Two Chelsea players - Victor Moses and Romelu Lukaku - secured Merseyside loan deals on transfer deadline day, with Moses coming to Liverpool, and Lukaku ending up at Everton. I don't have a problem with the Moses transfer, and I'm sure he'll acquit himself well in a Liverpool shirt; however, why did Rodgers ignore Lukaku, a player who is (arguably) more of a necessity for the Reds?
Liverpool were linked with a move for Lukaku - who grabbed 19 goals/4 assists for West Brom last season - in 2011, and a few days prior to the transfer deadline, Anfield legend Dietmar Hamann urged Rodgers to sign the Belgian:
"No centre forward for Chelsea and Jose Mourinho wants to bring another one in. He obviously doesn't fancy any of the three [Torres/Ba/Lukaku] he's got. Get Lukaku to Liverpool, Brendan".
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".
Amen. Lukaku - who cost Chelsea £20m - grabbed two goals against Liverpool last season, and helped West Brom to a humbling 5-0 aggregate victory over the Reds. Like Aston Villa's Christian Benteke, he is a beast of a player, and to be honest, I'm gutted that Liverpool didn't go for him.
Moses is a decent player, but with Coutinho, Aspas, Sterling, Ibe, Enrique, Suarez, Alberto, and now Cissokho in the squad, Rodgers has EIGHT options out wide. Conversely, the Reds have only Sturridge and Suarez up front, and that is clearly not enough.
If Lukaku is willing to sign for Everton, then there's an extremely high probability that he would've signed for Liverpool too. Indeed, given the Reds' very clear upward swing this year, why wouldn't he come to Anfield?
Moreover, given Rodgers' Chelsea background (and obvious connections at the club) he would've known about Lukaku's availability, but he specifically chose to go for Moses instead, and I believe this could prove to be a mistake. The reasons for signing Lukaku are painfully obvious:
* Daniel Sturridge is increasingly injury prone. He is now recovering from his FOURTH since signing for Liverpool in January.
* Last week, Brendan Rodgers admitted that Sturridge is 'nowhere near' full match fitness.
* It's a great start to the season for Liverpool, but the team has struggled to score goals.
* Suarez is still out for another two games, and there's always the possibility he'll pick up another ban for something this season.
* If Sturridge gets injured, LFC is back in the same position as last season: relying on Suarez alone.
* If Suarez gets injured/banned, LFC will have to rely on Sturridge, and what happens if he then gets injured?
* (Alleged) striker Fabio Borini is now on loan, and Rodgers has not replaced him.
* Lukaku SCORES GOALS. Moses does not. In the last FIVE seasons (123 apps), Moses has contributed a paltry 19 goals overall. Lukaku achieved that on ONE SEASON for West Brom.
* Moses scores less goals than Stewart Downing, who Rodgers deemed not good enough for LFC.
The more I think about it, the more it feels like Rodgers has made a gigantic mistake here. In fact, given Liverpool's clear need for another striker, I submit that there's an element of negligence here. I just don't see how anyone can look at the current squad and think that Moses makes more sense than Lukaku.
Liverpool need goals from midfield, which is why Rodgers went after the likes of Mkhitaryan and Willian, but when it comes to creativity/goalscoring, Moses is not in their league, so I don't see the point in bringing him in, especially when - as noted above - he is not a consistent goalscorer.
And please don't give me the Andy Carroll argument about how Lukaku wouldn't fit into Rodgers style of play etc. That's total nonsense. He is not some lumbering, technically inept lummox - Lukaku clearly has the attributes to play the same role as Sturridge (i.e. centre-forward), and he's infinitely superior than Carroll in almost every way, including touch, balance, skill, positioning and - crucially - ability to score goals.
Of course, Sturridge and Suarez may stay fit/unbanned for the rest of the season, and bang in 50+ goals between them, but, on the balance of probabilities (based on the past) that is unlikely.
Don't get me wrong: I wish Moses all the best, and hope he does well, but Rodgers has (arguably) made a mistake here, and I just hope it doesn't come back to haunt the club.
Just imagine if Liverpool had Lukaku now; the sense of optimism for the rest of the season would (arguably) be even more immense.
Jaimie Kanwar
NOTE: Please stick to the Comment Policy (Click to read)
Liverpool were linked with a move for Lukaku - who grabbed 19 goals/4 assists for West Brom last season - in 2011, and a few days prior to the transfer deadline, Anfield legend Dietmar Hamann urged Rodgers to sign the Belgian:
"No centre forward for Chelsea and Jose Mourinho wants to bring another one in. He obviously doesn't fancy any of the three [Torres/Ba/Lukaku] he's got. Get Lukaku to Liverpool, Brendan".
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".
Amen. Lukaku - who cost Chelsea £20m - grabbed two goals against Liverpool last season, and helped West Brom to a humbling 5-0 aggregate victory over the Reds. Like Aston Villa's Christian Benteke, he is a beast of a player, and to be honest, I'm gutted that Liverpool didn't go for him.
Moses is a decent player, but with Coutinho, Aspas, Sterling, Ibe, Enrique, Suarez, Alberto, and now Cissokho in the squad, Rodgers has EIGHT options out wide. Conversely, the Reds have only Sturridge and Suarez up front, and that is clearly not enough.
If Lukaku is willing to sign for Everton, then there's an extremely high probability that he would've signed for Liverpool too. Indeed, given the Reds' very clear upward swing this year, why wouldn't he come to Anfield?
Moreover, given Rodgers' Chelsea background (and obvious connections at the club) he would've known about Lukaku's availability, but he specifically chose to go for Moses instead, and I believe this could prove to be a mistake. The reasons for signing Lukaku are painfully obvious:
* Daniel Sturridge is increasingly injury prone. He is now recovering from his FOURTH since signing for Liverpool in January.
* Last week, Brendan Rodgers admitted that Sturridge is 'nowhere near' full match fitness.
* It's a great start to the season for Liverpool, but the team has struggled to score goals.
* Suarez is still out for another two games, and there's always the possibility he'll pick up another ban for something this season.
* If Sturridge gets injured, LFC is back in the same position as last season: relying on Suarez alone.
* If Suarez gets injured/banned, LFC will have to rely on Sturridge, and what happens if he then gets injured?
* (Alleged) striker Fabio Borini is now on loan, and Rodgers has not replaced him.
* Lukaku SCORES GOALS. Moses does not. In the last FIVE seasons (123 apps), Moses has contributed a paltry 19 goals overall. Lukaku achieved that on ONE SEASON for West Brom.
* Moses scores less goals than Stewart Downing, who Rodgers deemed not good enough for LFC.
The more I think about it, the more it feels like Rodgers has made a gigantic mistake here. In fact, given Liverpool's clear need for another striker, I submit that there's an element of negligence here. I just don't see how anyone can look at the current squad and think that Moses makes more sense than Lukaku.
Liverpool need goals from midfield, which is why Rodgers went after the likes of Mkhitaryan and Willian, but when it comes to creativity/goalscoring, Moses is not in their league, so I don't see the point in bringing him in, especially when - as noted above - he is not a consistent goalscorer.
And please don't give me the Andy Carroll argument about how Lukaku wouldn't fit into Rodgers style of play etc. That's total nonsense. He is not some lumbering, technically inept lummox - Lukaku clearly has the attributes to play the same role as Sturridge (i.e. centre-forward), and he's infinitely superior than Carroll in almost every way, including touch, balance, skill, positioning and - crucially - ability to score goals.
Of course, Sturridge and Suarez may stay fit/unbanned for the rest of the season, and bang in 50+ goals between them, but, on the balance of probabilities (based on the past) that is unlikely.
Don't get me wrong: I wish Moses all the best, and hope he does well, but Rodgers has (arguably) made a mistake here, and I just hope it doesn't come back to haunt the club.
Just imagine if Liverpool had Lukaku now; the sense of optimism for the rest of the season would (arguably) be even more immense.
Jaimie Kanwar
NOTE: Please stick to the Comment Policy (Click to read)
I don't think it was really a take Lukaku or take Moses situation. Moses was taken in as he is good cover for a position that we have no experienced starters in (aspas and henderson are not traditional wingers).
ReplyDeleteI also don't think Chelsea would have fancied loaning two players to Liverpool, and Liverpool already have an established starting striker, which Everton don't.
I'm not arguing that LFC should've loaned both. I'm saying that BR should've signed Lukaku over Moses.
ReplyDeleteLiverpool have enough players to cover on the wings: Coutinho, Ibe, Sterling, Enrique, Aspas, Suarez, Cissokho, Alberto etc. That's EIGHT players.
LFC only have two strikers, and one of them is regularly injured.
JK!!!............just sent you the info about the Real Madrid defender signed by Liverpool on deadline day, Rafa Paez 19, a CB who was on trial before signing according to Neil Jones (Liverpool Echo)............yet another CB signed.... :-)
ReplyDeleteThanks for that, Tony. I was going to post about that yesterday, but didn't get round to it. CB overload it seems (!)
ReplyDeleteI don't think Chelsea would have fancies either loaning nor selling us Lukaku.
ReplyDeleteI reckon Jose still rates Lukaku and just wants him to get games, which he is simply more likely to get at Everton. I also think that LFC considers the probability of a possible buy after the end of the Season here which seems more likely in the case with Moses if things work out.
I don't think Lukaku would have got a game up front ahead of Sturridge or Suarez so wasn't really a good choice for a loan deal. Moses would play as a wide forward and would probably get games ahead of or at least as much as Aspas/Sterling.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest I'm not really sure Lukaku would even fit well into our team, he's too much of a target man which we can't make the best use of.
I do agree with you, I thought exactly the same when I heard that Lukaku was available.
ReplyDeleteSturridge is regularly injured, plus there will be lots of games in the cup competitions, so Lukaku definitely would've got games. Also, having him would allow Rodgers to rest Sturridge occasionally, which would stop him getting injured so much.
ReplyDeleteHow can it be a bad idea to have three top quality strikers? Top teams should ideally have 4, yet LFC only have 2.
Moses is not a goalscorer. 19 goals in FIVE YEARS proves that (!) Why would LFC want to sign him permanently when he doesn't score goals regularly? Where is the benefit in that?
ReplyDeleteSturridge has played pretty regularly since he joined in January, I'd rather we played youngsters in the cups if he's not going to be picked.
ReplyDeleteIt's not a bad idea to have 3 top quality strikers but it is a bad idea to take one on loan only as a backup player, I would say. Plus, I really don't think he would work in this system any better than Andy Carroll would.
Lukaku loan seemed last minute.... If we had a chance we would of took lukaku but I'm happy with our transfer dealings.
ReplyDeleteHow do you know Lukaku would've been a backup player? It all depends on performance. If he came into the team and did well, he would've probably stayed in. Plus, there's the competition aspect - Sturridge has practically no competition bar Suarez, and he will most likely play on the wing.
ReplyDeleteWhere is the evidence for the contention that Lukaku would not work in LFC's system? He is nothing like Carroll. For West Brom, he played the same position Sturridge does for LFC, and he banged in 19 goals, and that's playing alongside inferior players.
My initial reaction was the same but worth remembering that Chelsea did not let Ba go to Arsenal for fear of strengthening their team. I would assume the same thinking would have applied had Liverpool come in for Lukaku which, it has to be said, is understandable.
ReplyDeleteYes, that's a possibility, and fair enough if that's the reason. However, Mourinho publicly stated last week that he has no problem selling to rival clubs.
ReplyDeleteA striker should have always been one of the priority for Liverpool this season for a number of reasons:
ReplyDelete1) Sturridge is injury prone, I can guarantee he will pick an injury this season that will rule him out for a few weeks. In fact he is injured right now.
2) Suarez flirted with Real and Arsenal so Liverpool although they did not want to sell him they should have taken a leaf out of Levy...buying replacements before they leave.
3) Suarez stayed..okay, purely on footballing terms that's good news but IMO he should have been sold for right fee for obvious reasons. However, due all this saga we don't know if he will let this affect his performances.
All in all, Lukaku makes a lot of sense, would have kept both Suarez and Sturridge on their toes and competition is always good.
We could have had a front 3:
Sturridge-Lukaku-Suarez.
At the moment we're doing well, but injuries up front will come and we don't want to be overreliant on one player, so BR should ahve def signed a striker.
I agree that Lukaku is an immense player. However, I cannot imagine Chelsea wanting to loan him to us. Lets be honest, this year we are likely to be much more of a contender for a top 4 position than Everton. Also, why would it be in Lukaku's interests to come to Pool and be third choice behind Suarez and Sturridge. Finally, Liverpool is generally not a club that takes young players and develops them for other clubs (Although the case could be made that this is what is happening with Moses). It would have been a great luxury to have Lukaku in as a bench player, but it makes no sense from Chelsea' or Lukaku's point of view. Perhaps that is why Rodger's didn't even bother making the inquiry.
ReplyDeleteLet's be honest, Suarez isn't going to replace Sturridge as our main forward so there was little chance of a loan signing doing so, and if he did it wouldn't necessarily be a good thing, demotivating our actual players while helping a player who is set to go back to one of our rivals.
ReplyDeleteI think you can see Lukaku's movement is nowhere near that of Sturridge, he's an up and down striker and a really good one at that but for him to be a good signing for us he would have to be a permanent deal, he'd have to be prepared to start as an understudy, he'd have to fit into a fluid attacking system... I don't think any of those criteria would be met.
that was an admirable stance but he was posturing for Rooney at the time. The January window is not easy but signing a striker worthy of replacing Suarez should be high on the list
ReplyDeletewho cares who we did and did not get , were top at the moment and that is all that matters ,lets look forward not back wards , saying players might get injured are all hypotheticals , why don't we think what if we dont get injuries how good can we can be .just take each week as it comes
ReplyDeleteFootball is about opinions and discussion, so please don't rock up here and tell people to stop discussing football-related issues.
ReplyDeleteBR is so meticulous and detail orientated. He has a plan in his head and know who will fit and who won't. You have to trust him. He knows what he's doing.
ReplyDeletestraightforward jamie. lukaku wanted a team where he would be guaranteed first team football, week in, week out.
ReplyDeleteThe fact of the matter is..we will get injuries, it's part of the game. And Sturridge is injury prone and no doubt will pick up a knock here and there so having another striker is important.
ReplyDeleteSuarez I'm sure will score some goals as usual but there needs to be back up. But Suarez has had a goal drought every season and if Sturridge is injured then no doubt having another option is a good thing.
Lukaku all day for me don't rate mosses at all
ReplyDeleteJamie u know ur football.i wish i cud get thru 2 these ppl.1 man scored a single goal of our opening 3 matches.we needed lukaku more than we need moses.jeez!its goals that win games
ReplyDeleteThe problem is you're posting it as though we had the choice and it was only our choice that stopped us taking him, but it's more complicated than that.
ReplyDeleteWhen loaning a player out, you want him to play, consistently. Imagine if we decided to loan Ibe out. Would we be happy sending him to Chelsea, where he wouldn't play, because he couldn't get past the players that are there?
Would Lukaku play at Liverpool? Yes, definitely. Would he be first choice? Almost certainly not. He's an excellent player, and one I'd LOVE to see at LFC, but, at the moment, it would be hard to see him being first choice ahead of Studge, Suarez and Coutinho. Because of that, Jose has sensibly sent him to a club that will try to play good football under a manager who likes to play like that, where he will get game time and lots of it.
It's a shame, but we should see it as a positive that our squad is too good for people to lend us their players.
In actual fact, I'm not keen on us loaning players in, unless there's an agreed fee included, as we're just developing players for other teams and we should be bigger than that.
funny when i said we were light up front the other day ,i was moaning for the sake of it,lukaku would have been ideal ,wether chelsea were willing to let him go to us ,or we even inquired is a different thing,we have what we have ,and lets just hope we do not have injuries ,the next 6 games are all winnable on paper 14 points minimum,
ReplyDeleteWas Lukaku available for a loan deal when we got moses? it sounded a bit last minute from Mourinho's comments. Great signing for Everton :-(
ReplyDeleteThat's my take on it too I originally thought the same as JK but I think Everton can promise Lukaku a starting position and we can't, plus I think Moses will look to a permanent deal if he does well as Chelsea will continue to buy whatever top striker they can and he will get less and less time on the field
ReplyDeleteMoses definitely needs to step up a gear, but if he replicates his early promise he will play a part especially since he can stretch teams much more than Downing
I agree. Definately light!
ReplyDeleteIf we can get a win against Swansea then our momentum can continue for sure. Hopefully other players will chip in with a few goals too.
we need to do well over the next couple of months - we've got some tough games in Dec
ReplyDeletewe all knew we needed a striker we all wanted cover for lucas ,the powers that be thought different hopefully we are still going strong in jan and we can get them in then
ReplyDeleteinternationals never come at the right time for us;-)
ReplyDeleteI think our poor retention of the ball on Sunday in the secong half was down to the 120 minutes against county (gerrard tailed off quite a bit for one). i expect us to really start stepping it up from now on.
ReplyDeleteat least we're guaranteed top for a bit longer :-)
ReplyDeleteswansea will be tough ,but we have to go there looking to win ,and we can
ReplyDeleteIf we can get a win then it would do wonders for the lads confidence.
ReplyDeleteMe2. I just want a few others to chip in with a few goals. At the moment is fine because it's early in the season and we only played 3 league games and the most important thing is winning. It tooks us 8 games to get 9 points last season so def an improvement already.
ReplyDeleteha ha yes but we had momentum i,said when the fixtures came out looking at our fixtures and our rivals ,we had to be very near the top after ten games ,now i see no reason(after the weekends results why we cannot be top)we are better than the sides we have to play we just need to knuckle down and prove it on the pitch,we have players who are willing to fight to the the end sunday showed that,lets play every game as a cup final
ReplyDeleteThis is pretty much sensible reasoning. Borini went to Sunderland because I am sure they will give him games. Maybe Lukaku would be "back up" for us especially if Sturridge and Suarez are playing well.
ReplyDeleteI think he will do really well at Everton.
I rate Lukaku as the better player and one with better potential, easily but Moses is probably more tactically suited for us at the moment. Moses can play wide as well as up front. Lukaku can't. We, at the moment, play with one striker through the middle. Sturridge and Suarez can play wide, yes, but Sturridge is doing a great job through the middle and Suarez has shown he can too. So better off going with a player that can do both wide and play up front. Although I'm not sure how good Moses is as the main striker, as I've seen him play behind the front man at Wigan but I don't think he was used much as a main striker. But anyway, I'm going off point as is often the case, definitely took the right option in Moses, tactically.
ReplyDeleteLol shame man.sum ppl jus dont get it jamie
ReplyDeletelets hope he does not;-)
ReplyDeletetotally agree. I really think hendo will chip in with 10+ this year if we cplay further up the pitch in the second half. All he lacked before was confidence. i think Suarez' return will give a lot more space for the likes of coutinho too, so expected him to start scoring. We're not far away from being a top class side
ReplyDeletespot on
ReplyDeletewe went to villa when they were on a high ,we can go there two
ReplyDeleteMoses will lead us to the promised league!!!!
ReplyDeleteYou really are clueless
ReplyDelete'that was an admirable stance but he was posturing for Rooney at the time.'
ReplyDeleteThis. Always take what Jose or every other manager say with a pinch of salt. Hypocrisy, BS-ing, spinning, etc, they are full of it.
No, Jason. When I said you were 'moaning for the hell of it', the comment to which I responded had *nothing* to do with strikers. You were bitching about FSG's net spend, so don't try and twist things.
ReplyDeleteSame reason JM wouldn't let Ba go. to Arsenal
ReplyDelete.
fair enough i thought it was under another comment but i will take your word for it:-)
ReplyDeleteWe don't need the Lukaku. We did need defenders. We got them. Why would you call attention to BR's knowledge of him at Chelsea and then claim he made a mistake when he didn't pick him? Seems to me he didn't pick him for a reason...more like three reasons: We already have two of the best strikers playing, we needed the defense and he knows Lukaku. To me Lukaku and Carroll are interchangeable. I'm with BR on this one.
ReplyDeleteone of my favourite banners ever
ReplyDeletemoses said come fourth
but we came first
how would that look back on the kop come the end of the season
With Sturridge having a knock and Johnson having a spained ankle, i think the internationals could be a good thing for us this time.
ReplyDeleteLukaku wouldnt fit the system tactically and wouldnt be first choice up front so he wouldnt get alot of games. Moses makes much more sense.
ReplyDeleteDisagree with in that we need anymore strikers jaimie, aspas is a forward like Suarez he can operate all across the front if needed, but is mainly a striker, I agree that we would have been stronger with him but even him goin to Everton would have been the better option for himself as he wouldn't likely get much game time at us and who wants to go on loan to sit on the when he could stay at chelsea and do that! It would have been exciting if he came to us but feel he wouldn't have played much
ReplyDeleteI think we needed a wide player more than a central player
ReplyDeleteWhy wouldn't Lukaku fit 'tactically'? This is just a total myth. He played the same role for West Brom that Sturridge does for LFC, and he scored 19 goals. What is it 'tactically' that Lukaku can't do?
ReplyDeleteunless we pick up more injuries ,when your winning you just want the next game
ReplyDeleteYou say that there is a big chance Lukaku would have signed for Liverpool since he signed for Everton but that's simply not true. Lukaku wants to play. A lot. Every week. He simply wouldn't get that at Liverpool. Do you really think it would go down well with LFC supporters if Sturridge were dropped for Lukaku because that is the only possibility. Lukaku knows that he would be second choice, at best, at Anfield and he wants to be number one. Which is what he is at Everton.
ReplyDeleteI read that. Seemed odd to me seeing that Llori is only a year older. Then there is Lloyd Jones as well and Wisdom. Obviously we need the competition also at reserves level but thic could quite easily backfire. Shame for Sama and Sokolik though. Came through the ranks for five or so years only to now be ninth or tenth choice.
ReplyDeleteAbsolutely, it's a great signing for Everton but he'll get more time there...the other option was back with West Brom I believe...both could offer him much more game time than we could. Also I rather suspect that after giving up one very promising striker to us in DS they'd be wary of doing anything to remotely assist that possibly happening again.
ReplyDeleteI believe Moses will have the same impact as Coutinho... Just a gut feeling.
ReplyDeleteWe may have the quantity, not necessarily the quality though. Whereas its the opposite, when it comes to up front.
ReplyDeleteJust a few players we thought Liverpool 'missed out' on and that have turned out average just as many of us knew they were: Jelavic, Papiss Cissé, Demba Ba, Moussa Sissoko, etc, etc.
ReplyDeleteNot saying that Lukaku is average but there's no need getting carried away in too many dramatic assumptions. Succeeding in a mid/bottom table club does not mean succeeding at LFC and we've witnessed that time and time again.
They could have gone 4-3-3? suarez, lukaku sturridge.
ReplyDeleteI seem to remember you had similar conerns about Sturridge's ability when he arrived but look how he turned out!! I think Rodgers has exceptional skills to get the best out his players and getting them closer to reaching their potential (e.g Henderson, Downing (to an extent), Sturridge and I would go even as far as to say Suarez to a degree). No doubt Lukaku would of been fantiastic but I encourage you to keep the faith in Rodgers and hopefully he can get Moses performing to his full potential!!!
ReplyDeleteMoses scored more than downing in all competitions last year, also most of them was on the bench
ReplyDeleteFact is Sturridge, no matter how good and valuable he's proven to be from the day he set foot at anfield, it remains that he is an injury prone player. We have backups in abundance for the CBs position ( too many in my opinion). Skrtel remains a very good player, as demonstrated last week. All players have dips from time to time. Even Agger does the odd mistakes in games.
ReplyDeleteTo come back to the front positions, we should deffo have signed someone, especially after letting the pretty inexperienced Borino go on loan. So should, the 2 S gets injured, who do we have left? Aspas?
Plus, I think we could sometimes miss a traditional number 9 leading the lines against the Stokes, Sunderlands...
Although I agree he is the better player and I would have loved to have gotten him here I think this is such pie in the sky. Would Jose have loaned him to us? If so that would mean he does not consider us any kind of threat. Like JK says himself Lukaku is the bigger goal scorer than Moses. Moses is not going to give us another 10 plus goals where Lukaku probably would. Then there is also what others are saying. Why would Lukaku come to be behind Sturridge. Yes Sturridge is injured a lot but when he is not he should play ahead of Luakaku. Why? Because he is OUR player and not one we will be sending back to London. Moses has less competition for his place.
ReplyDeleteAlso how do we know that we did not Enquire about Lukaku? We inquired about Moses (obviously) inquired about Mata (apparently) just because we didn't here anything does not mean we didn't find out if it was pos. Have Chelsea asked for a certain amount of games to be met? Do they have assurances?
This strikes me a little like times when a team signs a player that the fans like and people ask why we didn't sign them. It just simply isn't as straight forward as that and there is undoubtedly far more things going on in it than we are aware.
There are two many ifs and buts. But as a dream line up having him as an option would have been brilliant.
'Simply not true'? - Everything you've said is baseless supposition. My argument at least has some kind of logical base: Lukaku signed for Everton, so it's definitely probable that if LFC came in for him, he would've signed for the Reds. That makes sense. You don't know that he wouldn't have got chances at LFC, and no one (especially me) suggested that Sturridge should be dropped in favour of Lukaku.
ReplyDeleteIn any event, competition is king, and if Lukaku came into the team and scored, then Sturridge would have to stay on his toes, and what's wrong with that?
You speak like you know the contents of Lukaku's mind, and you don't. You really think he would reject Liverpool - a team that is clearly going places, with a a manager who loves to play young players? How does that make sense?
I see your point. But other than ibe and sterling the other players are just converted wingers. About strikers, any news on Adam Morgan or Yesil?
ReplyDeleteMoses has tons lot's more talent to be shown than Downing. Moses is one of the 'great signings of Rodgers' kind, i feel. I knew he would come in since it first been suggested. The striker problem wasn't acknowledged i suspect because the trust in Borini was high before pre-season and faded threw it, till the end of the window. Might have made a mistake to not pursue a replacement ST soon and hard enough. Now will see how does that turnes out.
ReplyDeleteI think the point is that Rodgers was more sure of the signing of Moses before anything regarding a ST, then on it rolled from there. Chelsea were probably satisfied of how it came to play, and when the Lukaku option might have surfaced it was a no-go on their behalf.
Of course another top contributing goal scorer was the missing piece of this window, and might come back to hunt us, but also Moses might still come threw to surprise us. Will see how it plays and hope for the best.
Here's an analysis of the 16 BPL goals Lukaku scored last season. WBA finished 8th in the table. The only teams Lukaku scored goals against that were above WBA in the standings were LFC, twice in two games, and a hat trick against ManU in the meaningless last game of the season in a 5-5 draw. The other 11 goals were all against bottom feeders...who were bottom feeders for two reasons: they couldn't score goals and they had swiss cheese defenses. He is just not as good as his numbers say.
ReplyDeletelol you actually think he would choose everton over liverpool
ReplyDeleteremind me who finished higher last two years
This point doesn't come to say or argue anything, but just a point here: Aspas is a striker, not a winger. Aspas, the new men. We needed to get might be a better version of Borini. Meaning a young prospect with much more confidence and ability. Who wouldn't get mind screwed for siting the bench.
ReplyDeleteScore goals against top ten teams...see above.
ReplyDeleteThat is a limited analysis that is looking at it from one way. I'm not a big fan of stats as they rarely tell the whole story but more in-depth and better use of stats would have made a 'analysis' or at least a better one. For example, how many chances did West Brom create, compared to say the teams above them? Lukaku could possibly score more and against better opposition in a better team. Depending on a more competent analysis, could be possible that he did as well as anyone could in that West Brom side of last season, in terms of goals.
ReplyDeleteI would just re-iterate Dempsey 16 goals for Fulham in 2011-12. Dempsey playing for Seattle in 2013-4. I rest my case.
ReplyDeleteEh? That doesn't conclusively prove your case at all.
ReplyDeleteFair enough but to call it a travesty is ridiculous.
ReplyDeleteSwansea we draw, we wiil win the next 5 and get 16. Guarantee - you can place your betting.
ReplyDeleteBut great assumption. 14min no less!
There are none so blind as those who will not see. Many are skewed because he beat on us twice...but then we scored goals last year but pretty much had a swiss cheese defense last year too.
ReplyDelete'There are none so blind as those who will not see. '
ReplyDeleteExactly, Dempsey didn't play the same role. Thank for you such a appropriate quote.
This one makes sh*t like football worth it. Oh, and he won't be allowed to enter the country as well. Amazing.
ReplyDeletefour wins two draws,but lets go for 6wins
ReplyDeleteYou want to think Lukaku is a great striker, then knock yourself out. I believe he is the second coming of Andy Carroll...and I think BR saw the same thing and correctly passed on the lad.
ReplyDeleteSuarez is rubbish out wide and is better off the striker playing behind the lines
ReplyDeleteI don't think he is a great striker, at least not yet anyway.I have said (or something similar) in this thread that he is a better player than Moses and has easily the better potential. Bit of a difference between that and saying/implying heavily that he is a great striker.
ReplyDeleteRegards to why Rodgers didn't get him, there are possible alternative reasons too.
Lukaku:‘I was sitting in my hotel room in Brussels when the phone went to tell me I was going out on loan again,’ he said, ahead of Belgium’s World Cup qualifier with Scotland. ‘It was 7 pm, and that was the first I knew of it. There had not been a mention of it before then, but after speaking to my parents, I decided to take the plunge. So says it their, we didn't know he was available and Moses loan was done for a couple of days.
ReplyDeleteMartinez 1 Rodgers 0, Rodgers loans out Borini ( probably because he can't sell him ) and leaves us short of a striker for the second year running. With sturridge being injury prone, of coarse he should have got Lukaku, he's a monster. Should also have got a defensive and creative midfielder. Not sure about Rodgers, sometimes looks out of his depth.
ReplyDeleteSo how did Everton and Westbrom know he was available? or did Rodgers have his head in the sand again.
ReplyDeleteBetter player than Moses where...on the wing? that's what we need, a winger...not another striker. Who says DS thigh knock is nothing more than a excuse to keep him out of an international match? He has to be wondering what is going to happen when LS is cleared to play.
ReplyDelete'Better player than Moses where...on the wing?'
ReplyDelete'that's what we need, a winger...not another striker.'
I've already expressed my views on this in my own post in this thread. Lukaku is the better player but in terms of playing on the wing, he can't play there and Moses can, as well as being tactically more suited to us.
I disagreed with your inept attempt at analysis regarding Lukaku in your initial post but doesn't stop me from sharing similar views on other bits regarding Lukaku and/or Moses.
ll at least my analysis is based on something measurable whereas yours is the whimiscal musing of what-if's and coulda, woulda, shoulda with not a shred of factual basis.
ReplyDeleteTalking of available strikers, i just read this from the Lazio president About Yilmaz:
ReplyDelete“Yilmaz would have cost us €13m in cash, plus a further €2m in bonuses. Everyone was in agreement, I was sure we could close and then I get an email from his agent.
“He outlined the details of the bonuses and salary agreed – €2.8m a season net. And then he asks me for a further €2m when the player signed.
If ever a striker was genuinely in our reach, this guy was it surely? A bit older than we would like, but seemingly cheap and a proven scorer at the highest level. missed opportunity?
Because stats don't give the whole story, especially when given in the silly incomplete manner you have done. So I'd rather leave my options open, instead of relying on spouting incomplete analysis.
ReplyDeleteWe had already signed Moses before Lukaku was made available. Isn't rocket science. Think about it.
ReplyDeleteWhat options did you keep open? You presented no options except to grouse about one pick over another. I am fully convinced if Lukaku had been the pick you would be grousing that we didn't go for a winger when that's what we needed.
ReplyDelete"rubbish out wide"? are you kidding? he will awesome anywhere in the front 3
ReplyDeletei think the point is, he needs to earn his place back in both the team and in the fans hearts, especially as sturridge has filled in so well. he and sturridge will interchange anyway. the movement with coutinho behind them both and Moses / Sterling / Aspas in the mix will bedevastating at times - i cant wait! :-)
What options I kept open? I was referring to my initial reply to your post. I kept open the notion that Lukaku could fare better in a better team or in a team that created chances. Instead of relying on incomplete analysis to illustrate the mindset of 'see, he only scored against bottom feeders whilst playing for mightly West Brom, so he isn't that impressive'.
ReplyDeleteLook your analysis was utter rubbish. I'm sorry but it was. Get over it.
Of course, I wouldn't have been all that happy with bringing in Lukaku as I clearly stated in my own post that Moses is the better option for us and that we don't have anyone currently that has regularly performed for us out wide (especially if Coutinho is going to make the move the middle on a regular basis).
Give over!!!!....we have 3 strikers, Everton have 3 aswell. Problem?
ReplyDeleteIt isn't rubbish. Big players come up big in big games...Lukaku did not. It is as simple as the analysis demonstrates. Your squishy rebuttals make no counter-argument whatsoever and are nothing but contrarian name-calling. You can maintain your faulty 'everything is relative' philosophy all you want, but your philosophy is the rationalizing mentality of a person who seeks to soothe lack of ability with the comfort of a supporting mindset.
ReplyDeleteThere is a site that gives minute by minute stats on both Sterling and Moses based on minutes on the pitch last season. There isn't 1 stat that shows Moses being a out and out better alternative to Sterling. This begs the question as to why we signed him if it is going to halt Sterlings 1st team progress?
ReplyDeleteLets hope stats can be wrong and we get another gem from Chelsea.
Lukaku would only go where he could have a chance to be GUARANTEED to play.
ReplyDeleteIF Sturridge got hurt again... IF Suarez got banned again...
Lukaku wasn't guaranteed to start if either of those two are healthy/not banned.
To try and pin this on Rodgers as though he failed miserably is unequivocally unfair.
Liverpool and Everton are in two completely different situations when it comes to the strikers on the given teams.
Did Rodgers leave us a striker short... Yes? But that's for a third striker... Lukaku would not come here to be the 3rd Striker.
And furthermore, Chelsea wouldn't want Lukaku to come here to be the 3rd striker because the whole point of loaning a guy out is so that he can play!
This is a tough one. I have rated Lukaku from day one and wished we bought him before Chelsea did. When we missed out on Bony (in my mind, athough we didn't make a bid for him) I wanted us to move for Lukaku. But when I look at the team, we have Sturridge and Suarez who can play up top with Aspas who can do a job there as well. Between Aspas, Suarez, Coutiinho, Sturridge and now Moses we have players who can play anywhere across the top and can create chaos with that ability to interchange during games.
ReplyDeleteLukaku HAS to play up top and I think this lack of adaptibility in the end is why we weren't interested. Obviously Lukaku is the better player and would score more, but as a TEAM I think we really needed pace in the wing areas to get in behind teams playing ultra defence and also exploit teams on the counter. It's a smart move and I like it, but would love to see Lukaku in the Red jersey at some point in the future
Lukaku is a different type of player to Sturridge, Sturridge is all about a turn of pace and skillful creating chances, where as Lukaku is more of power striker who creates chances via his strength. The interchanging of the front three would also be something that i don't feel Lukaku would be good at and which is a fundamental part of our game.
ReplyDeleteAlso you have missed my second point being that he would not get games. If Sturridge is fit he plays Central striker, If not it will be Suarez.
Because Lukaku had competition at Chelsea. He wants to play. Your argument is supported by "your" logic which doesn't make it true. My logic is that Lukaku wants to be guaranteed games. But don't take my word for it. Take his: "I think at my age it is important to play a lot. I have a good relationship with the coach of Chelsea [Jose Mourinho]. Now I hope to have good results." In order for him to play a lot at Liverpool, Sturridge would have to be dropped or get injured. Ergo, he is much more likely to play a lot at Everton. Who's the competition there? Jelavic? Koné? Steven Naismith? I have a few quotes from him in Dutch for you as well if you want me to further support my "baseless supposition"
ReplyDeleteAnd sacrifice Sturridge by putting him on the wing? Why? He's doing quite ok where he is in the middle no? What he's done now is he put a winger on the wing, Moses, where he belongs and leaves Sturridge in the middle. Makes perfect sense.
ReplyDeleteDid you see him when we played Arsenal away last year he may of scored but was poor defensively
ReplyDeletei thought he was fantastic and so clearly did Wenger. Also, that was Left Midfield, and the role proposed is on the left of an attacking 3. I actually think he will be operating in the area you outlined above :-)
ReplyDeleteHe'd also have less competition at chelsea for a starting place that at Liverpool - now that is a nice thought! :-)
ReplyDeleteBang on target mate. Unwanted fuss really.
ReplyDeleteEven if we wanted to take him on loan it would not have happened. Lukaku needs regular football and would not have gotten it at LFC.
ReplyDeleteWho is going to keep him on the bench at Everton?
To be honest I really doubt that Chelsea would of let Lukaku come to us
ReplyDeleteAgain you seem to be forgetting Chelsea. As I said before I doubt Chelsea would of let him come to us.
ReplyDeleteHow abt experience, strength & a proven history against top 4 teams!
ReplyDeletei would have taken luka just so we dont have to face him...but hopefully this time round sako can keep him under wraps. When we play everton id have kolo and sako at cb ...i have to admit i like luka and its good buisness for everton .I just hope moses makes an impact
ReplyDeleteIs this some sort of joke article? In what parallel universe is Lukaku (fantastic prospect that he is) a better option than Moses. Jesus wept! Young lads really shouldn't be writing articles unless they have an iota of knowledge or common sense.
ReplyDeletePlease stop spouting nonsense and educate yourself if possible.
I have full faith that Rodger's knows what he is doing, im sure he would have good reasons for choosing Moses over Lukaku, time will tell....
ReplyDeleteI don't think he had options, otherwise BR definitely had gone for him. I think, after missing 2 wide player (Costa, Willian) BR was looking for a wide player & sorted Moses option. He wasn't sure that Lukaku was available & I think Chelsea also in a limbo to buy another forward, or keep faith on Torres or make Lukaku starting striker. By the time Chelsea decided to let him go, I think it was too late.
ReplyDeleteAlso, Chelsea would have sent him on loan only to ensure he starts every week (otherwise no point, they have enough mafia money to pay his salary from bench), I doubt JM would have allowed him to be 3rd choice after SS at Anfield (neither Lukaku would have liked). & BR also had to off-load Borini early to bringing another CF.
Personally, I would have taken Lukaku over Moses, but he would have played only as a henchman for last 25-30 min, I believe both JM & Lukaku understand that as well.
did i say that lol no i said lets discuss football in a positive way and that is talking about and having opinions where the team is where it is know and the players we have know instead of players we did not get ,look forward not backwards is all i am saying , just like lucas said after the game keep our feet firmly on the ground and look forward , and like you said football is about having an opinion , so i gave an opinion lol
ReplyDelete5 years to Moses means ages 17-22, it makes more sense to look at the last 2-3 years. Remember also that he is a winger and how many starts and minutes did he play? Your criticism of him is less than fair. Moses scored more goals than downing across all competitions(last year), even with less games. Moses was out scored in the premier league by Downing but considering the vast difference in starts and minutes , the difference in goals proves little.
ReplyDeleteA front three of Sturridge, suarez and lukaku would never work. Sturridge is not a wide player we saw this at Chelsea and to be fair neither is Suarez. Moses was the right loan deal imo.
ReplyDeleteYeah, I was thinking that. I really expected Ba and Torres to be the ones out of there. That said, I could see Mourinho keeping and playing Torres just to prove that he will be the one that gets him back to his best. Just for the sake of his own ego. Of course if it doesn't work out, it will be Torres' fault :-)
ReplyDeleteWhy Everton and not us? They've had more to fear from the toffees lately than from us :-)
ReplyDeleteLukaku has gone to Everton to get games and almost certainly as a regular starter. Why would he come to Liverpool to sit on the bench behind Sturridge and Suarez? The only scenario in which Lukaku plays is if both our main strikers are unavailable. That's the same scenario he was facing at Chelsea, the scenario he is leaving in order to get more playing time. Neither Chelsea nor the player would be interested in that, it makes no sense. It would be nice for us to have a player of that quality on the bench but it's obviously not what the player himself would be looking for.
ReplyDeleteAs you pointed out, our big targets for the season were creative midfield players. Mkhitaryan has me a bit confused as he's not clearly a wide player and would have confined Coutinho to be a left winger for the rest of his Liverpool days. But Willian is a left sided player and didn't have much of a goal scoring record. I think he was a serious target for us and Moses is a very similar player. In fact Moses has a better goal scoring record than Willian, a player supposedly worth far more. So clearly our tactical need was identified as a wide player, regardless of else you seem to think can fill that role. I think Moses will show himself to be preferred to start in a wide role over all those players you list. Coutinho will play centrally with Suarez on the other flank. What we ened up with is quality across the line, not quality on the bench for that rare instance when all our first choice strikers are not available.
Lukaku would only have been a positive aquisition because of his goal scoring record from last season. Sure, we would have been excited about it, but then the player would have been unlikely to play very often in his preferred role and we would still have had to rely on inexperienced or out-of-position players in those wide areas. For me it would have made no sense and I actually think, despite Lukaku being arguably a better player, that Moses is the better choice for us. That for me is a point lost on a lot of fans this transfer window. They just want us to get as many big name players as possible, totally disregarding the need to put out a team with the best players in their best positions. I'm surprised at this from you because you used to criticise Rafa all the time for not putting players in their best positions.
lol.. maybe last season but we are top of the table :)
ReplyDeleteDamn good
ReplyDeletewe can dream but dreams can come true
ReplyDeleteI think you can forget about them as Liverpool players. My philosophy is, if they haven't played for the first team by the time they're 20, they won't. And I don't mean friendlies or because we had absolutely no one else at the beginning of last season. They were already overtaken bij Sinclair and Ibe last year. It ain't gonna happen. Same goes for Texeira by the way. Perfect example that we shouldn't get excited about youngsters we sign for the reserves or academy until they run out for the first team.
ReplyDeletei'd take moses came forth and so did we :-)
ReplyDeletebut i am dreaming .so iam dreaming big:-)
ReplyDeleteIn that case i'm with you! I've also projected our points tally at the end of the season to be 114 based on our perfomance so far :-)
ReplyDeleteyes 114points but i hope we can up the goalscoring rate;-)
ReplyDeleteLakaku wont have come ... he wasnt getting a sniff in at Chavs due to torres , ba and etto... Y do u think he would get to play ahead of Sturridge and Suarez... Remember he would have wanted to go to a club where he is a certain starter and mourinho would want the same... Moses to us and Lakaku to Everton are his acceptable loans as well as player getting playing opportunity as the team getting the player on loans lacked quality in Position moses (our left,coutinho is not genuine left sided player technically) and Lakaku(everton forwards).... So it dint really matter Lakaku wont have come here and mou would not have let him come to us either
ReplyDeleteAspas is a striker!!!
ReplyDeleteI just figured out something very positive about Liverpool: No team have split the City defense as well as we did this year. Very impressive attacking capabilities out current team has when you think about it.
ReplyDeleteBut why would Lukaku come when he is not guaranteed to start games with Suarez and Sturridge? Thought of that?
ReplyDeleteGoing to Everton he knew he will have the game time he wanted while he couldn't know that going to LFC.
It's hard these days to get players. Moses was a mistake. Let's get over it. Managers make mistakes they need time - and i am BR's biggest critic probably, having one opinion since he came and never changed it threw results - So if he continues with too many transfer mistakes then we will know better, right know lets see what happens.
Everton are better then us. They are fearless at the moment and more dangerous to anyone. They started bad this year with 3 draws but since then they played really really well and it's Martinez only first season. The harsh truth.
ReplyDeleteI hate them. They play dirty and foul a lot in a way i don't like. I don't like their supporters as well. Won't go in to it.
But, They finished above us for two seasons and this half season as well with a new manager while ours already had some time in. Right now the harsh truth is that they are better and it's in our hands to change. Plus give me a break, Lukaku probably had some since to prefer going there for he knew it will roll up easier there with less competition and - etc.
Plus, the simplicity, Rodgers got Aspas and the expectations set there. He wanted a winger and made a mistake in Moses. Aspas as well a mistake. That's how it rolled up. Lukaku wasn't a target at that last day of the transfer market; we were looking more for midfield and other positions at the time
ReplyDelete