-
Benvenuto su Interfans.org
Il forum dei tifosi dell'Inter, ti dà il benvenuto! Registrati gratis per discutere con centinaia di cuori neroazzurri
Stai navigando nella nostra community come Ospite.
Avere un account su Interfans.org ti permetterà di creare e partecipare alle discussioni, mandare messaggi privati agli altri utenti, partecipare ai nostri quiz e giochi e di utilizzare tutte le funzioni di questo sito.
Is Lukaku a real bomber?
- Creatore Discussione Not Sure
- Data di inizio
Thank you Mr. Gillette !!
I'm not sure he is, because he doesn't shave like a bomber.
I mean, take a look...
Vedi l'allegato 2371184Vedi l'allegato 2371186
Everybody knows that a real bomber should always shave the proper way
Vedi l'allegato 2371190
Vedi l'allegato 2371206
Vedi l'allegato 2371214
What do you think?
Cazzo è vero
A bomber has to be shaven?
For every rule there's an exception!
Certainly one of the best I've ever seen and who doesn't get recognised enough in my opinion.
However, I've never really thought of Lukaku as a bomber. He's a very good centre forward but I've never been convinced he's an out and out striker. That said, I also don't believe it's crucial to have a bomber and in fact I think football is moving further and further away from them all the time. Lukaku is the type of player who can be used in a variety of different ways and adds to the tactical prowess of a team whereas, without wishing to be controversial as a new member, Icardi, a real bomber, limits you in that sense. Lukaku can hold the ball up because of his strength whilst other players push forward, he can cut in from wider positions, he can score and regularly, he gives options in the air because he's tall. Icardi, on the other hand, can only play in one way and everything has to be channeled to him whereas with Lukaku that's a possibility but the ball can also be played through him. Actually, he's not unlike Henrik in that sense. I'm not going to start saying that I think Lukaku is a Messiah figure because I reserve judgement until I see him playing for us but he is the player Conte wanted so it has to be seen as a positive that we've got him. I've also had it in mind for a while, and correct me if I'm wrong, but Conte's Juventus teams didn't actually have a bomber until his third season (Tevez - you can make a case for Quagliarella being a bomber but a top level bomber? I'm not so sure).
For every rule there's an exception!
Certainly one of the best I've ever seen and who doesn't get recognised enough in my opinion.
However, I've never really thought of Lukaku as a bomber. He's a very good centre forward but I've never been convinced he's an out and out striker. That said, I also don't believe it's crucial to have a bomber and in fact I think football is moving further and further away from them all the time. Lukaku is the type of player who can be used in a variety of different ways and adds to the tactical prowess of a team whereas, without wishing to be controversial as a new member, Icardi, a real bomber, limits you in that sense. Lukaku can hold the ball up because of his strength whilst other players push forward, he can cut in from wider positions, he can score and regularly, he gives options in the air because he's tall. Icardi, on the other hand, can only play in one way and everything has to be channeled to him whereas with Lukaku that's a possibility but the ball can also be played through him. Actually, he's not unlike Henrik in that sense. I'm not going to start saying that I think Lukaku is a Messiah figure because I reserve judgement until I see him playing for us but he is the player Conte wanted so it has to be seen as a positive that we've got him. I've also had it in mind for a while, and correct me if I'm wrong, but Conte's Juventus teams didn't actually have a bomber until his third season (Tevez - you can make a case for Quagliarella being a bomber but a top level bomber? I'm not so sure).
I agree with you and give you also a little advise : don't take too seriously all the arguments that you read in this forum.
There's a bit of everything, insanity and jokes included
I always thought we needed someone to take care of a section so poor ( as followers ) like the one in english.
I think that you could start creating new threads you would like to deepen with others that speak english, not many I guess.
What do you think @Interfan
There's a bit of everything, insanity and jokes included
I always thought we needed someone to take care of a section so poor ( as followers ) like the one in english.
I think that you could start creating new threads you would like to deepen with others that speak english, not many I guess.
What do you think @Interfan
A bomber has to be shaven?
For every rule there's an exception!
Certainly one of the best I've ever seen and who doesn't get recognised enough in my opinion.
However, I've never really thought of Lukaku as a bomber. He's a very good centre forward but I've never been convinced he's an out and out striker. That said, I also don't believe it's crucial to have a bomber and in fact I think football is moving further and further away from them all the time. Lukaku is the type of player who can be used in a variety of different ways and adds to the tactical prowess of a team whereas, without wishing to be controversial as a new member, Icardi, a real bomber, limits you in that sense. Lukaku can hold the ball up because of his strength whilst other players push forward, he can cut in from wider positions, he can score and regularly, he gives options in the air because he's tall. Icardi, on the other hand, can only play in one way and everything has to be channeled to him whereas with Lukaku that's a possibility but the ball can also be played through him. Actually, he's not unlike Henrik in that sense. I'm not going to start saying that I think Lukaku is a Messiah figure because I reserve judgement until I see him playing for us but he is the player Conte wanted so it has to be seen as a positive that we've got him. I've also had it in mind for a while, and correct me if I'm wrong, but Conte's Juventus teams didn't actually have a bomber until his third season (Tevez - you can make a case for Quagliarella being a bomber but a top level bomber? I'm not so sure).