Everton must keep Lukaku this summer

In my opinion, Lukaku is nowhere near as good as he thinks he is. When he is in the mood he can be unstoppable but, honestly, how many times do we see that?

All too often, he is lazy and lethargic, is unwilling to shift his backside and take a gamble. The recent game against Wales was typical – he could have had a hat-trick of tap-ins but instead stood around waving his arms in frustration.

I also think he will limit Koeman's options. The new boss clearly likes to play two strikers at home. Who do you put alongside Lukaku? Niasse – I think not; Kone – no thank you; Mirallas – we've tried that before and it didn't work. I believe that there are better options that we could have by selling and using the proceeds.

My personal choice would be two strikers, total cost of around 㿗M, much less than we are demanding for Lukaku. My choices would be:

Pellè (around 㾾M) and Slimani from Sporting Lisbon (around 㿅M). Martinez (to his credit) tried to sign Slimani twice last year but we couldn't afford to pay the full release clause up front; now we can.

Given how much Pellè seemed to enjoy his partnership last year with Shane Long, it is very possible that Pellè and Slimani could be a real 'dream team', and they are both proven goalscorers. As with many past successful partnerships, the two players are as different as chalk and cheese which surely increases Koeman's option substantially, particularly if he chooses a single striker away from home. He could opt for either the classic centre forward in Pelle or the speedy and direct Slimani.

We have money (at last!!), we have a new and exciting boss and we have a terrific opportunity to build something special. I am sorry if this upsets some but I am truly not convinced that Lukaku is our best option.

Get shut and get some quality in.

NSNO

He's shown in the Euros he's nothing better than average and I think he himself knows his options are going to be limited.

I'd cash in now. £50M will do. There's better players out there. Let's be fair, he can't do the basics, ie, trap a ball or even head it properly. I'll be glad to see the back of him personally.

When you combine skill with honest endeavour, then you are usually on to a winner, and Slimani does appear to have both these qualities,

Actually, I think there's quite a lot of doubt!

"Ronald Koeman's primary objective this summer should be to keep hold of the forward, and restructure the squad around him."

Restructuring around an employee who may well leave isn't smart, unless you can guarantee a like-for-like replacement.

The Slimani / Pelle combo sounds good though Michael!

I honestly think that we'd struggle to replace him and his goals. He scored a lot in a struggling team last season. Imagine a reinvigorated EFC, with a reinvigorated Lukaku next season - we can hope.

I for one hope he stays another couple of seasons, but I think he always saw us as a stepping stone. The u-turn on his move away came down to the fact that the clubs who can afford him and offer him champions league football don't want him for the price we're asking.

Yes, his ball control is quite amateurish at times and he does sometimes appear lazy but he is a different kind of striker to some and we must not compare him to a Messi, Ronaldo or even a Vardy. With the right support and supply line he will continue to get 15-20 goals a season.

Harry Kane, who is more mobile than Rom, burst on the scene last season but looked awful at the Euros which shows all strikers can go through a rough patch and usually the team suffers.

We should be thankful we didn't sign Benteke way back then.

If he isn't happy about his reported 㿷m price tag and wants to leave, how will he respond? Koeman has an interesting dilemma.

We are entering, or should I say are now in the midst of the blind faith mode. The only guy whose opinion counts is Ronald. His alone. No-one else. We have to trust in him. It puts into perspective why Moshiri and Kenwright were so keen to land their man. Without someone at the helm for the next critical season, and it is critical, we would be fooked!

Sorry Gary but you are guilty as Roberto for blowing smoke up Rom's arse. Ronald will try to keep him, to get him down off the pedestal, and get him playing for the TEAM. If he needs a trip to the chemist to reassess his values and modes of communication then so be it. If it works bloody great. If not he will not playing regularly by Christmas and will be offloaded before the end of the season.

Where has the precocious man-child scoring machine of Season 13-14 gone? What has he morphed into? I want the Rom of Season 13-14 back. Is that too much to hope for?

My personal view has been well aired – that I believe Rom, for all his faults and abilities, is a toxic influence in the dressing room and, for a player that can't head a ball, is cumbersome on the ball, often losing possession, and who is lazy, he is not the player we should be building the team around.

"It puts into perspective why Moshiri and Kenwright were so keen to land their man."

Kenwright wanted to keep Martinez.

But really this is the most ridiculous and ill thought out post on the subject that I have read. #4 and #9 pretty much say it all. My big fear is that the useless, mouthy lump will still be with us at the start of the season.

As for paying him £100,000 per week - well I absolutely despair. He should be returning some of the £3.75m he cost us in prize money alone from his last season's over inflated earnings.

I think, if latest reports are to be believed, that he's realized that too!
It'll be interesting to hear his, or his agents, take on things now.

As for keeping him, it's win-win for me. We'll either keep a player who can bag 25 goals, or we'll sell him for a huge profit, and can reinvest. I'm honestly not bothered either way.

Haven't Chelsea just signed Michy Batshuayi? I think this would place any interest they have in Lukaku into immediate doubt.

His stock certainly didn't go up during the Euro's. When a player like Robson-Kanu is getting more attention than you, you must realise you've still got a long way to go.

I wonder if he and his old man have realised that he's not quite the world beater they thought he was yet.

Having said all this, I still remain hopeful that RK has the managerial style and ability to kick his lazy arse into gear!

Everton should try to keep Lukaku because he scores 20-ish goals a season, simple as that. Depending on the form of the team, maybe more, maybe less.

I don't really care if he can't pick a pass out like Glenn Hoddle or dribble like Ronaldo. I don't care if he spends half his time sulking and moaning. Those who have played enough know that's what strikers do. They are the most selfish, self-centred, egotistic and high maintenance (must be loved / arm round shoulder all the time) buggers on the field of play. But as long as they score, that's all you want.

Gary Linekar was an average footballer. Could barely pass, couldn't tackle and if a defender got in front of him, would struggle to go past him. However give him the ball in behind to chase and an opportunity to score and he would find the net consistently.

He's young and scores; he could get better in a better performing team. Therefore I say try to keep him as we have other priorities. If we can't then yes, get rid and get someone else in.

Get him the right service and he will score 20+ next season, and his value will remain high.

Its a win win situation for us, his contract puts us in a strong position and Roms own ego will not allow him to perform badly all season round.

Yes he was poor towards the end of the season, but he clearly had an eye on the Euros, plus his form was no worse than any of our other attacking players apart from Lennon who finnished the season well.

I honestly believe that we have something of a rare commodity in Rom, he is a natural goal scorer, he's proven in a top league and he's young. Someone will happily bid big for him as early as January.

In a market place that has Vardy, a one season wonder aged 29 valued above £20m, Benteke a no season wonder valued at £32m and Sterling a new Theo Walcott/Arron Lennon valued at £50m, a player like Rom will always fetch a high price.

If we keep Rom we have to trust in Koeman that he has done the best thing for the club, and allow Rom a clean slate as we did with John Stones last season.

I think there will be a few of our players who might find that they are not automatic choices week-in and week-out. That only good consistent performances will count and not past reputations.

I can't imagine RK accepting the mediocre performances from so-called star players that his predecessor tolerated.

How is he lazy? He played virtually every single match as a lone striker, and very often lasting the full 90 minutes. When was he being lazy? By not running down balls into the corner that were never played, because Martinez had the team playing a slow sideways passing game?

Bad for team spirit, who has said this? What player has come out and said that Lukaku is bad for the team, that he isn't liked? Name me one single person in or around the team that has said this about Lukaku.

Overpaid, how is he overpaid in relation to any other premier league striker who has seen their goal tally increase year over year, and scored 25 goals in his last season. Do you know what his pay is? He earns less than half what Wilfred Bonu makes. More than a third less than Benteke. Less than Danny Ings.

Bad influence on Barkely, how? He works on his game every year, has improved every year, has kept himself in great shape every year. He wants to improve, wants to be the best. Obviously he is not the best now, nor does he say he is. He says he wants to be. How is that bad for Ross Barkley, to be playing with a player who chose to leave a club in Chelsea where he couldn't get playing time as a youngster under Mourinho (see De Bruyne and every other youngster under Mourinho), to come to our club in order to play football and improve every season? As opposed to a player just happy to get a big pay check and not take on any pressure as a key player in a team.

I'd love to know the answers to those questions.

He is a player that divides opinion in a big way, there's no doubt. One thing that is not in dispute is that he scores plenty goals, more than I for one would expect when I watch him!

It's time for him to sling his hook though, he's opened his big mouth too many times for me. If we do sell him though, it's going to have to be a lot less than 㿷m, closer to 㿙m I would guess after his recent performances!

By the way koeman is not Martinez!

Raymond #44, I would actually expect him to score more, if it wasn't for poor ball control and lack of positioning.

Furthermore, the club don't need the money unless a ridiculous offer comes in. Imagine Lukaku in a side with pace, desire and intent to win. Last season: 18 goals. Next season: 25-30 goals.

Let's hope that Barkley attains his supposed full potential under this new manager and the mercurial duo of Deulofeu and Mirallas play well consistently. If Lukaku remains and we can add a proper playmaker to provide decent ammunition, we may have a successful season.

At the moment though we are three first team squad players down on last season's squad. Osman, Hibbert and Pienaar were all counted in that squad.

For my part, if he stays, he has to eat lots of humble pie and stop disrespecting the club and the fans. Is it only the Premier League where you can switch off from your job the way he did, say publicly that you want to leave and then (we hear) find yourself in line for a bumper pay rise?

Improvement in consistency from Lennon, Mirallas and Deulofeu may also come so let's not worry about too many signings just yet.

Benteke's form before joining Liverpool was up there with Rom; if he is to leave, I would not mind him as a replacement. Better in the air, probably has a better first touch, and when playing consistently, he kept Lukaku out of the Belgian team, plus you don't get this constant shit about his age and improvement.

I would like Rom to stay as we would miss his goals but, if he's not the finished article now, he never will be. I can live with the flaws but he has to bag 20-25 every season imo to justify keeping him and realise it's a team game; if not, sell him on as he can be replaced. Pellè and even a player not good enough for the Red Shite first team are more than capable of stepping into his boots.

The "fat, lazy and disinterested" Lukaku scored 25 goals for Everton last season in 47 appearances. He has now scored 61 goals in 127 games.

Since 2012, only 10 players in Europe have scored more goals than him. Only Aguero has scored more goals than him in the Premier League in the same period.

He has best ratio of minutes / chances created in the league. And he scored the highest number of goals among the current under 23 players in the top 5 European leagues.

http://www.football365.com/news/romelu-lukaku-the-ridiculous-statistics

You may not like him, but you can't argue with his stats. And most of this was achieved in a very average team.

I prefer to believe my own eyes and I saw him miss a penalty and 2 one on ones against West Ham, I saw him miss an open goal with a header from 3 yards at Watford in the last minute and I saw him miss a penalty and 3 great chances in the semi final.

You may like him but you can't argue with the facts that the very average team provided him with those chances and he missed the lot. Those chances alone cost us 2 league places and a cup final.

Go on, humour me, show me the source of your stat where you say Lukaku has the worst rate of chance conversion of any of the top 15 Premier League strikers.

How many places did the 18 league goals and 6 league assists gain us last season? And how many rounds did his 4 league cup goals help us progress through? Or his 3 FA Cup goals?

If you're going to say things like "his misses cost us", at least acknowledge what the impressive goals tally gained us. Strikers miss chances. All of them. But if they're scoring better than a goal every 2 games, they're in an elite band of players.

And remember that he turned 23 a few weeks ago. And including international games, he scored 32 goals in 56 games in the season just gone. How many players do you know who've done that as a 22/23 year-old?

https://www.whoscored.com/Players/78498/Show/Romelu-Lukaku

Pleasure https://www.whoscored.com/Regions/252/Tournaments/2/Seasons/5826/Stages/12496/PlayerStatistics/England-Premier-League-2015-2016

Little bit of analysis required.

Have a look at the bad control per game and dispossessed per game while you are there. Mind you, you have to go to 49 to find him.

As I said you can make statistics say anything. As Disraeli said 'there are three types of lies - lies, damned lies and statistics'

I am surprised you have to ask.

Lazy – he does not close down the opposition defenders when they are in possession of the ball, he trots around. watching a team mate run past him to get to an opponent in possession is a ridiculous situation.

Bad for team spirit – insisting on taking free kicks outside the box only to balloon them over the bar, insisting on taking penalties when we already had a proven penalty taker and Baines coming out in the press saying we didn't have a good team spirit, just individuals.

Overpaid – if he was a complete player, he would be overpaid and he is nowhere near a complete player. His ball control at times is shocking.

Bad influence – Barkley at one time was full of effort, he ended up trotting around just like Lukaku.

I only went back to the beginning of March, but since you ask only his goals against Barnsley and Chelsea in the cups won us the game and we would not have lost those games without them and his goals in the league actually won us 9 points. I named 2 games where his misses cost us 5 points.

And surely it is his responsibility to score goals, that is his job, that is what he gets paid 㿲,000 a week to do. SEVENTY THOUSAND POUNDS EVERY WEEK. We apparently want to give him a pay rise to 𧴜,000 a week. God give me strength.

I would not mind quite so much if he said 'look guys I'm really sorry I cost you a trip to a cup final to give you a chance of winning a trophy for the first time for 21 years, I'm young, I'm going to try and put it right next season'. But the arrogant idiot says he wants away to go and play for a team that wins trophies and is playing in Europe.

You might have to help a little more. How are you calculating conversion rate as I can't see it as a measure.

Enough.

If he stays, we have a 20+ goal a season striker who is still 23.

If he goes, we get 㿭m+ for him and all of that money goes to the Koeman brothers to find a replacement who actually wants to play for the club.

If Stones goes for 㿞m and Lukaku for 㿲m – that gives the club 𧶔m to build a squad over the next 2 windows.

Then there will be more money available next summer.

Under Premier League Player Statistics go to the detailed tab and you can use the drop downs to create virtually any list you want by pretty much any criteria you want.

If you get a striker who has a lot of other attributes, like being able to hold the ball up and bring team mates into the game, as opposed to losing the ball and giving the opposition the chance to counter attack, or winning headers and finding team mates or the net with them, and chasing down the opposition when not in possession, then you have an excellent striker... which is obviously not Lukaku.

Add to that the lack of loyalty to a club where he was happy to sign a 5-year contract and take all the benefits while causing disharmony amongst the team and making statements to the press about wanting to go to a big club, then you realise the guy has an ego problem. If he thinks he is bigger than EFC, then he needs a sense of realisation and my fear is that, if he stays, he will certainly get that from the supporters.

He obviously just thought, 'fuck this shit'. And who can blame him?

But his stats for a 23-year-old striker are fantastic, and goalscorers are a rare breed. Many a good striker has come to the Premier League for big money and flopped, hence Lukaku's value. Many a striker has had the occasional season (Beneteke, Beattie, Johnson, Vardy????, Saha etc) but very few have banged in near or above 20 goals a season for over 4 seasons, especially at the age of 23. All strikers miss chances, even goal machine Ronaldo misses chances, so singling out specific misses is totally pointless.

Big clubs don't have a hissy when players speak to other clubs; if we wanna play with the big boys, we need to be able to take it like the big boys. Big players have ambition, both professional and financial. Welcome to the world of modern football. Players are gonna be 'disloyal', 'greedy', etc etc etc. If we get in a hump and sell them each time it happens coz 'they disrepected us', then we will never be a top team.

We must fight tooth and nail to keep Lukaku.

1-in-2 conversion?!?!?!

This is not FIFA2016, but real actual football matches, against real actual goalkeepers and real actual defenders.

So the big clubs, with their good strikers, win all their games with just two to four shots, because the striker only needs two at the most the convert one?

I doubt even Pele had a 50% conversion rate.

Like it or not, we are talking about a top-grade player here.

And as for Lukaku's hold-up play, in all but one match at the Euros, against Italy, his hold-up play was actually quite good, and the commentators said as much. He was winning the headers in midfield, and holding up play for the midfielders.

The place where Belgium failed was their build-up play was extremely slow and consisted of De Bruyne or Hazard holding on to the ball way too long, and never delivering the through-ball.

But a good striker has a 1-in-2 conversion rate, wow.

If we get rid of him, I don't want one of the also-rans who struggled to get goals (no matter how good their control, heading, running); so what would we get in his place? How about somebody who scores around 20 goals a season?

If we want to be perceived as a big club, then we need to act like one. Yaya Toure has talked about potentially leaving Man City virtually since he signed, but the club don't care and neither do the supporters really. If they say he's staying, then he stays. Just get over it.

What we need is to add talented attacking players. Not players who just work hard or run a lot... talent.

㿭m+ for Lukaku – if we were to put him on the open market, we would not get anywhere close to 㿭m.

All those who want Lukaku to stay, what about his attitude!
He's made his mind up he's too good for us, he will be sulking around in no time if he's forced to stay here.

In an ideal world, he would love to stay, he would be working to find space, he would actually tackle a few players and continue to score goals like he admittedly can.

It's the 'love to stay' bit that concerns me.

What do those numbers mean?

The club don't need to sell; the hype (justified or not) around him is constant and he has 3 years left on his contract. I think if the club sold him for less than 㿭m, it would constitute bad business.

At some point, some other club was linked at 㿨m and Everton have let it be known that they want 㿷m, so I don't think 㿭m is at all out of the realms of possibility.

For the record, I personally don't think he is that good, but I do think we can get that number.

While it is not scientific, I think it is called supply and demand. If Everton put Lukaku on the market, it will be seen as the club not wanting him and open to offers. If we don't transfer-list him then interested clubs will know that he is or may be wanted, therefore the price will have to interest the seller.

As for his attitude, that is a matter for the Manager and then, if necessary, the Board.

That said, when as you say "you can make statistics say anything," that is very true. And how you describe them as you do can also be misleading.

You advise us to look at his bad control per game and dispossessed per game stats, implying he is poorly rated in this (and other categories) in a lowly 49th place. That grading actually refers to his medium for match ratings.

If you click the individual column headings it filters results based on that data. This reveals Aguero is the most dispossesed player in the league, losing the ball 3.4 times per game on average, followed in order by Alexis Sanchez, Martial, Rondon, Deli Ali, Diego Costa, Ayew and Zaha all worse than Romelu in 9th with a 2.2 average. Next is Kane with 1.8.

It's a similar story with bad control. Ayew at Villa led the way with 3.2 errors per game, followed by the likes of Diego Costa, Sakho, Rondon, Mane, Wickham, Deli Ali, Mitrovic, Zaha, Sanchez, Martial and Long before reaching Lukaku on 2.2 grouped with 3 others, Shaquiri, Giroud and Bolasie, with the likes of Mahrez, Ozil and Aguero not far behind.

Far, far from being the worst in either category as your post might imply and better than many 'better' players (as considered by some on TW).

And, like Graham, I have been unable to manipulate the data as you suggest to reveal the worst chance conversion rate you speak off.

Any chance you can offer a step by step Dummy Guide as to how to see them? Much appreciated if you can.

Real fun site - thanks again!

Well I blame him, I blame him big time for being a thief of the highest order.

And we only got 5 points because he was standing around watching our midfield run past him and the opposition back 4 playing the ball out unhindered.

You know at the semi final even after 4 really bad misses Lukaku chased a ball down into the corner really hard and won a corner off Blind - the whole corner rose and applauded him, that one incident alone should have given him a clue as to what was required - sadly it was the last time he broke into a trot last season.

Look don't get me wrong, I would love him to be the player we think he could be and while he wears the blue I will shout for him until I'm hoarse for 90 mins. My issue with him is that with his 'the world owes me a living' attitude he will never be that player. Everyone tells me he is young, give him a chance, but hey don't we pay him a grown man's wage and then some.

Fran - 'All strikers miss chances, even goal machine Ronaldo misses chances, so singling out specific misses is totally pointless'. So by the same token isn't singling out the chances he puts away equally meaningless. Surely there has to be some accountability, and whatever you think of him Ronaldo's work rate is remarkable.

And if we must talk stats his stats for bad control and being dispossessed don't even get him into the top 50.

I'm more exercised at the moment by who we can get in as support / backup.

Ehrm ... but it was you who raised the topic with the link to the very interesting site, fellah.

And NO striker gets into the top 50 (of 461 listed) ... or even the top 100 or so for the mentioned data. That's almost exclusively inhabited by goalkeepers and defenders!

I hope you can offer a step by step Dummy Guide as to how to see the worst chance conversion rate you speak off, as requested. Cheers Stephen.

Any further help welcomed.

(Hope I'm not on premium rate per minute for taking up you time on your Helpline!)

I'm not too fussed whether he stays or goes as along as its sorted one way or another before the start of the season. He'll score if he stays and we can replace him if he goes.

We have to keep an open mind about Stones until he comes out in public (soon hopefully) and makes his position clear. It's only newspaper gossip at the moment. Again, let him go if he wants to. I know people will argue that we should not be selling our best players and we won't if they want to stay and be part of our future. I was going to say 'bright future' but we are talking about Everton here so anything could happen!

But there is absolutely no point in keeping players whose heads are elsewhere. Get as much as we can for them and move on. I do want to keep Barkley as I have a feeling RK will get the best out of him. And, as others have said, let's see how good the youngsters are.

But I didn't single out any particular goals, just the fact that for each of the last 4 seasons he has scored near 20 or more. Few strikers will ever achieve this, especially by the age of 23. That is a testament to his talent.

Al: "Have I missed something, Fran?
What do those numbers mean?"

They refer to goals scored by the age of 23. So by looking at the list:

Ronaldo – 194
Raul – 145
Lionel Messi – 127
Sergio Aguero – 124
*Romelu Lukaku (with two months remaining) – 119*
Michael Owen – 111
Cristiano Ronaldo – 97

He is certainly amonst some of the best strikers of recent years. Or is he just so lucky that he is almost on par with Aguero, just a complete fluke?

You see... my issue with this sort of spin... cos that's what it is... spin. Is that you are comparing strikers who have played in the toughest leagues in the world as physically undeveloped 19-year-old debutants with a lad who at the age of 16 was fortunately big enough to play against absolute cannon fodder in a piss poor league.

41 Jupiter League goals somehow elevate him to being compared to players whose boots he's not fit to lace were against teams who's players.... well that's unless you are able to understand the difference in levels these lads played at.

In all games including friendlies he scored 1283 goals in 1367 games.

No-one and nothing in football compares to his record and he will forever in my eyes remain the greatest footballer in the history of the game.

It's a crime he never got any protection from refs in the World Cup of 1966 and, although I can say I saw him play in the flesh at Goodison Park, we never saw the very best of him as he was kicked and fouled with impunity.

The World Cup of 1970 was another story. Genius, pure genius, on a football field.

Does that make them shit too?

Spin?

The biggest spin is "he's crap, lazy and only scores sitters... well, okay, he doesn't only score sitters but he cant head... okay, he can head, but he misses so many chances, any striker would have stats similar to him.... he only got good stats because the league is crap....."

Admit it, it won't hurt, Lukaku is a good goalscorer, in a world where few goalscorers exist. He has consistently scored goals, be it in weak leagues or in strong leagues, since he was 16/17 years old. Do I give a shit if he disrespected the club? No. Not a single jot. I wan't to watch the game and see us win it. It makes the whole football thing a lot more interesting/fun.

I don't watch football for fake loyalty. I don't watch football so I can romantically imagine our players wanking off into Everton crested socks.

I wanna see us win games. To win games we need big players who score goals.

Big players who score goals generally have their agents manipulate the media to get the big moves and the big contracts.

West Brom: games 38 goals 17
Everton: games 33 goals 16
games 48 goals 20
games 46 goals 25

Those are good numbers for a young forward, if you still think he's shit and easily replaceable, then I am astounded.

Clearly shit.

You think Rom would have played for barca at 18 like messi? No. You need to control and pass a ball to play for them. Would he have displaced Aguero in either of his two clubs prior to man city? Don't be stupid. Portuguese league? Rom would never have had the technique to break in any sides at 18 never mind 16.

He's an overgrown kid who's been sussed out by centre halves. Don't let him face you up, and give him a little shove, he soon goes quiet.

Quite a Euros he had, eh.... this super striker you love so much stank the place out. 900 minutes of football has passed since he scored a goal for us.

All the stats trying to paint a prettier picture about his early growth spurt leading to easy goals for a top team in a woeful league doesn't detract from the fact that he averages 14 Premier League goals a season for us. You can try and plump his Euro goals up... but let's be honest – we again played so we shocking teams "young boys" – awful.

Take the Rom glasses off. Embarrassing.

Ronaldo is a truly magnificent footballer but if he tried those multiple stepovers against Storey, Harris, Hunter, Giles etc he would have been killed in action and the ref would have waved play on.

I did this thread a couple of times at the start of the Euros. It's an emotional issue, not a rational one.

Like all players, he has strengths and weaknesses, and if you're angry because he's talked about leaving Everton, you notice his weaknesses and minimise his strengths. If you're not so angry and like the fact that he scores lots of goals for Everton, you focus on the strengths and not the weaknesses.

Strengths are actually far more important. Vardy has weaknesses, but if your strengths can make you effective, then no-one will care.

There was a phrase used in the context of the England rugby team this season: "Pick him for what he can do, don't leave him out for what he can't do."

I watched the French last night, and the most impressive thing about them is how they are all so physically strong and great athletes. They still have flare but speed and strength seem to have become the main assets for The French.

Lukaku, has both these things in abundance but, if he wants to become as good as he already thinks he his, then he's got to start pushing himself a lot more, start anticipating the play a lot more, and playing with a lot more fire in his belly.

If he can drag it out of himself, then everyone will benefit, because these things are infectious and can only be good for the team. Can he do this? I'm not sure.

Yes, Pele was hounded and treated disgracefully in the 1966 World Cup. Versus Bulgaria in the 2-0 victory, he scored and I think Garrincha, both from free kicks; against Hungary, he just wasn't allowed to play.

Andy (#105),

Yes, George Best was a truly great player but, as you say, was let down by his temperament – that and the fact he never played half the seasons that he should have done rules him out, IMO, to be considered an all-time great, although when he played it was marvellous to watch him – except when it was against Everton.

I doubt it would have made a difference – Hungary were magnificent that wet Friday (?) evening. One of the greatest games I have ever seen and probably the best goal.... Vargas on the volley first time from Florian Albert's cross into the Street End

I have enjoyed arguments over the years re the "Would players from the old days be as great today" scenario and I always say that they would stand out today as true greats just as they did then. We were so lucky to see so many superb players in those weeks: Pele, Albert, Bene, Tostao, Eusebio, Simoes, Jairzinho, Garrincha, Torres... we were really blessed to witness that lot.

But I think the greatest team I've seen is the Brazilian World Cup side of 1970. Sheer magic.

Interestingly, Peter Roberts (#105) says "Brazilian teams and Argentinian teams show them true quality... they are two of the toughest leagues in the world". Funes Mori is first pick in the Argentine defence and still takes flak on here. Just saying....

Regarding Funes Mori – he is quality and will go on to be a very very good defender indeed. Regardless of that, the Argentina and Brazilian league are two of the most brutal yet technical in the world.

Go have a look at the 16-year-old Ronaldo playing for Cruzeiro.... watch the defenders. Animals.

Yes,you are correct, it was against Portugal when Pele was savaged. In fact, he never finished the game. I would also agree that Hungary were worthy winners when they beat Brazil, and Pele didn't play in this game.

As Ray says, we were indeed blessed to witness all these great players in that World Cup.

Funes Mori is a more-than-decent player and, under a better coach with more defensive nous, he will become a top Premier League defender.

He suffered like Stones due to Martinez over-emphasising the high-risk play in defence. He will be a top player under Koeman, absolutely no doubt about it.

Early in the piece, because of his ability to score goals, I was willing to overlook what I considered to be his shortcomings which :-

Poor ball control
Poor in the air
Poor with his back to goal

However, when the reports started coming through that he and his dad had been talking publicly about him wanting a move, it got right up my nose.

Despite Andy Crooks's sound advice about a clean slate, I am having great difficulty getting his posturing out of my system. Following Everton for me is indeed an emotional affair.

I am confident that our new manager will do what's best for the team. Whatever that turns out to be, there will be no complaints from me because I think he is going to make us a force to be reckoned with again – with or without Romelu Lukaku.

The point is, they were good leaders to aim for because they took the buffeting to make space for smaller, lighter and quicker partners following up. Rom Doesn't do it every time but, when you consider that he usually has more than one defender following him, he hasn't done so bad over his career so far.

Whatever happens, I think Everton will benefit keeping him or selling him.

You might want to reconsider the point Fran is making. He hasn't added Lukaku to that list of illustrious footballers. Lukaku himself did so by matching or outscoring some of them at a comparable age.

Similarly, when he scored in the 4-0 rout of Villa last season, he joined an elite group of 5 players – Fowler, Owen Rooney, Lukaku and Ronaldo – who scored 50 Premier League goals before turning 23, in the 3rd fewest games.

Conclusion: Romelu Lukaku scores goals at a rate matched by only a few very good footballers.

Pele credits Dondinho – his father – with teaching him to play left-footed rather than rely only on his right foot, heading, passing and close possession. Other tricks and how a change of pace could also outfox defenders were also sown by Dondinho.

As the footage from the Worid Cup 1958 demonstrates, the teenage Pele was a tiny scrawny kid. Indeed, only a couple of years before he burst on the world stage, a gateman refused him entry to the stadium where he was due to play and his team mates came looking for him, convincing the gateman he was indeed part of the team. They won 12-1 and Pele, a boy amongst men, scored seven!

By his own admission he wasn't an out and out CF, more a deep-lying one or what we now consider the playmaking number 10. Indeed, most pirated Brazil shirts sold in the country still bear the number 10 and the association with Pele.

Curiously, for both his club side Santos and even the national side, he was the designated substitute goalkeeper should injury befall the keeper in the match (before subs were introduced). Indeed, as he closed in on his 1000th goal, on 998 goals, Santos played away and he scored early on, but then... the Santos keeper was mysteriously injured and Pele played in goal for the rest of the game!

Apparently, unbeknown to Pele, this was contrived by the manager so Pele could score his 1000th goal in front of his home crowd which he duly did... only, updated records show what at the time was thought to be goal 999 was indeed the magical 1000th.

Another very influential figure in his sporting career was a kind of personal trainer who worked with him at Santos, NY Cosmos, and the national team, Julio Mazzei. Pele was blessed with a near-perfect physique for his chosen sport, but Mazzei also believed he could have been an Olympic decathlon champion as, without any specific training, he could run 100 m in 11 seconds, high jump 1.8 m and long jump 6.5 m. And his stamina and resilience was almost unequalled. Mazzei told Pele "Your body responds perfectly to everything in sport."

At the height of his fame with Santos, he was their cash-cow and would undertake gruelling overseas tours where, of course, as the main draw, Pele was expected to play. For many years, 6-8 games a month was a typical schedule for Pele, year round.

"Re-markable," as David Coleman might have spouted.

The people on here slating him for not running around enough are probably the same ones that used to moan that Andy Johnson ran around too much and didn't score enough.

You seem to use the word 'stats' dismissively, when actually they are the only facts we have to make judgements on, and they work out reasonably well for him.

Your argument seems to me to amount to this: Lukaku's goals don't count and he's not as good as Messi/Aguero/ Ronaldo etc.

By all means dislike him, there's good reason, but admit that that's what it is.

is somewhat undermined by the fact that European teams have won 8 of the last 9 FIFA World Club Cups. This is despite it not being taken all that seriously in Europe but being seen as the pinnacle of club football in South America.

You are basically a spouter of angry nonsense, and not a very good one, as your angry nonsense is easy to refute using widely available facts.

When I think about that it makes me marvel at what the young Garrincha was made of. Can you imagine what he went through and yet he ended up a truly great footballer who made people happy. Here is an extract from Wikipedia that is a fitting tribute to him:-

His epitaph reads "Here rests in peace the one who was the Joy of the People – Mané Garrincha."

People had painted on the wall: Obrigado, Garrincha, por você ter vivido (Thank you, Garrincha, for having lived).

Coming from someone I am sure hasn't watched a game from these leagues in his life.

The Brazilian league is very poor quality, very poor indeed. Much due to the absurd CBF, who are as corrupt as anything and thus young talent is shipped abroad en masse. The result is the Brazilian league is very weak, with almost no teams with tactical nor technical ability.

Brazilian fans are passionate, this is true, the atmosphere in games is immense. But quality?

Again, you obviously haven't watched a game from this league.

The Argentine league I know less of, but having watched the Libertadores championship I would assert that you again are incorrect in your judgement. But the Argentine league I admittedly have no knowledge of.

And Jay @124: spot on.

However, it seemed to me Fran was saying he is / would be as good as Aguero, I recall Fran saying something along the lines of it's not fluke he's got almost identical stats as Aguero.

My point is that I don't think he is world class like those strikers. Just an opinion and sincere and not clouded with venom or hatred which some people seem to think if you don't rate Lukaku as great.

Remarkably, when playing together for Brazil, Pele and Garrincha never lost a game. Coincidentally, their last game together for Brazil was a 2-0 win over England in which both scored free kicks.

Whilst Pele is remembered for winning 3 WC medals, in truth in Chile 1962 he barely featured, having been injured in the 1st game and not fit to play for the rest of the tournament.

Garrincha was duly crowned the best player of that WC as, like Maradona would do for Argentina in Mexico in 1986, he almost single handedly carried Brazil to victory.

Tales of 'the little bird's' dribbling prowess are legendary. (Garrincha means wren in Portuguese - an affectionate nickname given to her little brother by his sister).

Tragically, like George Best, he had a liking for the ale - fiery cacacha, actually (born into a family with an alcoholic father, his first taste of the drink that would kill him was aged 5!) - and the ladies.

His mother in law died in a drink driving accident with Garrincha at the wheel and he died aged 49 in 1983, a mental and physical wreck, of cirrhosis of the liver. MILLIONS turned out for his funeral.

Mostly he played for Botafogo in Rio and his home stadium was the famous Maracana which has hosted 2 WC finals. Even today, the home dressing room is not called Pele but ... Garrincha.

Brazilians love nicknames and other names he was known by reflect how fondly he was thought of in the people's affections, Alegria do Povo (People's Joy) and Anjo de Pernas Tortas (Bent-Legged Angel) being just two of them.

This link is a short review of a TV documentary about Garrincha that is well worth viewing if you can find it. It features a photo of his curiously bowed legs Laurie refers to.

Link

How many of his comparibles were fully grown at 16. How many played for the best club in a rubbish league scoring 41 goals for the club (yes Mike if you are going to quote total club goals as a point of saying look how many he's got then quote total goals elsewhere... not just league).

In short it's just some nonsense guff designed to make people think we've got a potential world class player.

World class players can control a football, this lad can't. He never will have a decent touch. It doesn't stand up to close examination. Defenders aren't soft. You watch him next season. He will struggle big time. He has been well and truly sussed out.

Unless we turn into Cambridge United or Wimbledon and just play long balls for him to run onto like an excitable uncoordinated labrador then I do not see the point that in keeping him. Just watching griezmann the other night highlighted the gulf in class between a proper striker and this lad who has so many flaws.

Well you sound so sure Peter that you can't possibly be wrong, so I defer to your absolute certainty.

Usually such predictions come with words like "beast" thrown in. Like he's a footballing Brock Lesnar who will bodyslam defenders with his 6ft 4 marshmallow muscled frame.

Smoke and mirrors with this one. You just don't see it.

He's got a decent goals record, but people often pad it out by counting in cup goals which his profligacy in the latter stages has rendered meaningless.
He averages around 14 per season in the Prem, about the same as the very ordinary Rickie Lambert averaged with Southampton.

The guy needs to get his head down and continue his progress. He may become a very decent striker if he concentrates on improving his game rather than his circumstances

If he really was such a great striker, you wouldn't have so many Evertonians criticizing his ball control and lack of effort.

I don't even want a target man, the game has moved on, I want fast small tricky strikers who never stop running.

I've heard it all now.

Facts vs Angry Nonsense.

We also have the facts that we see before our very eyes, week-in and week-out: the ball control, positioning, can't be arsedness, etc.

Stats only give you numbers for comparison with other numbers, not an indication of how a player plays.

I've not been paying much attention to Lukaku threads lately, seeing as though they tend to end up with the same people making the same points for and against, so stumbling across those two little pieces on Pele was something of an unexpected treat. Enjoyed reading both.

Unfortunately, the only time I ever saw him strutting his stuff, he was lining up in the same side as Sylvester Stallone... and, even then, he was unfairly nobbled by a Nazi.

The amorous Garrincha admitted to losing his virginity in his humble rural surrounds, aged 14, to ... a goat!

The dangers of drinking cachaca at too young an age, harnessed to bouncing hormones I guess!

It is quite likely a few here on TW saw his one and ONLY defeat with the Brazilian national side - the loss to Hungary in the 1966 WC at Goodison.

Apparently, there was 'trouble in t'Brazilian camp' during their stay in England for the 1966 WC. Pele was told by a journalist that The Beatles were football fanatics who wanted to perform a tribute show for them.

Pele, thinking it would lift spirits in an unhappy camp, approached the elderly head of the Brazilian football federation. You must remember this was at a time when Brazil was still governed by a military juanta.

He told Pele: "What, those hairy kids? You guys are here to play football, not to play rock n roll. I will not allow it." It pissed Pele and the players off.

Ten years later, when both Pele and John Lennon were living in New York, they attended the same Belitz language school - Pele learning English, John Japanese. Lennon recalled the offer the band made to play for the Brazil team and Pele told him his side of the story that John didn't know.

The Garrincha documentary (and other footage on YouTube) is well worth a watch, if you can find it.

Naughty Dave, naughty.

The goat certainly had some Brazilian in it!

I get slightly irritated by bad arguing, and people who can't understand the difference between a fact and an opinion, but it certainly doesn't make me angry.

"Lukaku never scored another goal after the Chelsea game" that's a fact.

He missed "several great chances" is an opinion. (It being open to dispute whether they were great chances, or whether a goalkeeper's save counts as a miss).

"Lukaku scored 25 goals for Everton last season" is a fact.

"Lukaku should have scored more than he did last season" is an opinion.

"Lukaku did well to score that many, because of our emphasis on passive possession" is an opinion.

"Lukaku has a poor first touch" is not a fact, it is an opinion.

"Lukaku is one of the best strikers in the world" is not a fact, it is an opinion.

"Lukaku is standing inside the centre circle" is a fact.

"Lukaku's positioning is poor" is an opinion.

"Martinez sacrificed everything in his quest to get goals for Lukaku" is an opinion, as is "Martinez constantly negated Lukaku's strengths by asking him to play with his back to goal and encouraging the team to play slow possession football which enabled opponents to set themselves up defensively. He'd have been more effective and scored even more goals if we'd played more direct high tempo football."

Everything anti-Lukaku on this thread is based on opinion, which appears to me to be motivated by anger at him talking about leaving.

My opinions are mostly pro-Lukaku (I've always had this weird soft spot for people who score goals for Everton), but I've based what I'm saying on facts. I try to avoid the angry exchange of opinions, because I don't find it particularly enjoyable, but occasionally I like to challenge something I disagree with, especially if it seems to be getting accepted in large numbers without challenge.

For example, Lukaku's 'poor first touch' is often a result of the ball being played forward to him from some distance, at pace, sometimes knee high and with at least one defender making forceful physical contact with him. That defender is often backed up by another defender and a holding midfielder, meaning Lukaku is outnumbered and trying to control a difficult pass. At times his first touch is very good and he links up play nicely. That's my opinion, and I'm not angry about it.

Lukaku's 'laziness' can be attributed to at least three factors. Firstly, like all great goal scorers, he wants to score goals. This means he doesn't run channels or pull wide, he stays near the goal. Strikers are often criticised for running too much when they should stay near the goal. Secondly, given Everton's style of play last season, he was unlikely to ever be given the kind of through ball that made it worth making off the ball runs. If he made them at any point, he would've soon learnt not to bother. Thirdly, he may be considered lazy for not closing down opposing defenders enough, but pressing needs to be done as a team, and organised beforehand. One centre forward charging after the ball achieves nothing in this era where defenders are so comfortable in possession. He wisely opted for saving his energy for situations where it might actually be useful. He may also have lacked a bit of fitness and conditioning, as our entire squad seemed to. Again, this is my opinion and I'm not angry about.

I could have said all this earlier, but I didn't see the point, as you won't agree with it, and will probably reply telling me I'm wrong. I don't care. I'm saying it now because it's arisen as part of the discussion, and helps me make my point about the distinction between facts and opinions.

The goals he scored are facts, the weaknesses in his game, and especially the level of importance of those weaknesses, are opinions.

His tragic-comic story is all the more remarkable because of his serious physical handicaps. A twisted spine, pronounced bow legs, one leg 6 cms longer than the other. Maybe they actually helped him be what many consider the greatest dribbler the game of football has ever seen.

In the 1962 WC, after beating England, one English journo described him as "a cross between Stanley Matthews, Tom Finney and ... a snack charmer!"

In that quarter final, a dog entered the field of play and Jimmy Greaves was the only one able to catch the dog. In gratitude, the dog pissed on the England mans shirt which Garrincha found so hilarious that he was almost unable to play on. He even took the dog by to Brazil from Chile!

Four years earlier at the 1958 WC when Pele announced himself to the world, at the end of the World Cup final, and the biggest game of Garrincha's career to date, due to his years of alcoolism he did not realise Brazil were world champions. Bemused by his team-mates wild celebrations, he had to be convinced that his team had won the biggest competition in world football as he thought the tournament was more league like, rather than a one off match.

As well as killing his own mother in law in a drink-drive accident as mentioned in a previous post, a year after winning the WC in 1958, Garrincha ran over his own father in their home town and drove off without stopping. When he was found, he was completely unaware of what had occurred, almost comatose by the amount of alcohol he'd consumed.

Film stars, renowned Samba and carnival dancers, he sired at least 14 children with several different women.

Quite the lad, was our 'wee wren.'

I think you've missed my point.

I didn't say you weren't allowed opinions.

Here's a clue, if you think what someone said is ridiculous, you probably haven't understood what they've said. Perhaps your comprehension was dulled by how angry you are. Emotion can cloud higher brain functions.

Opinions can be either pro or anti Lukaku. Fine. He has strengths, he has weaknesses.

The facts are that he scored 25 goals for us last season. The fact is, no-one else has done that for... (actually I'm not sure, is it all the way back to Lineker?)

I like people who score goals for Everton. It is therefore my opinion that we should keep him and not slag him off so much as his weaknesses are outweighed by his goals.

No dear, it's my opinion that he has weaknesses. (Although you could construct a definition of 'weakness' that meant everyone had them by definition, then it would be a fact).

Your use of 'now' suggests you think I at some point stated that he had no weaknesses. Or are you still just completely baffled as to the difference between a fact and an opinion?

Jim gets it. And to be fair, the Lineker point is a genuinely good one. A different striker to Lukaku might not score as many goals, but might make the team better.

However, there were two 'mights' in that sentence, and they were pretty big ones.

You get "slightly irritated by bad arguing" ?

You might want to save your lectures about fact and opinion until you have worked out the difference.

"He missed several great chances, is an opinion" . . only if you are prepared to deny the evidence of your own eyes . .The rest of us saw them and know that statement to be fact.

"Everything anti Lukaku on this thread is based on opnion" . .REALLY ? so he has averaged more EPL goals for Everton than Rickie Lambert did for Southampton ?

"Lukaku has a poor first touch, is not a fact, its an opinion" . .Evidence, eyes . .denying.

You then tell us that "Lukaku's "laziness" could be attributed to at least three factors" . .but you ignore the obvious explanation that he is bone idle and if the thought of getting across the defender to convert decent near posts crosses ever occurs to him . .then he cant be arsed to do anything about it - opinion ? I would argue its fact

If I were to write a sarcastic post satirising the views I'm disagreeing with it would look something like yours.

You're confusing the fact/opinion distinction with the agreeing/disagreeing distinction. Perhaps you could do with a lecture or two?

And to think someone accused me of being condescending last week. Tut tut.

My opinion is that Lukaku's weaknesses aren't as big or important as his detractors suggest, and that his goals outweigh them significantly. I've explained why I think that, but when you do that on ToffeeWeb you get the likes of Darren being very angry with you, so I originally didn't bother, until the conversation seemed to naturally lead in that direction.

As opposed to presenting numbers, like scoring 25 goals last season, the stats that show where he stands regarding goals scored at his age and the company that he shares, etc. Those are facts.

Now if you said because of those stats that means he is better than player X, or because he shares elite company like Aguerro regarding premier league goals that he is an equal player to Aguerro, then that again would be opinion.

Make sense?

Not sure why you think I'm angry. like you I am just looking at other peoples posts and when I look at yours I'm seeing Swiss cheese.

I don't think you a condescending . . I just think you are trying to be clever and failing miserably.

40,000 people saw Lukaku miss sitters last season. Stop talking nonsense.

They saw it, therefore it is fact

What holes in mine need filling in?

Which bits are nonsense?

The "fact" is, its only "opinion" when its Lukaku missing the sitters . . we only THINK we saw them.

The Lukaku threads are becoming like the old Martinez threads with people clearly prepared to deny the evidence of their own eyes.

Jim, of course, and like I said, it's not that you're not allowed opinions, but I tried to avoid being too 'opiniony' early on (because look what happens when you do) and use facts. The point really is that I think the pro-Lukaku opinions are based on facts, and the anti-Lukaku opinions are based on an emotional reaction to media talk. These people then try to convince themselves and us that he's not that good anyway, something I think could be harmful because if it became prevalent we might end up losing an important player.

In my opinion, the best thing for Everton is keeping Lukaku so that he continues to score lots of goals for Everton.

My first post at 108 summed up plenty of what I think.

Can I have have my argument now? I've paid for it.

No you haven't paid.

Yes I have... Ah! I see that's an argument! Very good.

No it isn't an argument.

Of those chances, whichever way the person sees them, missing a "sitter", missing a chance or a great save, what I am saying is that the likes of Messi and Ronaldo also miss those same chances.

There it is -post 170

If it's an even deeper discussion of the fact/opinion distinction you're after, of what they really mean and of difficult cases where the boundaries seem to blur, then usually I'd be up for that, but I think I'll be doing us all a favour if I resist.

You really, really don't get it do you?

Try reading through everything again, slowly. It's all in there.

It appears to be fact that Ronaldo and "every single players misses sitters . . but only opinion when Lukaku misses them.

I'm guessing its only opinion that when you stop trying to pad out Lukaku's goal stats. He has only averaged 14 premiership goals each season with Everton

It appears to be fact that Ronaldo and "every single players misses sitters . . but only opinion when Lukaku misses them.

I'm guessing its only opinion that when you stop trying to pad out Lukaku's goal stats. He has only averaged 14 premiership goals each season with Everton

You talk about the goals he's averaged for Everton, fine. I'm sure you were on here screaming that his goals against Chelsea and City were absolutely useless and should never be counted, right?

Looking at the rest of his goals, or total goals since the last time I checked we all wanted to win those Cup games, his goals score each season has increased. Going from 16 in his first year with us, to 20, then 25 last season. Now, only my opinion of course, but I would imagine that seeing the goals scored increase year over year for a just turned 23 years old player is generally seen as a very positive thing.

And I would submit to you that any team looking to buy a player would look at those numbers, especially the prior year, with much more weight than the average of premier league only goals. Now, even if they did, for some strange reason, only want to know what he scored in the league, they would also see that last year his goals scored jumped from 10 to 18 in the league. So 18 goals in 37 appearances.

Cast your mind back 12 years ago... did Rooney spout crap to the press to get his move... did he insinuate we weren't good enough? Yet he attracted pure bile. I was angry because I knew we needed him. But let's be honest - he was sold - actively. Anyone who thinks otherwise probably thinks Lukaku is happy to stay because Koeman told him he's prepared to turn us into a long ball over the top outfit.

If people want to start comparing Lukakus goal stats at least start comparing apples with apples. 25 goals "last season".... stop trying to make out its a huge return... he played in more cup and league games for more minutes than any other striker and got penno duties on top of that. By hook or crook we ended up playing lots of games... just like we did the year before where he needed his europa goals to supplement his poxy 10 league goals. Prolific eh.

Bored of this. Bored of fan boys who staunchly defend a completely over rated player who has absolutely no affinity for Everton. I had his judged before his lack of loyalty... throw that on top and I genuinely hate the fact we pay him wages like we do.

For the record, Lukaku has played three seasons for Everton, scoring 15, 10 and 18 league goals. That's 43. An average of 14.33 per season (which is higher than Rickie Lambert's average for Southampton in the Premier League - 14.00).

I think I'll stop here, but this has made me chuckle tonight, so I guess it depends what Darren comes up with next.

Half of the conversation has been about what words mean, certainly not much passion in that, although some clear exasperation from David has begun to creep in.

He hasn't run down Everton, hasn't said he is too good for Everton. He has said he wants to play Champions League football and compete for titles. The "fact" is that Everton will not be in the Champioms League next season. The previous ownership was all too happy to just finish mid table, and that is a fact that every single person on here can attest to. Lukaku is saying he is not happy to do that. It remains to be seen what this new owner is actually going to spend, since so far it has been just about nothing.

Its just preposterous that you and Mike Allison think you can muddy the waters by taking refuge in semantics. You know he missed sitters. I know he missed sitters, the dogs in the street know he missed sitters, stop denying it. Do you think we were all born yesterday ?

Lukaku rendered his goals against chelsea worthless when he missed those sitters at wembley.

Its no good leading in the Grand National if you are going to fall in the latter stages.

Fourteen premiership goals per season he has averaged . . fact or opinion ?

Perhaps you or Mike will help me out on this one.

People who say 'it's just the way it is' are a huge part of the problem. It's pathetic behaviour from the player and it shouldn't be tolerated. Fine him, boo him, chase him with pitch forks. Teach the big baby that actions have consequences.

Of course he could have avoided the whole sorry affair by simply conducting his business privately...and giving his dad a good slap.

That'll be 14 then

Maybe it's all the other work lukaku does (what I do not know)... or the fact that he's 23.... which means he has another 10 years of earning money whilst having a touch like an elephant.

Unfortunately I think I've run out of things to say.

Well I haven't, obviously, but this is probably a good time to stop.

Cheers.

He also – more often than not – could not trap a rat in a 3-ft room with a 2-ft box.

COYB

Alan Ball is the greatest Everton player I've ever seen... opinion or fact?

WR Dean is the greatest Everton player of all time, as above.

The Bayern game was the best atmosphere ever at Goodison (see also Dixie's 60th over Arsenal).

Wembley FA Cup Final 1966 was a great day.

As a matter of fact, that's just an opinion.

Not once did the previous Board ever come out and say they demanded or expected us to win the league. Not once did they say they demanded or expected us to finish in Champions League places. In fact, they praised Moyes throughout his tenure for doing an incredible job, which was most often mid-table finishes. Not bottom half of the league, not top 4, but roaming right around 7th to 8th, mid-table.

Praising the manager for doing a good job with little financial support is something completely different.

Didn't BK jump at Martinez when he said in his interview 'I'll get you Champions League'? He should have said, "No thanks, we only want mid-table at this club."

10th to 12th is midtable.

Moyes's last 7 seasons' placings were were 6, 5, 5, 8, 7, 7, & 6.

Hardly mid-table, unlike Martinez last 2 seasons of 11th and 12th despite spending more in one season than Moyes spent in the whole of his tenure.

We can knock the Moyes years for many things but let's not over-exaggerate, eh?

What on earth are you talking about? The previous owner may have budgeted and expected to finish 7th (love the way 7th has become mid-table in a 20 team league) but we can't know he was happy with it – don't you think he would have loved to have won it?

I happen to agree with you. I think he was content with respectability... but I know that's merely my opinion.

You claim that every single person on here will testify that your opinion is a fact, but me and Eric disagree... Which kinda renders your "fact" mere opinion.

Jesus Christ, are you people actually trying to convince anyone on this forum that BK expected to win the league? The fact is in the budgeted league position and the retention of a manager who most often finished around 7th to 8th, which absolutely is mid table. Then hiring a manager who was just relegated.

Honestly, this place is becoming a bit of a nonsense place at this point. I miss the days of Tony Marsh. BK and mid-table mediocrity was such a known thing that the argument that used to take place on here was between supporters who believed we should push for more and those who said we should be happy for just hoping to qualify for the old Uefa Cup.

One thing is for certain – I've seen far better penalties taken. It was a very poor penalty, perfect height and was too close to the keeper.

I think it's fair to say that there is a case to be had to say that this lad who wants "the big games" is a big-game bottler. Chelsea super cup – poor penno. When we had top 4 in our hands, he went missing against Southampton and Palace. The second leg semi-final versus Man City. The semi-final against Man Utd. The Euros versus Wales....

If we are going to win things, we need a player who delivers – not just against Swansea, Villa and West Ham.

Anyone seen the tin man and the lion?

I agree regarding 'big-game bottler' and that's what annoys me the most in relation to his comments about moving to a 'bigger' club.

However, I still don't believe we should sell him. He can score goals. We don't need to sell (financially) and we don't currently have a better striker.

We should buy another striker (hopefully better than Lukaku) to provide competition. That way, we improve without taking anything away from the club.

If my mind serves me correctly, Lukaku won us a big game quarter-final against the team that rejected him. His fantastic run past a series of Chelsea defenders didn't seem like bottling to me, and is one of the best goals I've seen from an Everton player. Didn't he also score in a semi-final against Man City? Again – does not seem like 'bottling' – nor does his 7 goals in 9 cup appearances.

He has scored goals against City, Arsenal, Liverpool, Chelsea etc. He has scored in big games. You can throw a 'bottling' narrative at anyone if you cherry-pick isolated examples and ignore those which contradict the argument.

Lukaku is the best striker we've had at this club in the Premier League. He is only 23. It drives me mad to read so much rubbish about him on here. It was even worse before this season, before a lot of the naysayers disappeared after an impressive goal return and a realisation that the system, rather than Lukaku's ability, was the issue.

He has acted like an idiot although, to be honest, in Lukaku's shoes, I'd probably have asked for a move after the kind of season we had, if I was not brought up an Everton supporter. But Lukaku asking for a move does not mean he has suddenly become a bad or over-rated striker, or a bottler. He is still a young, and in some ways raw striker, but has been one of the most consistent scorers in the last 4 Premier League seasons. 60 goals in 112 starts (135 appearances) is remarkable for a 19- to 23-year-old.

I'd rather we keep him but, if he goes, I will wish him well. We will make a significant profit, and getting him was a signal of our intent as a football club. It meant little then, but with Moshiri in charge, I think we are heading back to the big time. Our ambitions would be easier to achieve with a player like Lukaku in our ranks.

Regardless of the facts about Lukaku's abilities, as some think that we overpaid for him, and also think that he hasn't improved enough since then, they would surely not expect another club to pay even as much as we paid for him? Discounting, of course, the extra TV money now available – so we might get more for him in cash terms than we paid for him but, by the same token, we would very possibly have to pay out even more than that for a player of better ability than Lukaku?

That's a question. Not another debate about Lukaku's abilities.

What system would improve his ability to control a ball?

Do you accept the goal every two games and take it for what it is?

Or do you think that is not enough and require more running, chasing back and general hard work, regardless of scoring record?

Lukaku got 18 Premier League goals and 25 in all competitions as a 22-year-old in an Everton side that finished in the bottom half of the league, and who gave up in the tail end of the season (Lukaku included).

He is one of the hottest properties in European football. I can't fathom any opinion that says we paid too much for him. It's quite frankly absurd.

This is a market that has seen Man City pay 㿅-28 million for a 26-year-old Bony (now 27), Benteke (25) move for 㿌.5 million. This is a market that has already seen Liverpool pay 㿎 million for Mane, Watford turn down 㿊 million plus offers for Deeney and Ighalo, and seen West Ham bid 㿆 million for a 29-year-old Bacca.

Lukaku's ball control issues, whilst clearly are an underlining issue, are just as clearly a product of confidence. When he is flying high, his ball control and first touch are far better.

I think he has a serious confidence issue, which was worsened the season before this one by a failure to play to his strengths. He will have to conquer that issue if he is to ever become a world class striker.

People may pay £40m for him just in the way sterling and Luiz went for £50m. Crazy business. Get rid. Dont rate him. 3 or 4 years he will be in a Turkish or Chinese club.

So why has nobody come for him? Despite all of his "come-and-get-me"s, he's attracted about as much interest as a Rishi Persad nap.

I've said all summer that Lukaku will be forced to climb down due to a lack of interest... and I'm still saying it.

Just waiting for his "I never REALLY wanted to leave" statement...

Martinez was the only manager who was prepared to pay 28m, nobody else has made an offer since.
Stones on the other hand was pursued relentlessly by the champions, their final offer was around 40m and they only walked away when they were told he was NOT for sale.

Stones cleared all doubt by telling the club he wanted to go to the Champions and when he was told no, he knuckled down and got on with it. We have not heard a peep out of him since.
Lukaku, on the other hand has repeatedly lifted his skirt to every top club in Europe, without having the balls to put in a transfer request . . Their lack of interest has made him look a complete twat.

Stones we hear, told a fan that he is really impressed by the new manager and wants to stay, I believe that, if he wanted to go, he has proven he has the balls to make his request official.

See the difference ? Stones stayed because the club wouldnt let him go. Lukaku stays because he doesnt have any choice.

I also love that people are now claiming that the asking price for Lukaku is putting these top clubs off. .he was putting putting himself in the window, long before reports claimed there was an asking price

Michy Batshuayi has a career total of 77 in 198 games, from the french and belgian leagues. That is significantly lower than Lukaku's record. Last season he recorded 23 in 50, again lower than Lukaku's record and in a weaker league: He cost 33 Million pounds.

Alexandre Lacazette has a record of 96 in 229, closer to Lukaku's record than the former, but all in the French League (lower quality than PL) and is 2 years his senior at 25. 23 in 45 games last season, no better than Lukaku's return. Was unable to break into the France squad, despite Giroud and Gignac being the no1 strikers. His asking price is said to be 40-50 million pounds.

Arkadiusz Milik has 61 in 143 games, much lower than Lukaku despite having played his entire career in weaker leagues. His 24 games in the Bundesliger saw a total of 2 goals. His last 2 seasons at Ajax have seen a decent record, with 24 in 42 last season. He is a year younger than Lukaku. Would probably cost 16-20 million (Given Janssen went for 17).

So go on, find me a striker that would make selling Lukaku for 40-50 million not a absurd risk. Spurs have Kane, and just added to him with Janssen. If we are to challenge, we need to keep Lukaku and add another striker to the squad.

Proven goalscorers are very hard to find, and that is why, despite being dick-heads, despite having other technical abilities less than perfect, they will always be in demand.

Lewandowski, Benzema, Ibrahimovic, Muller, Aubmeyang, Aguero, Kane and co all have their deificiencies. Lack of pace, fitness, weak, small, first touch, lazy etc etc, but they score goals and thus play for the best teams. Lukaku scores goals, and if we sell him we will never get somone able to score as many, and thus our team will be weaker.

Wilfred Bony. Technically very good, goals per minutes he's up there (just in case people start saying oohhh he only got 2 in 16 games or whatever for city which amounted to 60 minutes of playing time).

Your obsession with goal stats hinders your ability to see what a striker needs to do for the team. Yes... goals win games. Losing the football time and time again leads to conceding goals. Strikers who combine goals with work rate with high quality possession stats are more important than a strikers who done none of the rest but get an extra 3 or 4 goals.

What I love about those 3 players is the passion they show... just a pity we don't have 3 Number 9 shirts.

The striker may well score and as a consequence his stats looks great: 1 goal per 20 mins. If he doesn't score, he's only had 20 mins on the pitch, so no major damage to his goals-per-mins stat.

Similarly, a striker can start a match, score and then be subbed with 20 mins to go when his team is winning, as the manager decides to shut up shop to try to secure their result. Again, good for the goals-per-minute stat: 1 goal in 70 mins, not 90.

So goals per min can be massively influenced by the type of manager you play for. As we know, Martinez didn't like to shut up shop and Lukaku was rarely (ever?) on the bench, so he nearly always played 90 mins.

As for the talk about Rom's penalty against Man Utd, if you want to see a contender for worst penalty of the year, take a look at Pelle's against Germany in their shoot out this year. Appalling.

I'm more bothered that Everton have had someone on penalty duties who is garbage at them. Even ones he scores aren't always convincing. But hey... the ones he gets boost his stats, I suppose.

I don't believe there are many clubs out there ( if any ) that will pay the rumoured asking price that Everton want to let Lukaku leave, assuming he stills wants CL that is of course !

There has been various figures branded about from 50million to 75 million.
Possibly PSG may be tempted , but only because they have the money and could be desperate for a striker - time will tell.

Lukaku and his mucker Pogba would be having a few chats about clubs ,money , contracts , lifestyles and the rest while on holiday.