It’s not saying much, but I’d prefer to have Okaka as an option from the bench than Success. At least Okaka makes a nuisance of himself and can score.
Okaka is getting very poor reviews here. His problem is one of fitness, not ability imo. When I've seen him play, he is fantastic at receiving the ball to his chest, bringing it down and making it stick, before playing in others. Far better at this than Deeney. His spell in Italy has shown, in addition to his scant sub appearances for us, that he's capable of getting goals too. His problem, however is that he seemingly cannot play for more than 30 odd minutes. Also, there's an implication of being difficult. Perhaps that's empty conjecture, but the fact that a succession of managers have shown little willingness to use him much, suggests there may be truth in there. Ultimately, if okaka could be relied upon to start games when Deeney was suspended, he'd be worth keeping, but he can't.
That's a good point but would be better to explain to Deeney the rules so he doesn't get sent off in the first place!
I wouldn’t worry. Since our transfer business is concluded we can probably keep both Success and Okaka in the squad
No place on this forum for racist comments like that. People may think that he is not up to Premier League standards, but remarks like this are just way over the top.
I broadly agree with this sentiment, particularly about Okaka’s fitness, but I’m afraid you can’t call any aspect of his play ‘fantastic’ in any regard. I also do it agree that his ability to receive and release the forward ball is better than Deeney’s.
If Okaka could be relied upon fitness wise to start games then I'd genuinely prefer him to start over Deeney, even when Deeney wasn't suspended. That's not too big of a compliment, but still.
I think it was just a random choice of species to use the spunk of in the insult. Could have been aardvark batter or bat jizz.
Ok., but it is still not a very nice way to refer to a fellow human being, I would not be very impressed if someone said that about me. Let myself in for it now, I expect.
I assure you that racism was not the intent. Thanks to @wfcmoog and @cyaninternetdog for pointing out alternative meanings of this phrase in my absence.
Oh right, so you take the time to thank them but not the oppressed peoples of the world, past, present and future?
Aardvaaks deserve all the criticism they get for changing their name so they get first listing in the phone book . C unts
Talking about male mammalian ejaculate in a derogatory way is sexist , and not the sort of tone I expect to hear from my favourite fans forum. This is 2019 not 1819 ladies and gentlemen . However I do NOT have a problem with being derogatory towards horses as they are all ****s that need to **** off back to where they came from , which I believe was the Mongolian steppes.
Given the universe only came into existence in 1881, your talk of events before that year, such as your hypothetical ‘1819’ fairytale, is pretty upsetting.
Is there still such a thing as a phone book? I have not had one left at my house since Julius Caesar was a lad. Also I have absolutely no idea if I am listed in it, if there still is such a thing.
The Romans could not use telephones anyway as they had no symbol for "zero" so couldn't dial anyone's number.
If I recall correctly, due to a lack of zeros in the Roman numerical system, their early prototype telephones failed to work , being hindered by the lack of a non integer numerical prefix to the dialling number.
Good god, were people really trying to find racism in "monkey spunk". I suppose it fits perfectly with the current climate of the world with everyone seemingly desperate to take offense to anything and everything and find discrimination where there is none.
