21 May 2013

Redknapp insists: £20m 'baby Drogba' will have 'lots of takers' this summer. LFC...?

Chelsea striker Romelu Lukaku has been a revelation at West Brom, and with 23 goals/assists for the Baggies this season, you'd think that Chelsea would be desperate to have him back at Stamford Bridge. Former Liverpool midfielder Jamie Redknapp doesn't think so, though, and he believes another loan spell would be the best career move for the 20-year old Belgian.

Liverpool were linked with a move for Lukaku in 2011, and in his column for the Daily Mail on Monday, Redknapp observed:

"Jose Mourinho loved Didier Drogba as the focal point of his Chelsea attack, so the hat-trick for Romelu Lukaku against Manchester United has come in good time for the returning manager.

"If Baby Drogba is not going to play regularly then another loan will keep him active. I can think of lots of takers".


Like Aston Villa's Christian Benteke, Lukaku is a beast of a player, and Chelsea would be stupid to let him go out on loan again. However, if they're not going to play him regularly - which seems likely if (as expected) they sign an expensive striker this summer - then other clubs could benefit.

After watching Lukaku bully Liverpool's defenders during West Brom's 2-0 victory over the Reds at Anfield in February, Robbie Earle argued that the striker would be a good buy for the club. He told ESPN:

"What a monster this boy is. Still not 20 years of age, but he bullied Liverpool into submission in the end. They say he isn’t quite good enough for Chelsea, well you look at this Liverpool team, and strangely enough, a player like Lukaku would be the perfect complement to their side".

I would love to see Lukaku at Liverpool. Like Christian Benteke, he's a big, powerful striker with good technique and an eye for goal, and at the age of 20, he perfectly fits the FSG transfer template.

Lukaku - who cost Chelsea £20m - grabbed two goals against Liverpool this season, and helped West Brom to a humbling 5-0 aggregate victory over the Reds. He is everything Andy Carroll should be, and he's four years younger than Liverpool's record £35m signing. He has great pace, power, close control, technique, balance, and the ability - as Earle suggests - to bully defenders into submission.

Lukaku would be great addition to the squad but considering he initially cost £20m, I doubt Liverpool would be able to afford him. A loan, on the other hand, could be a possibility, but would Chelsea allow him to go to a major rival...?







NOTE: Please stick to the Comment Policy (Click to read)


49 comments:

  1. A loan would be an awesome move to get him.
    But being his age if he actually did well with us a huge majority of fans would be screaming for us to make the move permanent and as you said Chelsea initially paid 20m for him, It would cost us way more than we would have unless we qualified for CL next campaign.
    but thats just my opinion

    ReplyDelete
  2. I dont think Chelsea will want to sell Lukaku to Liverpool after Sturridge Torres and Mereiles and Yossi they may be a little bit averse to be made to look foolish again.

    ReplyDelete
  3. But he is too arrogant in my opinion and he is person who dares to speak freely or recklessly should I say. No doubt he is a talented player but I hope he keep a low profile

    ReplyDelete
  4. I don't understand why Chelsea persist with Torres. They had Sturridge who was playing 10 times better than Torres with fraction of his wages and more than 5 years younger - Sold for 12mn. Similarly Lukaku who I think suits Chelsea style of play, out on loan. They bought Demba Ba but still Torres is first choice. Beggars Belief.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Im not sure they would sell him to Liverpool.

    In other news Kolo Toure to Liverpool??

    ReplyDelete
  6. i think if he goes out on loan again in the prem next season WBA are in the box seat.he loves it at Albion and he knows the fans love him and we are not a threat to chelskis asperations

    ReplyDelete
  7. I can't see Mourinho passing up the chance to have a Drogba-like option on the bench at least at Chelsea next season. Not many CFs out there who have his style that a I don't think Chelsea will loan him out to a top 6 PL side.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I like Lukaku however this is a non starter as there is no way Mourinho will sell to Liverpool

    ReplyDelete
  9. not worth a loan deal when your trying to build a solid team. for me loan signings are for lower down teams to ensure for that year they do not go down and if they do, they have not got a top player on their books. Liverpool if they want him should buy him, then we can build him into the team. Why would we loan him out, develop him so the opposition can use him for their own end?

    ReplyDelete
  10. fair comment m8 congrats on a decent season to steve clark and wba. now back to lfc .it looks like enrique is on his way so with reina coates carroll and suarez its looks like rodgers will have plenty of poke to get it right.if he doesn"t he will be out by xmas.i totally agree with reina and coates going .but the others not so sure

    ReplyDelete
  11. I will personally wish he come to lfc

    ReplyDelete
  12. Loan shmoan, either we buy him or we don't. Having to loan players from other Premier League sides is beneath us.

    ReplyDelete
  13. like you said cannot afford him and your dreaming if you think theres any chance will loan him to us

    ReplyDelete
  14. Like 90% of the players and activity you just mentioned are based on rumours thats a large part of our team you have just written off don't think it's going to happen.

    ReplyDelete
  15. On that evidence? No, we shouldnt sign him under any circumstances. Not good enough.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Getting either he or Benteke would be an absolutely dream but sadly I dont think we have much of a chance at either. Stranger things have happened though. I'd prefer Benteke but given how good of a season he just had and the relative struggles of Aston Villa I'm sure a large number of clubs will be after him and I doubt whether or not we can compete... Lukaku on loan would be interesting though.

    ReplyDelete
  17. I don't think they will sell him full stop. Unless some kind of ridiculous offer/he pushes the move happens. Loaning him out for another season looks rather likely though.

    Kolo on a free seems like an okay bit of business. If his wages aren't ridiculous (which I dont think they will given the recent trend of player performance based contracts) then I think he is a decent signing. Add that bit of experience at the back that we will be missing now that Carra has retired and he is a solid centre back so we could do a lot worse. I will however be incredibly disappointed if we dont sign at least one more quality centre back though. if Toure is all we get then its a bit of a downer.

    ReplyDelete
  18. We got Sturridge from Chelsea.

    ReplyDelete
  19. I can't see all of those players leaving. Suarez could go either way but I have the feeling he will stay as he still seems like he wants to prove himself. Enrique is a dilema. I have no problems with him at the back but there seem to be these persistent rumours about Rodgers not favouring him? He might sign another left back to add competition but I dont think he will be sold. I'm not sure it'll be as big a deal as many people seem to think it will be if Reina is sold. Sure his form has picked up immensely over the last few months but I feel this may be because he is trying to engineer a move away so he needed to up his performance levels. Previous to that he hasn't seemed interested in quite sometime. It might be a little challenging to get a good replacement but we should get enough money from his sale to buy a quality GK if needed. Thats my opinion anyway.

    Carroll and Coates do look on the way out but I couldn't be arsed with either. Used their combine fees to buy a centre back.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Are you serious? How on earth is he not good enough? Lukaku is quality. If we could sign him I'd snap him up instantly but theres no way Chelsea would sell him to us unless we got ridiculous with an offer which I don't see happening.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Chelsea would be looking at 20m plus additional fees or something like that or straight up 30m. Off the back of a good season in the PL and his age and original fee he's too expensive for us. Thats beside the point though I don't see Chelsea selling him to us it just wouldn't make sense for them to do that.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Kolo on a free. Hmm, a CB as a 3rd choice CB of his quality, pedigree and experience would be good. But I'm not keen on him as a first XI CB, as he isn't even near as good as he was at Arsenal. So nice to have him in the squad but I hope Rodgers has got someone else lined up for one of the first XI CB slots.

    Edit: So I agree with Joshua basically I guess, as i've only read his comment just now!

    ReplyDelete
  23. When you invest £50m plus wages, it is somewhat understandable why they have persisted with him for so long!

    ReplyDelete
  24. Its an absurd logic and not understandable to me. I am glad we didn't persist on playing Andy Carroll. Torres is a liability and am sure if Sturridge started as striker for Chelsea as many times as Torres started this season, Chelsea could have achieved much more.

    ReplyDelete
  25. liverpool4life5655:11 pm, May 21, 2013

    http://www.avaz.ba/sport/fudbal/begovic-od-jula-na-pripremama-liverpoola reports are saying we are going to sign begovic if reina goes and he wants to start pre season with us.... Would be a good signing

    ReplyDelete
  26. Agree wholeheartedly.

    He's not going to fix anything by himself. But he could be a nice addition to the puzzle provided we have the right expectations.



    A rotational player. Not a first XI.

    ReplyDelete
  27. All about ego. And justifying sales.


    Every team does it to some extent.

    ReplyDelete
  28. And you call him arrogant because...

    ReplyDelete
  29. Chelsea look foolish already for picking a passed it Torres over Lukaku and Sturridge, both of whom are better than the Spaniard.


    It just sucks that they got a second chance after flopping in the CL and so got to pick up another trophy.

    ReplyDelete
  30. The £50m is a sunk cost - continuing to persist with Torres doesn't help them get their money back. It just stops the club from moving forwards as quickly as it could be, especially when they had superior alternatives on the books already.


    I guess that's the only real difference between our situation with Carroll, as we ended up cutting off our nose to spite our face as we didn't have any other options available to us...

    ReplyDelete
  31. I prefer Lukaku largely because Benteke is such an ugly brute.


    Yea, I'm shallow like that. lol

    ReplyDelete
  32. I would love to see him over Benteke at anfield only because from what I've seen of both he runs a lot better channels and has a great ability of knowing when his role is to be a hold up striker, play off the defenders shoulder, or make runs from deep.

    Like most people have said, Chelsea won't let him go unless something north of 25mil comes in. And I don't think a loan really does us much good because with 3yrs left on his contract Chelsea have all the power. Even if we loaned him and he did well we'd be back to square one; he's have 2yrs left on his contract and Chelsea would still be demanding a lot for a player who clearly doesnt want to play for them. If we can negotiate something creative and get him here I'd be delighted.

    Otherwise I'd go for Bony who im guessing should cost less than 15mil and is currently scoring goals for fun - 31 goals in 30 games

    ReplyDelete
  33. I'd like both!

    ReplyDelete
  34. Pride and Mr Abe is what I call it (as well as FFP concerns). Basically what Isles said below. I think it is somewhat understandable.....to an extent, as to why Chelsea persisted with him but I do think they should just give up altogether on him now and flog him home to Atleti.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I have my doubts as to how well Sturridge would have done, as he did have some chances to play front, instead of wing, and he was nothing special. Yep, he has done well here but different circumstances here, so it doesn't prove that he would have done better at Chelsea if given a more regular run through the middle. As the man said/implied himself one or two months ago, he has done some growing up mentally. I think Sturridge has done really well here but it is very early days to be so confident about him, even though Torres was really bad.

    ReplyDelete
  36. Forget Lukaku or Benteke... You just have to get use a new life with Kolo Toure in our team... What a joke...

    ReplyDelete
  37. sometimes you need an old arse in the team that costs u nothing > gary mac

    ReplyDelete
  38. Agger and Skrtel are better and younger (they are both 28 years old), they have a lot of experience, playing for the team from 2006 and 2008 respectively and Kolo Toure, is not anymore the good defender we knew at Arsenal. We don't need him. Yes we need a center back, but not him.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Lukaku in the Belgian media: Spurs or another English club in direct competition with Chelsea is not an option. I'd love to go to Dortmund or Schalke. So I think we can put this one to bed.

    ReplyDelete
  40. I didn't think he was all that on the wing either, as ran down quite a few blind alleys but each to their own. I can see why Chelsea persist with Torres but I wouldn't have persisted as long and would have simply played Sturridge a bit more, even though I don't think Sturridge would have made a massive difference. Considering how depressing Torres was and is, I can understand your view.

    ReplyDelete
  41. hehe.. that is very true, however the difference between Gary Mac and Kolo Toure is one was a consent professional and a very accomplished player and the other is a money grabbing parasite who at best is average.

    ReplyDelete
  42. true m8 but that coud be said about 70% of the players in the epl not just toure

    ReplyDelete
  43. truth is were still buyin at great homer st market.rather shop at tj"s and spend 5 million on lescott.to get back to were we belong fsg must realise to win the epl we have to shop at harrods.billy the cat aka martin lewis !!!!!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  44. Sturridge had a fantastic season for Bolton, did alright for Chelsea for over a year and we still got him for 12!

    ReplyDelete
  45. We looked equally foolish for taking Joe Cole.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Aha fair enough. As good a reason as any ;). I'd be over the moon with either. Both look close to a 0% chance of happening though with Benteke maybe being closer to a 1% chance...

    ReplyDelete
  47. Bit of a different situation though. Sturridge I think was ready to move on after being frustrated with his chances at Chelsea somewhat and they never seemed to rate him at the Bridge. Lukaku on the other hand seems to me to be a different situation. I'd be surprised if they easily let him go on a transfer to any club let alone a rival. Transfers between the two clubs are common but I just don't see lukaku being one.

    ReplyDelete