I would never have thought that United would have gone for Lukaku. Certainly not at £100m+ but the aim is scoring goals. And he has scored as many as any bar Kane. It seems to me that Lukaku scores in runs and I may be wrong here but not against the top teams. Beggars cannot be choosers and United need a specialist goal poacher. I would have gone for Kane Griezman or Aguero if they were available but they are not.
I would much prefer that we bought Lukaku instead of Morata - who was always going to be a bit of a gamble whereas Lukaku should hit the ground running with all his PL experience. Next summer, once Spurs form has dropped through the floor playing at Wembley and Levi has only found Swatch Watch to sponsor their new stadium, we can go for Keane who will be only too delighted to join a big club.
Kane and Lukaku actually had similar goal spread if you look through last season. However, Lukaku dropped off poorly toward the end of the season but Kane lit up around that period. My argument would be that Lukaku would perform better with a team that creates more chances than Everton. Hence why he was my first choice for available Premier League strikers. Spurs would give us long runaround to get Harry and Harry would be too much of a chicken to put in a transfer request because he is 'one of them'. I "somewhat" like Aguero but I would hate any dealings with City - lol.
I wonder whether united have shot themselves in the foot: Chelsea have now submitted a bid to Everton just as they had hoped. Apparently same price. £75m.
Surely if Lukaku is holidaying with Pogba, and his agent is in our pockets, then it's going to be tough for Chelsea to hijack our deal for him. They say Lukaku wants to go back to Chelsea, but Lukaku may have said this long before he knew how big our interest was.
