Lukaku

OP
Emelano offered to step down if Jose wanted him to. Also Jose has pretty much explained the loaning of Lukaku and it seems pretty clear he was involved in the decision.

comment by Kevin De Bruyne #ETO'OOOOOO (U14678)
posted 9 seconds ago
JFDI

That sort of attitude is not welcome on these boards.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

As a loanee, you will already be paying his wages thanks.
-----------------

And a fee for the loan.
I think people forget how FFP works and all the loans Chelsea has are beneficial in the long run. All the fees and wages paid by other clubs mean the price we pay for a player is reduced by the amount we get for the loan. In turn we see how the player performs and if he's any good he comes back and plays. If not we can sell him on at less than we initially paid but the loan fees mean we lose zero and have zero applied to FFP results. It makes sense and is why both ourselves and Arsenal loan out in excess of 20 players.

Think Everton confirmed there's no buyback clause.

BK
I think it was Jose that said he had no intention of calling him back in Jan which suggests there is the option or Jose would have said I can't call him back.

It is Jose's decision whether to keep him or loan him, not Emanelo.

The logic behind the decision to loan him is that Jose and Lukaku both felt that at this stage in his development it was very important that he plays regularly....

Jose could not gurrantee him that at Chelsea...

I am not saying I agree or disagree, but that was th reasoning behind the decision...

There is no call back option, both clubs hav officially confirmed this...

Common sense prevails.

The Emanalo thing was from an interview on talk radio where the interviewee directly heard Emanalo saying that. So given that that was true don't you find it the least strange that we re-loan a striker that featured in most if not all of the pre season games and had been scoring and looking good if not with us then certainly WBA, and leave us with an underperforming striker, one who is never likely to play most games and do a deal with Roman's mate for a striker that has been coasting for the last 2 years.
I suspect none of this was Emanalos decision and I can't beleive Jose is that poor a decision maker.

I found it strange that we loaned Lukaku given our apparent want for strikers right now butthat doesn't mean 2 and 2 make 5 based on the evidence povided so far.

I can easily take the Mata situation where Jose has not been playing the player, is that a Roman decision?

In relation to Lukaku, Roman sanctions all buys, why would he buy the guy if he didn't want to play him or use him at some point.

I could go on but haven't got the tie, but if you look at just about any situation you can chuck in a few details to argue a point any which way you like.

In truth, as fans we only ever get glimpses into what is truly happening at our club, and that goes for any fan of any club, owners can be seen as heors or villans, again at any club.

Personally, I do not get booged down in these sort of details, as far as I am concerned there is a team making decisions at Chelsea, Roman, Bruce Buck, Emenalo, Neil Bath, Steve Holland, etc,etc are all part of that team, they may not all agree with every decision made but as a teamthey will make decisons and I for one believe they will always act with the best interests of the club in mind, they may make mistakes, as will any human, I will not berate, it may frustrate me of course but I know I would likely make many more.