When Lukaku goes 'missing' against big teams, is it because he's having a particularly bad game, or because his team are being dominated/outplayed on the whole? Genuine question.

49 minutes ago, bluedave said:

When Lukaku goes 'missing' against big teams, is it because he's having a particularly bad game, or because his team are being dominated/outplayed on the whole? Genuine question.

But I would argue while every player has an off game the truly great strikers can usually bring something to the game. I find when Lukaku goes missing he's not in the game at all. 

For reference, this is Lukaku's scoring record against Premier League teams since he's been at Everton:

ARSENAL  0
ASTON VILLA 4
BOURNEMOUTH 5 (+1 FA CUP)
BURNLEY  1
CHELSEA  0 (+2 FA CUP)  
CRYSTAL PALACE  4
HULL CITY 1
LEICESTER 2 (+1 FA CUP)
LIVERPOOL 1
MAN CITY 2 (+1 LG CUP)
MAN UTD  0
MIDDLESBROUGH 1 (+1 LG CUP)
NEWCASTLE 1
NORWICH  1
QPR  0
SOUTHAMPTON 3
STOKE  3
SUNDERLAND 4
SWANSEA  0
TOTTENHAM 0
WATFORD  2
WEST BROM 3
WEST HAM 4 (+2 FA CUP)

1 minute ago, PloKoon13 said:

For reference, this is Lukaku's scoring record against Premier League teams since he's been at Everton:

ARSENAL  0
ASTON VILLA 4
BOURNEMOUTH 5 (+1 FA CUP)
BURNLEY  1
CHELSEA  0 (+2 FA CUP)  
CRYSTAL PALACE  4
HULL CITY 1
LEICESTER 2 (+1 FA CUP)
LIVERPOOL 1
MAN CITY 2 (+1 LG CUP)
MAN UTD  0
MIDDLESBROUGH 1 (+1 LG CUP)
NEWCASTLE 1
NORWICH  1
QPR  0
SOUTHAMPTON 3
STOKE  3
SUNDERLAND 4
SWANSEA  0
TOTTENHAM 0
WATFORD  2
WEST BROM 3
WEST HAM 4 (+2 FA CUP)

Can't even score against relegated QPR and relegation threatened Swansea

1 hour ago, PloKoon13 said:

For reference, this is Lukaku's scoring record against Premier League teams since he's been at Everton:

ARSENAL  0
ASTON VILLA 4
BOURNEMOUTH 5 (+1 FA CUP)
BURNLEY  1
CHELSEA  0 (+2 FA CUP)  
CRYSTAL PALACE  4
HULL CITY 1
LEICESTER 2 (+1 FA CUP)
LIVERPOOL 1
MAN CITY 2 (+1 LG CUP)
MAN UTD  0
MIDDLESBROUGH 1 (+1 LG CUP)
NEWCASTLE 1
NORWICH  1
QPR  0
SOUTHAMPTON 3
STOKE  3
SUNDERLAND 4
SWANSEA  0
TOTTENHAM 0
WATFORD  2
WEST BROM 3
WEST HAM 4 (+2 FA CUP)

 

What is Costa's?

I seem to remember him turning arsenal inside out when at everton. maybe when he was on loan so not included? also put a hat trick past united when he was at west brom.

 

I think this is right, if i added up correctly. It's over the 3 seasons he's been here so far.

 

Costa

Swansea - 7

Everton - 4

Hull - 4

West Brom - 3

Watford - 3

West Ham - 2

Liverpool - 2

Leicester - 2

Southampton - 2

Man City - 2

Crystal Palace - 2

Aston Villa - 2

Norwich - 2

Arsenal - 2

Newcastle - 2

Sunderland - 2

Middlsboro - 1

Stoke - 1

Man utd - 1

Burnley - 1

Spurs - 1

Edited February 8, 20179 yr by Zeta

Man that is impressive!
 

Lukaku's goalscoring record for all five seasons as a starter in the Premier League (4 at Everton including one on loan, 1 at West Brom on loan):

 

ARSENAL   1 (+1 FA CUP)
ASTON VILLA  5
BOURNEMOUTH  5 (+1 FA CUP)
BURNLEY   1
CARDIFF  0
CHELSEA   0 (+2 FA CUP) 
CRYSTAL PALACE  4
FULHAM  1
HULL CITY  2
LEICESTER  2 (+1 FA CUP)
LIVERPOOL  5
MAN CITY  4 (+1 LG CUP)
MAN UTD   3
MIDDLESBROUGH  1 (+1 LG CUP)
NEWCASTLE  5
NORWICH   2
QPR    0
READING  3
SOUTHAMPTON  5
STOKE    4
SUNDERLAND  7
SWANSEA   3
TOTTENHAM  0
WATFORD   2
WEST BROM  3
WEST HAM  6 (+2 FA CUP)
WIGAN  0

Lukaku, since he's been in England:

 

West Ham - 9

Sunderland - 6

Bournemouth - 6

Liverpool - 5

Man City - 5

Southampton - 5

Aston Villa - 5

Newcastle - 5

C Palace - 4

Stoke - 4

Man Utd - 3

Reading - 3

Swansea - 3

West Brom - 3

Leicester- 3

Chelsea - 2

Norwich - 2

Middlesboro - 2

Watford - 2

Hull - 2

Arsenal - 1

Fulham - 1

Burnley - 1

So that's 5 against City, 5 against Liverpool, 3 against Utd, 2 against us. Doesn't seem that bad in big games at all. Plus he clearly has it out for West Ham.

Edited February 8, 20179 yr by Zeta

Seems legit

6 hours ago, RMCM said:

A 3-5-2 with Aguero and Costa up front and hazard behind them would make most defences sh*t their pants, and would make us a really viable threat in the Champions League too. 

 

I don't think so tbh. The balance wouldn't be right. Aguero or Costa, not both.

Hazard would be our only threat outside the box, it would easier for the opposition to concentrate on him.

I prefer our set up which gives us a double threat across the pitch with Hazard and Pedro or Willian. It's already proven, we just need the attacking players to stay in form because we haven't got much of a threat outside of those.

Ok... so what I'm getting from the (interesting) statistics here is that some people may have noticed him having a few quiet games against the bigger teams, and have then extrapolated those matches to conclude that he's not a 'big game player' or can only score against lesser teams. Sounds about right?

he's still a streaky player, but when he's on form he can do pretty much everything.

given his age I still think we'd be making a good decision to bring him back. and who knows what working with conte could add to his game.

5 hours ago, Zeta said:

So that's 5 against City, 5 against Liverpool, 3 against Utd, 2 against us. Doesn't seem that bad in big games at all. Plus he clearly has it out for West Ham.

Zero goals against the Spuds. That's unacceptable.

Lukaku, since he's been in England:
 
West Ham - 9
Sunderland - 6
Bournemouth - 6
Liverpool - 5
Man City - 5
Southampton - 5
Aston Villa - 5
Newcastle - 5
C Palace - 4
Stoke - 4
Man Utd - 3
Reading - 3
Swansea - 3
West Brom - 3
Leicester- 3
Chelsea - 2
Norwich - 2
Middlesboro - 2
Watford - 2
Hull - 2
Arsenal - 1
Fulham - 1
Burnley - 1

Fantastic

13 hours ago, g3.7 said:

he's still a streaky player, but when he's on form he can do pretty much everything.

given his age I still think we'd be making a good decision to bring him back. and who knows what working with conte could add to his game.

He's a very good player, no question.

But the question is, is he good enough to lead the line for a team with title aspirations? 

He's not content to share playing time and sit on the bench but is he ready to start week in, week out for a team like Chelsea? 

If Costa (God forbid) leaves Chelsea and is replaced by Lukaku, are buying a player who's going to score goals with regularity? I don't want to diminish the achievement for the four goals he scored at the weekend but I would much prefer a striker who scores one per game that keeps picking up wins over a striker who doesn't score in 8 games and then bangs 4. Does that make sense? 

I agree completely. realistically though, who could we get that fits the bill? there aren't guarantees anywhere.

at least with lukaku you're getting a player with scope to improve and with the peak of his career in front of him.

It's a shame we didn't sign Aguero in 2011 when the opportunity was there for the taking. Instead, we persisted with the hope that Torres would recapture the form he displayed with Liverpool.

Hindsight is wonderful thing, but didn't Aguero turn us down for City or we did cool off interest of him? I cannot remember exactly.

Edited February 18, 20179 yr by Jezz

1 hour ago, Jezz said:

It's a shame we didn't sign Aguero in 2011 when the opportunity was there for the taking. Instead, we persisted with the hope that Torres would recapture the form he displayed with Liverpool.

Hindsight is wonderful thing, but didn't Aguero turn us down for City or we did cool off interest of him? I cannot remember exactly.

We opted for Torres...

12 minutes ago, undertow said:

We opted for Torres...

I thought we had an offer accepted for agueros but turned down his ridiculously high wage demands?

1 hour ago, Jezz said:

It's a shame we didn't sign Aguero in 2011 when the opportunity was there for the taking. Instead, we persisted with the hope that Torres would recapture the form he displayed with Liverpool.

Hindsight is wonderful thing, but didn't Aguero turn us down for City or we did cool off interest of him? I cannot remember exactly.

Agreed Aguero playing off Drogba would have been a match made in heaven. His wages were high but we went onto spunk that amount paying Torres.Probably our biggest mistake in the market in modern times.

 

Edited February 18, 20179 yr by charierre

For every Aguero theirs a Robinho.

19 hours ago, Jezz said:

It's a shame we didn't sign Aguero in 2011 when the opportunity was there for the taking. Instead, we persisted with the hope that Torres would recapture the form he displayed with Liverpool.

Hindsight is wonderful thing, but didn't Aguero turn us down for City or we did cool off interest of him? I cannot remember exactly.

Call me Trump, but from what I can recall we simply weren't able to buy him for all the wrong reasons. Some people might call it a lack of interest, but I think they wanted to safe face by showing confidence in Torres, who, at that point, was still new. That's the only reason City got Kun for the ridiculous amount of £38m. 

2011 was a very dark year indeed. Ancelotti got sacked, Torres was bought, we watched Suarez join Liverpool and Kun join City, and wasted a full summer on a pipe dream that's called Neymar. But as they say the night is darkest just before the dawn.