I think he was good at hassling the defenders and won more fouls than Bayo did off them with being able to get between them and the ball that Bayo did not. I think Bayo did more in actually linking up play and trying to carry it forward.
Where we will pack him off to next season ? https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/sport/23440696.watford-agree-professional-terms-academy-striker/
Might he get a chance in the first team? It's very possible any players who could vaguely be considered a striker at the club at the moment could be off, and Bayo hasn't exactly ripped up any trees, depends on how financially screwed we are
Probably depends on who the manager is and what other strikers we decide to buy (waste money on) I fear he only was in the squad due to injuries really.
Very pleased for him. One of the few who seem to care. I'd genuinely have him in the side next season.
I purely meant that we have a small squad, Bayo has had a suspension and injury and Rajovic is crap. No need to get your knickers in a twist.
Hardly prolific at youth level and looked pretty ordinary in his few first team appearances. That isn't when he hasn't had a touch of the Ngakia's and been keeping the medics gainfully employed. Either way though we'll have to get used to players like him as continue to reacclimatise to Watford normality.
That’s fine. But he’s nowhere near first-team level, we don’t win a couple of games and people start making insane claims like this.
Hasn’t stopped the demands to throw him in ! https://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/s...gsters-topple-league-leaders/#comments-anchor
it’s a bit unfair on the young lad to call him dog **** is it not? some might say that’s an insane claim.
Yeah maybe harsh, because he’s young. But I didn’t say it to him, I’m sure his feeling are fine. He is rubbish though and will never have a career anywhere near this level.
see this is where I think people need to be more aware. players use social media and it wouldn’t surprise me if players looked at forums such as this one, and if so particularly threads discussing themselves or their performances. now you can say that people in the public eye need to have a thick skin, however as we have often seen it is not always the case and many players struggle with their mental health, in just the same way that many of us do. at the end of the day it has nothing to do with him being young. mental health issues are not limited by age. you can by all means believe that a player is not very good, and there is no problem in stating that on a public forum. however being abusive is not on. it is easy to say that they may never read what you right about them, but there is always a chance they will and at the end of the day would you say the same things to his face? if not then it probably shouldn’t be typed out just because we have the benefit of internet anonymity.
Btw Sinatra this is not meant as a dig at you….its just the forum in general and your post made me react a bit.
I’ve liked your first post because taken alone it’s all sensible stuff. And you’re a decent and thoughtful poster on here in general so it’s all good. But I have to say, what is a (this) forum if it’s not about opinions being expressed in different ways? You yourself have said it’s fine ‘to believe a player is not very good’ and that there’s ‘no problem’ saying so on here. Which is… exactly what sinatra did. He did it in a very robust way. Probably in a stronger way than I would have about this particular player. But nonetheless that’s absolutely fine in my opinion. If we all post on here worried a player might read something and their feelings could be hurt we might as well shut the place down, because fundamentally there’s very little difference between saying Adeyemo is not very good, Adeyemo is dog sh*t or producing five graphs and a handful of analytical clipped videos to show why a his performance was poor. If he looks at any of those he’s hardly going to go away full of the joys of spring! In essence there’s a slippery slope into policing style over substance and a risk of stifling debate. Sinatra’s comment wasn't abusive. It didn’t say anything about Adeyemo as a person or comment on his looks or his intelligence or his family or whatever, none of which would be fair game. So I defend his right to say what he did. I’ll end up by saying if we’re talking about the forum in general that there’s been a trend in the moderation in recent times towards policing the way people say things, avoiding hurt feelings or protecting people from offence. I don’t think it works as it’s so subjective and frankly that stuff sorts itself out anyway. There’s also been a trend from a number of users to bring things into the forum from other, far more toxic social media sites like X - for example the thread about that numpty Ron. That blurs the lines and is very unhelpful in my view as it makes it seem like this place is an extension of that cesspit, when it so clearly isn’t.
See I think we have a difference in opinion as to what I would count as being abusive. If someones says I’m not very good at my job, then that’s fair enough that’s their opinion. If they have evidence to back it up then fine. You take the feedback and try to improve. However, calling someone dog ****, literally the equivalent of a dogs turd is too far. If you don’t think that is abusive then I don’t know where you think the borderline is. You are comparing a footballer to a piece of excrement. Can you imagine how utterly degrading that would be to read? Imagine if you are a person who struggles with self esteem and then reads that! Someone literally comparing you to a piece of ****. No, I’m afraid it’s not on and I don’t agree with you. If you don’t class calling someone dog **** at their job as abusive, then where do you draw the line? I agree that forums have to moderated carefully and there is a fine line between over-policing and allowing free rein. However, abuse is never ok.
Do you know the way to endometritis? That was never Dionne Warwick's most popular song. Perhaps a bit too niche of Bacharach with the subject matter.
Or it's just a sweary way of describing something or someone as ‘rubbish’? Like any number of things people say in life if you pause to think about them and break them down in the way you have in your middle paragraph then sure, they will sound a bit odd. But no one really does that as they know it’s not literal. If sinatra had called him ‘rubbish’ you surely wouldn’t be posting to say that was abusive too because it is literally the equivalent of calling him a discarded crisp packet? Or if instead of liking your post I’d said it was the dog’s b*llocks you wouldn’t seriously suggest my compliment was actually an insult because I’d compared it to a canine’s testicles, would you? That's the trouble with pulling things apart a bit too much - the whole debate ends up jumping the shark. That’s the point I’m making. I draw the line at we’re all adults on here and the post wasn’t anything unusual and it’s also perfectly fine for someone to say, “woah, sinatra that’s a bit harsh’ (as happened and probably would in the pub or at the Vic) and that’s it. Feels like too big a stretch to link it to the very important wider ‘be kind’ mental health debate going on in society to me.
