If you mean Lukaku... 86 goals in 114 matches for his country. That would have been 89 and topscorer in this tournament without these silly rules.Doku could have had three assists tonight if not for having to play with simultaneously the worst and most unlucky striker in European football.
The fact you’ve only ever posted regarding Belguim players leads me to think you might be a tad biased…If you mean Lukaku... 86 goals in 114 matches for his country. That would have been 89 and topscorer in this tournament without these silly rules.
You can start to search for European player with a higher goal scoring rate, before calling him the worst striker.
Not even mentioning how he weighs on defences, as a target man, as an assist-player.
Biased, maybe I am. I follow City since Kompany came in, I like to see good Belgian players in a good city team. Though, I also like a good city team without Belgians. Let's admit it, every English City fan likes Foden and Walker to shine for the club, nothing wrong with that.The fact you’ve only ever posted regarding Belguim players leads me to think you might be a tad biased…
He’s a big lump. Will still score goals and tbf there was a time I thought he was excellent but those days are behind him and he’s living on reputation at this point.
Yeah there’s plenty worse, mate.Biased, maybe I am. I follow City since Kompany came in, I like to see good Belgian players in a good city team. Though, I also like a good city team without Belgians. Let's admit it, every English City fan likes Foden and Walker to shine for the club, nothing wrong with that.
Lukaku's stats for country are what they are.. you cannot deny that. 86/114 (Kane 64/93, I think we both agree he's not a bad striker). To call Romelu the "worst" striker is more than 1 bridge too far.
He has cost club and country hugely in the last couple of years.If you mean Lukaku... 86 goals in 114 matches for his country. That would have been 89 and topscorer in this tournament without these silly rules.
You can start to search for European player with a higher goal scoring rate, before calling him the worst striker.
Not even mentioning how he weighs on defences, as a target man, as an assist-player.
He's not an elite striker but you don't walk around finding players that have the same stats as he does, both for the clubs he has played for (47 in 75 for Inter), as well as his country (85), not every player has those type of stats and its fine to acknowledge it. I just find it weird how you can justify calling Lukaku a lump on this thread, and then cross over to the Grealish thread to confidently make posts calling Grealish wordlclass. Make it make senseThe fact you’ve only ever posted regarding Belguim players leads me to think you might be a tad biased…
He’s a big lump. Will still score goals and tbf there was a time I thought he was excellent but those days are behind him and he’s living on reputation at this point.
He's not an elite striker but you don't walk around finding players that have the same stats as he does both for the clubs he has played for (47 in 75 for Inter), as well as his country (85). I just find it weird how you can justify calling Lukaku a lump on this thread and then cross over to the Grealish thread and confidently make posts calling Grealish wordlclass. Make it make sense
He wasn't even that bad there, Dzeko's goal returns here is a lot similar to Lukaku's goals return with the rags (league stats, don't know about UCL)He has always scored goals, we are blinded by his stint at the rags.
All good, no bad feelings ;-)Yeah there’s plenty worse, mate.
I was only pulling your leg on the Belgium thing.
The fact you’ve only ever posted regarding Belguim players leads me to think you might be a tad biased…
He’s a big lump. Will still score goals and tbf there was a time I thought he was excellent but those days are behind him and he’s living on reputation at this point.