Fair point. Although he is a useful historical yardstick when judging deficiencies in existing strikers so I can see why people do it.
Technically yes. But his deal is up in the summer and he’s on huge money. He’s worth talking about in a financial sense as he’s still costing us. But I think we can move on from talking about him as if he has potential to play in a Watford shirt again.
...and of course given they will have a #provenpremscorer on their books, they will be there for good.
Don't think he should start again, Pedro & Cucho make a lot of mistakes but their effort and desire to win & impress is far, far greater than Josh King's. One of those two should always be in the line up with Sarr and Dennis, King can come off the bench.
Rather harsh take on King here ? It’s more of a grimace than a “grin”. https://mobile.twitter.com/SmithyWFC85/status/1502559042639732736
That’s the bloke from San Francisco who sells those shocking clipart t-shirts for £50+. Also runs a podcast, obviously. Attempting some fake controversy for clicks. Cashing in on the thickos.
Found his level ?! “What a night for Watford's Joshua King. He has scored a hat-trick in Norway's 9-0 friendly win over Armenia, who played 73 minutes with 10 men following a red card”
That’ll be Roy’s justification for giving him a run of games in the next few over Cucho or JP, a hat trick against 10 man Armenia. sigh
Confirmed. He's left the club. Joshua King has left Watford who have Richarlison sell-on clause | Watford Observer
Thought he started fairly well but by the end was mostly completely useless, like most of the squad. Just doesn't score enough goals. Highly doubt he'll be getting another Premier League move.
So our own announcement contained a lie? Unless it was 2 years, with a break clause. But then why wouldn’t you just make it a genuine 1 year deal in that case?!
Could still be true, he could’ve been on high wages so we’ve paid part of it up so he can find another cluh instead. More doing business properly if that is the case. Edit: I see what you mean, the wobby articles says Duxbury says he was on a one year deal. Would be unlike Duxbury to lie about anything to make decisions look better, so that is weird. I suspect the original article is correct, but we’re lying now to make it look like proper business.
A relegation release clause would still involve paying the player some money, otherwise it would be to the detriment of the player to have it.
Depends how confident you are as a player. Being free agent after relegation has appeals if you are good.
Hold on a minute, doesn't that wording actually imply it was a two-year contract with a potentially guaranteed option (on our end) for a third?!
I thought he was a Championship player at best anyway, I had hopes he would be of use next season, oh well.
