Was it a wise decision to loan out Lukaku?

This club have carried out some crazy activities over the years – selling Sturridge when he would have been a perfect fit now, selling Raul Meireles when he was the conductor from deep which they so desperately require now, signing one playmaker after another with no idea of how to accommodate them (Willian for example, was he someone the team really needed?), and loaning out players like Chalobah, McEachran and Piazon with no idea of when they will actually become regulars at this club.

There are a couple of fresh entries to the list now – loaning the experienced (in this league) Victor Moses to accommodate the new signing (Willian); keeping Lukaku ready for action, only to buy a 32 year old striker new to the league and send the Belgian out on loan at the last minute yet again.

Somehow, it doesn’t feel right. What is Mourinho thinking? Is he running a reunion party here, signing players he has worked with in the past?

The answers to these doubts lie far away from West London. The reason for Lukaku finding himself at Everton now is because another Belgian striker made it big in the league just like him. An impact so big, that Lukaku’s spot in the Belgian national team was by no means guaranteed despite his West Brom heroics.

Some might have thought of Christian Benteke as a one-season wonder. Three games into the new season, and he is making them eat their words. Benteke has been scoring for fun. Currently, he is only behind Ronaldo and Messi all over Europe in terms of league goals in 2013. Aston Villa are no Barcelona or Real Madrid, which makes Benteke’s contribution an extraordinary achievement.

Comparing game by game now, Benteke started and scored twice at Arsenal, while Lukaku was a late substitute in game-week 1. Benteke started at Stamford Bridge, while Lukaku was again a late substitute. Benteke started against Liverpool and troubled them all day, while Lukaku was an unused substitute at Old Trafford. Summary – Benteke has 3 goals from 3 appearances, while Lukaku has none from 2. Clearly, Benteke is winning the battle here.

I admit these stats are too short in duration for an extrapolation of the numbers, but a pattern is clearly visible. Benteke, if fit, starts. Lukaku needs to keep fit, get ahead of Torres, Ba and Eto’o, and score as regularly as his counterpart to stay on even ground. Assuming that both stayed clear of injuries all season and continued their scoring pattern, had Lukaku stayed at Chelsea, he would have got lesser game time (and lesser goals) than Benteke. This would make Benteke the automatic first choice for Belgium if they qualify for the World Cup.

This was the dilemma for Chelsea. Keeping Lukaku would have been beneficial to his club career, while at the same time, detrimental to his international career. Their decision, which looked baffling at first, now seems to make sense. The club have been spot on ethically – they are strengthening his chances of playing for his country on the biggest stage of all while at the club level, they have compromised his immediate integration into his parent club in favour of his international future.

So, why did they choose Everton despite reports of bids from elsewhere? A glance towards their list of strikers and the number of goals scored provides the answer – 2 goals (both scored on the opening day) in 3 games with one goal each from a full back and a playmaker. Their strikers are just not able to score. Though Kone was signed from Wigan to replace Nikica Jelavic, who has scored just once in 23 hours (and counting) of league football, a top class forward was still needed.