Romelu Lukaku

[Connor]

Nonsense. If we sold him at any point, we'd have brought in another player and played a different way.

The "Without Lukaku we'd get relegated" argument has no merit whatsoever.

We'd have gone down or at least got very close to going down without his goals, of that there is no doubt, to me anyway.

If we had sold him in the summer, I don't believe Martinez would have been able to replace with anyone of a similar level and we'd have ended up with a gamble, Niasse for example.

 

[Tubey]

We'd have gone down or at least got very close to going down without his goals, of that there is no doubt, to me anyway.

If we had sold him in the summer, I don't believe Martinez would have been able to replace with anyone of a similar level and we'd have ended up with a gamble, Niasse for example.

And again, I say we wouldn't have, because there was some severe diarrhea in this league that we'd have to be worse than, and what would have happened is we'd have brought in another player who the ball maybe would have stuck to (given not many in world football are worse than Lukaku at taking a ball in to feet) and we'd be a better defensive unit and concede fewer goals as we wouldn't constantly be caught on the counter when the ball ricochets off ol' ping-pong shins.

There's no way we'd have been bad enough to finish below Newcastle, Villa and the like last year, with or without Rom. The danger was progressive decline under Martinez to the point we were that badly damaged to drop.

 

[Connor]

And again, I say we wouldn't have, because there was some severe diarrhea in this league that we'd have to be worse than, and what would have happened is we'd have brought in another player who the ball maybe would have stuck to (given not many in world football are worse than Lukaku at taking a ball in to feet) and we'd be a better defensive unit and concede fewer goals as we wouldn't constantly be caught on the counter when the ball ricochets off ol' ping-pong shins.

There's no way we'd have been bad enough to finish below Newcastle, Villa and the like last year, with or without Rom. The danger was progressive decline under Martinez to the point we were that badly damaged to drop.

Oh Tubey.

 

[Kev The Rat]

You would think a canny operator like Koeman would find a way to keep us competitive without Lukaku. He used Shane long to great effect ffs.

 

[Kev The Rat]

And again, I say we wouldn't have, because there was some severe diarrhea in this league that we'd have to be worse than, and what would have happened is we'd have brought in another player who the ball maybe would have stuck to (given not many in world football are worse than Lukaku at taking a ball in to feet) and we'd be a better defensive unit and concede fewer goals as we wouldn't constantly be caught on the counter when the ball ricochets off ol' ping-pong shins.

There's no way we'd have been bad enough to finish below Newcastle, Villa and the like last year, with or without Rom. The danger was progressive decline under Martinez to the point we were that badly damaged to drop.

Bang on. The fear of losing Lukaku was more accurately described as the fear of Martinez at the helm long term.

 

[roydo]

Bang on. The fear of losing Lukaku was more accurately described as the fear of Martinez at the helm long term.

Well no Rom, with Martinez being in charge last season, would put the fear of god into me.

Thankfully only one is still here.

 

[Tubey]

Oh Tubey.

Here's a challenge for you - the next Everton game, watch how many times Lukaku is given a simple ball to feet, and he's either beaten to it by his marker as he's on his heels, or he gets there but the ball pings off him and the opposition counter.

Then when seeing that, tell me how having a striker who avoided doing that wouldn't help us defensively.

 

[Connor]

Here's a challenge for you - the next Everton game, watch how many times Lukaku is given a simple ball to feet, and he's either beaten to it by his marker as he's on his heels, or he gets there but the ball pings off him and the opposition counter.

Then when seeing that, tell me how having a striker who avoided doing that wouldn't help us defensively.

Sound, I'll get back to this after Boro.

 

[Ruairi77]

I remember seeing some european round up 6 or 7 years ago, it featured Lukaku playing for Anderlecht i think. He was about 16 and a monster! The commentator was going on about how Europes elite were lining up to buy him. We were going nowhere under Moyes and I remember thinking 'imagine being able to sign a player like that'. Now he's breaking records in a blue jersey. I couldn't care less about what he says when on international break, whether he can trap a ball or what his distribution is like, just keep banging them in Rom. Our grand kids will talk about the time you played for the toffees!

 

[Goat]

Here's a challenge for you - the next Everton game, watch how many times Lukaku is given a simple ball to feet, and he's either beaten to it by his marker as he's on his heels, or he gets there but the ball pings off him and the opposition counter.

Then when seeing that, tell me how having a striker who avoided doing that wouldn't help us defensively.

Heres a challenge for you, re-watch the Sunderland game and tell us who won the game for us.

Every single ball up to Lukaku bounced of his shins, he had some success with holding the ball up with back to goal, he made a few runs but on the main he was static, but he scored his first and he came alive and spoiler alert coming, he won us the game.

 

[Tubey]

Heres a challenge for you, re-watch the Sunderland game and tell us who won the game for us.

Every single ball up to Lukaku bounced of his shins, he had some success with holding the ball up with back to goal, he made a few runs but on the main he was static, but he scored his first and he came alive and spoiler alert coming, he won us the game.

Yes, but then for every time that happens, there's ten games he's anonymous in and it costs us points because we have a completely nullified focal point to our every attack.

He's a glass cannon.

 

[DRM]

And again, I say we wouldn't have, because there was some severe diarrhea in this league that we'd have to be worse than, and what would have happened is we'd have brought in another player who the ball maybe would have stuck to (given not many in world football are worse than Lukaku at taking a ball in to feet) and we'd be a better defensive unit and concede fewer goals as we wouldn't constantly be caught on the counter when the ball ricochets off ol' ping-pong shins.

There's no way we'd have been bad enough to finish below Newcastle, Villa and the like last year, with or without Rom. The danger was progressive decline under Martinez to the point we were that badly damaged to drop.

Thank God it's nothing personal between you and Lukaku.

 

[Tubey]

Thank God it's nothing personal between you and Lukaku.

It isn't though, why the hell would it be?

 

[toffeejack]

Martinez bought him and he bettered his goal tally every season under him.

I don't see how people say we would have got relegated if we didn't buy him. Bit of a silly hypothesis if you ask me

 

[DRM]

S

Yes, but then for every time that happens, there's ten games he's anonymous in and it costs us points because we have a completely nullified focal point to our every attack.

He's a glass cannon.

So for every game he wins for us there's ten games that he's anonymous? And it cost point as well? (When did he have to time to score all those goals then?)

Wow, when did you see those games? Or wait, are you marty MacFly and is some terrible season coming in the next few years?

In the last two years he's been getting better all the time with hi shandling of the ball. Other player have bad controls as well, but you don't focus on them. And he has had good games as well where the ball seemed to be sticking to him. But those games he didn't score and all of a sudden that seemed to be what a striker should do ...