channels for him to run on to, or we'd have to bring a Fellaini/Cahill style second forward to knock on for him to feed on the scraps.

I'm not saying Lukaku is a bad player, but I'm saying he's not a complete forward and as such if you buy him for a side not geared to him, he'll fail. We've seen how good he is for counter attacking sides, and we've seen how bad he is for possession based sides.
 
orly said:
But Shaun Goater scored in what is now League One and The Championship - naturally he would be more likely to score more. Imagine if Lukaku played at that level - would be like Saha for fulham before they got promoted.

Your posts are starting to make even less sense.
Click to expand...

Again the point is i'm highlighting the difference between a footballer and a goalscorer which is as per the previous, stay with it. Or do you you just have to disagree with every point made. Just becoming more and more pedantic needlessly.
 

Tubey said:
When I've watched him for Anzhi. He's poor in the air, but has a fantastic first touch and is rapid.

If he's here next season, look for him to receive the ball to feet, lay off, immediately turn and look to get in behind. Problem with Lukaku is that all of that doesn't happen - the ball goes into feet and usually that's the last of it as it bounces 10 yards away.

All I'm saying is that if we do sign Lukaku, we have to build the squad and the style of play around him as a focal point. We'd have to switch the focus from wide play to getting the ball into a creative attacking mid in Barkley and look to play in front of Lukaku in the channels for him to run on to, or we'd have to bring a Fellaini/Cahill style second forward to knock on for him to feed on the scraps.

I'm not saying Lukaku is a bad player, but I'm saying he's not a complete forward and as such if you buy him for a side not geared to him, he'll fail. We've seen how good he is for counter attacking sides, and we've seen how bad he is for possession based sides.
Click to expand...

Fair enough Tubes, I've only seen him for us and his first touch was really poor. I think if Barkley gets the ball in to feet we look a better side - and I do like Naismith Lukaku if not.
 
hafnia said:
Again the point is i'm highlighting the difference between a footballer and a goalscorer which is as per the previous, stay with it. Or do you you just have to disagree with every point made. Just becoming more and more pedantic needlessly.
Click to expand...

And what I'm saying to you is - how can Kone possibly be considered a better footballer than Lukaku when he has done nothing to suggest he is. You've still not come up with a tangible answer. Nothing pedantic at all.
 
A player can be a better overall footballer but weaker in a certain system. If you hoofed balls up to Messi to nod on he'd look a much worse player.
 
When all is said and done I want our striker to score goals. Romelu Lukaku scores goals. Not saying he hasn't go flaws i.e. first touch but personally I put goal scoring before first touch in my priorities when looking at strikers.
 
Tubey said:
When I've watched him for Anzhi. He's poor in the air, but has a fantastic first touch and is rapid.

If he's here next season, look for him to receive the ball to feet, lay off, immediately turn and look to get in behind. Problem with Lukaku is that all of that doesn't happen - the ball goes into feet and usually that's the last of it as it bounces 10 yards away.

All I'm saying is that if we do sign Lukaku, we have to build the squad and the style of play around him as a focal point. We'd have to switch the focus from wide play to getting the ball into a creative attacking mid in Barkley and look to play in front of Lukaku in the channels for him to run on to, or we'd have to bring a Fellaini/Cahill style second forward to knock on for him to feed on the scraps.

I'm not saying Lukaku is a bad player, but I'm saying he's not a complete forward and as such if you buy him for a side not geared to him, he'll fail. We've seen how good he is for counter attacking sides, and we've seen how bad he is for possession based sides.
Click to expand...

Its not like i've said not much different - maybe i've been a little too direct and hurt feelings by labelling Lukaku a "poor footballer", but unfortunately thats what he is. If he can't control a ball, lay it off and the defenders know this, then unfortunately you are going to struggle, teams can plan for you.

He can be a plan B for a team, a little bit like Rodgers may have considered using Andy Carroll - but he didn't. He wanted technically competent footballers - which is why he has gone for Lambert.
 

hafnia said:
Its not like i've said not much different - maybe i've been a little too direct and hurt feelings by labelling Lukaku a "poor footballer", but unfortunately thats what he is. If he can't control a ball, lay it off and the defenders know this, then unfortunately you are going to struggle, teams can plan for you.

He can be a plan B for a team, a little bit like Rodgers may have considered using Andy Carroll - but he didn't. He wanted technically competent footballers - which is why he has gone for Lambert.
Click to expand...


Whoa whoa, you are now saying Lambert is also a better player?

Ok mate no more responses from me. Crack on.
 
SteRobbo84 said:
When all is said and done I want our striker to score goals. Romelu Lukaku scores goals. Not saying he hasn't go flaws i.e. first touch but personally I put goal scoring before first touch in my priorities when looking at strikers.
Click to expand...

I've considered this, and I can't see past the flaws as being anything other than an obstacle us scoring goals when he is being contained.

If when he was being contained it meant chances for others then fine, i'd say lets do it - but Lukaku being contained is often him being closely marked and being unable to retain possession - he loses the ball needlessly, not by attempting a dribble but not being able to control it or pass to his own player.
 
hafnia said:
Its not like i've said not much different - maybe i've been a little too direct and hurt feelings by labelling Lukaku a "poor footballer", but unfortunately thats what he is. If he can't control a ball, lay it off and the defenders know this, then unfortunately you are going to struggle, teams can plan for you.

He can be a plan B for a team, a little bit like Rodgers may have considered using Andy Carroll - but he didn't. He wanted technically competent footballers - which is why he has gone for Lambert.
Click to expand...

But that's nonsense. You simply cannot score 1 in 2 over the course of a Premier League season if you're a poor footballer. It's outright impossible.

You can be a good footballer poorly suited to a certain system, which I believe to be the case with Lukaku, but just outright saying he's a poor footballer is pure lunacy and ignoring everything in front of you.

And to then say Rickie Lambert is a technical footballer on a different level to Lukaku is vastly warping the discussion. Lambert has a bit of a better first touch but much less pure running power and pace. There's a reason one has spent much of his career in the lower levels until he advanced to the point where he is, at best, a bench option for a decent side, and the other has been brought through from the start as a top potential striker.
 

Status
Not open for further replies.

Welcome to GrandOldTeam

Get involved. Registration is simple and free.

Register
Back
Top