And? I find it utterly perplexing that people often cite this as a criticism of some of the best strikers who've been around over the years.
Lineker may not have offered much else besides goals, but he scored absolute bucket loads of them which is ultimately the striker's primary role.
Personally, as long as they shine and regularly contribute in that key aspect of their game then everything else is just an added bonus!
van Nistelrooy is another common example of when people criticise a striker for their deficiencies in other areas of the game.
He may have strolled around, hardly touching the ball and have offered much else, however his strike rate was phenomenal. That's his success.
If a striker isn't performing and as such not scoring goals (their primary aim) then it's fair to question or criticise other areas of their play.
Otherwise everything else is an added bonus. I'd have Lineker (in his prime) back any day and he could do sweet FA as long as he scored...
Lukaku isn't as prolific as the two mentioned so there is some leeway for people to question his play, but the boy does score as well.