Romelu Lukaku

[domalino]

I like him but he comes across as a big fucking baby. A bit like a more clinical Morata.

I completely disagree, this whole Ibrahimovic row has turned him into a beast and tapped into a confidence and sort of confrontational arrogance I've never seen from him before. Inter were looking down and out and Conte was unhappy and Lukaku just found a fight to give him the spark to put the team on his shoulders and lead them on this charge to come back into title contention.

He absolutely destroys Milan and then remembers to put Ibrahimovic in his place for calling himself the god of Milan.

To be honest I don't want him to leave Inter, he's clearly having the time of his life there. It's a fantastic battle between Lukaku and Ibrahimovic

 

[Tugay One Cup]

I completely disagree, this whole Ibrahimovic row has turned him into a beast and tapped into a confidence I've never seen from him before.

Oh, the Ibrahimovic thing was great. Anyone standing up to that prick is good with me. Always thought it was a shame there was never footage of Oguchi Onyewu slapping him about.

He's just so quick to get in a strop. Whether it's moaning at a teammate or ref or getting in someone's face for fouling him. I don't know, maybe I'm basing it more off his united and Everton games because I've only seen him five or six times for Inter.

 

[FightLikeAGirl]

That footage of Lukaku reminds me of when he played for us.

 

[domalino]

This says it all, excellent for a midtable team but not good enough at the very top. We should steer well clear.

This is the kind of braindead 1980's ex-footballer logic that lead to this -




Just because someone had a bad spell at a top club doesn't mean they're not good enough.

 

[EdersonsSmiley]

This is the kind of braindead 1980's ex-footballer logic that lead to this -




Just because someone had a bad spell at a top club doesn't mean they're not good enough.

Not really comparable is it.

Kevin played about 9 games for Chelsea.

Lukaku played 15 for Chelsea and 96 for United.

 

[decmancity]

This is the kind of braindead 1980's ex-footballer logic that lead to this -




Just because someone had a bad spell at a top club doesn't mean they're not good enough.

He hasn't even had a bad spell anywhere, he has consistently scored at every level since he played for Anderlecht. He knows how to score goals even if hes not the best on the ball.

 

[domalino]

Not really comparable is it.

Kevin played about 9 games for Chelsea.

Lukaku played 15 for Chelsea and 96 for United.

And look at them.

Chelsea - 1 start when he was 18 and 8 tiny sub appearances. Then when he came back after doing brilliantly on loan, he got 2 sub appearances before leaving and scoring more goals than anyone at Chelsea that season.

United - 27 goals and 9 assists in his first season - excellent. Second season Ole comes in and decides he doesn't like him, still gets 12 goals in about 20 starts. For a shit United side.

It's completely disingenuous (and flat out wrong) to say Lukaku's time at Chelsea is "not really comparable" to KDB at Chelsea, and at United he scored plenty of goals for a shit side with a shit manager.

 

[Tugay One Cup]

Not really comparable is it.

Kevin played about 9 games for Chelsea.

Lukaku played 15 for Chelsea and 96 for United.

I'm not sure what your argument is, to be honest.

You've said that another poster's comment about him being a roaring success at everywhere other than united and Chelsea is proof that he's not cut out for a top level team.

De Bruyne and Salah also couldn't find success with that team and united are... united.

He also has a pretty fucking great record for Belgium and is currently amongst the best strikers in Europe in a superior team to the last one he was at in England.

The guy is clearly a top level striker.

 

[EdersonsSmiley]

I'm not sure what your argument is, to be honest.

You've said that another poster's comment about him being a roaring success at everywhere other than united and Chelsea is proof that he's not cut out for a top level team.

De Bruyne and Salah also couldn't find success with that team and united are... united.

He also has a pretty fucking great record for Belgium and is currently amongst the best strikers in Europe in a superior team to the last one he was at in England.

The guy is clearly a top level striker.

My point is that he is not good enough for us, thought that was obvious.

I agree that you can write off his Chelsea poor performances as he was young and in and out of the team but after nearly 100 games at United he has shown to me that he isnt good enough for City.

You can argue that United arent a top team but unfortunately they are.

International football is pretty irrelevant as the quality is closer to West Brom's level than what City's.

He is a top goalscorer, that is undeniable, but i think we would be a worse team with him in.

 

[EdersonsSmiley]

And look at them.

Chelsea - 1 start when he was 18 and 8 tiny sub appearances. Then when he came back after doing brilliantly on loan, he got 2 sub appearances before leaving and scoring more goals than anyone at Chelsea that season.

United - 27 goals and 9 assists in his first season - excellent. Second season Ole comes in and decides he doesn't like him, still gets 12 goals in about 20 starts. For a shit United side.

It's completely disingenuous (and flat out wrong) to say Lukaku's time at Chelsea is "not really comparable" to KDB at Chelsea, and at United he scored plenty of goals for a shit side with a shit manager.

I didnt say that their times at Chelsea were comparable, i said my opinion is not comparable to that of Phil Thompson and Paul Merson.

He would score plenty of goals in this City team, so would Defoe in his prime, that doesn't mean we would be a better team. Havent i seen you defend Jesus many times on his goalscoring because you can (correctly) see what else he offers to the team.

If we just want a goalscorer then get Immobile, he has been banging them in for years at a better rate than Lukaku.