It could be a tactical choice though. With the current form of Lukaku, he should be undoubtedly a starter. Anyway if we win at the end, I don't care too much.obviously the press dont really know whats going on in inzaghi's head, but the rumours are dzeko over lukaku atm. If that's what happens, this guy doesnt deserve a renewal tbh.
dzeko has scored 5 goals since december, total. Lukaku has scored that many in May alone.
You should put money on the same result.Just woke up from a dream where Haaland scored a 35 yard first time volley, and they went on to batter us 4-0.
Dream me took it particularly well, can’t say it’d be the same in real life.
He can do whatever he wants, he brought us here in a first place.obviously the press dont really know whats going on in inzaghi's head, but the rumours are dzeko over lukaku atm. If that's what happens, this guy doesnt deserve a renewal tbh.
dzeko has scored 5 goals since december, total. Lukaku has scored that many in May alone.
well, yes, I'm not suggesting he literally cant play Dzeko over Lukaku, but I dont think it'd be a rational choice.He can do whatever he wants, he brought us here in a first place.
I agree that Lukaku should start, but if he doesnt I wont demand Limone's head cause of that. Lukaku is not prime Messi or Cr7.well, yes, I'm not suggesting he literally cant play Dzeko over Lukaku, but I dont think it'd be a rational choice.
Would City defenders really be that tired out by playing against Dzeko? I kinda doubt it.The only rationale to starting Dzeko is that neither he nor Lukaku have 90 minutes in their legs, and subbing in Lukaku with his pace and strength against tired defenders is a much bigger game changer than subbing on the striker formerly known as Dzeko. But with that said, playing 60 minutes of Dzeko and 30 minutes of Lukaku based on their current forms would be straight sabotage.