Patson Daka

[Sly]

How bad was Amartey in that Moscow game as well 😂 Like watching our current defenders 

[shen]

13 minutes ago, Richmondfox said:

I think it was more a purple patch and he has shown his true ability the last 4 years.  A bit like when you pull a stunner in a night club and no one can understand how it happened, and never happens again. 

Terrible comparison. He performed over two seasons there, hardly a one-off. Although you could argue he never did much in their European games, so maybe there was an indication already back then that he couldn't replicate his form at a higher level.

 

In hindsight, I can understand why we went for him.

Had he not cost as much and had there not been such hype around him (remember he was Haaland's successor - and with great effect), then I don't think the judgement of him would be so harsh.

 

I think it's fair to compare him to Okazaki when it comes to numbers and graft. Shinji was obviously limited technically and physically and he was never ever prolific. But he cost around a third of Daka and was of course part of that side.

 

Likewise, compare him to Perez who was even more expensive and arguably a worse pound for pound investment, yet expectations were low as he never seemed more than a decent player at a team below us. His numbers, lack of physicality and lack of cutting edge were, I would argue, just as disappointing. But the fact he's had a decent career since leaving and somehow made the Spain NT suddenly makes people remember him more fondly.

 

[Richmondfox]

1 hour ago, shen said:

Terrible comparison. He performed over two seasons there, hardly a one-off. Although you could argue he never did much in their European games, so maybe there was an indication already back then that he couldn't replicate his form at a higher level.

 

In hindsight, I can understand why we went for him.

Had he not cost as much and had there not been such hype around him (remember he was Haaland's successor - and with great effect), then I don't think the judgement of him would be so harsh.

 

I think it's fair to compare him to Okazaki when it comes to numbers and graft. Shinji was obviously limited technically and physically and he was never ever prolific. But he cost around a third of Daka and was of course part of that side.

 

Likewise, compare him to Perez who was even more expensive and arguably a worse pound for pound investment, yet expectations were low as he never seemed more than a decent player at a team below us. His numbers, lack of physicality and lack of cutting edge were, I would argue, just as disappointing. But the fact he's had a decent career since leaving and somehow made the Spain NT suddenly makes people remember him more fondly.

 

Cope, hes crap.  Perez was always played out of position by Rodgers.  Daka falls over his own feet in front of the keeper, like at Man City last season.  

Edited 26 March by Richmondfox

[funkyrobot]

On 25/03/2026 at 09:41, filbertway said:

Yeah I'd argue his brain and instinct are decent enough, hence why he was a bagsman in the Austrian league. Clearly he thrives on confidence though as he looks like he's never played football when it comes time to actually interact with the ball.

 

It's a low bar, but actually seeing a striker make strikers runs and be in a position where strikers should be is much more preferable to watching Ayew do anything, but be a striker.

 

So unless you take a punt on Mukasa in the striker role, we could dip down and maybe look at Hutchinson.

 

As long as either of those can do the basics of a striker in terms of work rate and positioning, then either would be an upgrade as there's evidence of them being able to control, pass and shoot.

He’s not really looked the part since that 4 goal match in October 2021. Presumably he’s not then had any confidence for 52 months since that mirage of ability. That’s some crisis of confidence tbf. 

[shen]

25 minutes ago, Richmondfox said:

Cope, hes crap.  Perez was always played out of position by Rodgers.  Daka falls over his own feet in front of the keeper, like at Man City last season.  

I said all along that Daka has been poor for us.

 

Perez was underwhelming whether he played on the right (which really was as a channel forward if anything) or as a second striker. And he cost £10m more with similar or worse output. Yet he doesn't get near as much of a bad rap - probably because he's not here anymore for us to focus our anger on.

 

There's more to both players than what they've shown with us, which is the nuance and complexity I'm trying to get at, instead of just dumbing it down to one word. 

 

 

[funkyrobot]

1 minute ago, shen said:

I said all along that Daka has been poor for us.

 

Perez was underwhelming whether he played on the right (which really was as a channel forward if anything) or as a second striker. And he cost £10m more with similar or worse output. Yet he doesn't get near as much of a bad rap - probably because he's not here anymore for us to focus our anger on.

 

There's more to both players than what they've shown with us, which is the nuance and complexity I'm trying to get at, instead of just dumbing it down to one word. 

 

 

Daka is being played in his favourite position and as a number 9 is rightly judged on his goals. Perez prefers playing centrally behind a main striker and never really had the opportunity to play that under Rodgers.

 

The fundamental difference between the two though is one clearly has very good technical footballing ability that you’d expect of a premier league level signing and one clearly hasn’t. Perez could pass, control and dribble with the ball. Daka has never demonstrated any consistent ability to pass, control or dribble with the ball. 

[volpeazzurro]

1 hour ago, Richmondfox said:

Cope, hes crap.  Perez was always played out of position by Rodgers.  Daka falls over his own feet in front of the keeper, like at Man City last season.  

Let’s be honest, it’s like trying to decide which turd has had the most glitter sprinkled on it because you can’t polish either of them!

[volpeazzurro]

4 minutes ago, funkyrobot said:

Daka is being played in his favourite position and as a number 9 is rightly judged on his goals. Perez prefers playing centrally behind a main striker and never really had the opportunity to play that under Rodgers.

 

The fundamental difference between the two though is one clearly has very good technical footballing ability that you’d expect of a premier league level signing and one clearly hasn’t. Perez could pass, control and dribble with the ball. Daka has never demonstrated any consistent ability to pass, control or dribble with the ball. 

Perez had one reasonable season in four at Newcastle. Even when played in that imaginary best position he was still s***e so don’t let’s try and rewrite the history books because he’s hardly set the world alight since he left has he! He wasn’t misunderstood, he was Rodger’s choice and like most of his signings for Liverpool, Celtic and Leicester, bloody useless!

[shen]

5 minutes ago, funkyrobot said:

Daka is being played in his favourite position and as a number 9 is rightly judged on his goals. Perez prefers playing centrally behind a main striker and never really had the opportunity to play that under Rodgers.

 

The fundamental difference between the two though is one clearly has very good technical footballing ability that you’d expect of a premier league level signing and one clearly hasn’t. Perez could pass, control and dribble with the ball. Daka has never demonstrated any consistent ability to pass, control or dribble with the ball. 

I'd counter with Perez being weak in possession and physically average at best. If you compare him to Maddison, the difference is stark, yet we paid £13m more for Perez?

His strike rate for a forward was poor and while he did play the majority of games on the right, he had ample opportunities centrally behind the striker or even as the front man.

Then you also have to consider the minutes/starts that he got in that side.

Did Daka ever had a run of five or more starts when Vardy and Iheanacho were at the club?

 

My mind may be playing tricks and doing Daka favours here, but I thought his link up play around the box was usually solid - he would often be the bouncer in quick one-two's.

In today's team, he hardly gets any touches or gets involved in any link up play, so his passing and dribbling skills are kind of moot points anyway. 
You look at the profile when we got him and he was distinctly a running poacher type of player, who would probably have been better suited to the style we had when we were primarily a counter-attacking side pre Rodgers. He was wrong type of striker to get for a Rodgers team.

[Wasyls Pec Deck]

10 minutes ago, shen said:

I'd counter with Perez being weak in possession and physically average at best. If you compare him to Maddison, the difference is stark, yet we paid £13m more for Perez?

His strike rate for a forward was poor and while he did play the majority of games on the right, he had ample opportunities centrally behind the striker or even as the front man.

Then you also have to consider the minutes/starts that he got in that side.

Did Daka ever had a run of five or more starts when Vardy and Iheanacho were at the club?

 

My mind may be playing tricks and doing Daka favours here, but I thought his link up play around the box was usually solid - he would often be the bouncer in quick one-two's.

In today's team, he hardly gets any touches or gets involved in any link up play, so his passing and dribbling skills are kind of moot points anyway. 
You look at the profile when we got him and he was distinctly a running poacher type of player, who would probably have been better suited to the style we had when we were primarily a counter-attacking side pre Rodgers. He was wrong type of striker to get for a Rodgers team.

A solid turd perhaps. Come on, he’s rubbish. There’s no need for all this nonsense revisionism. 

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, shen said:

Did Daka ever had a run of five or more starts when Vardy and Iheanacho were at the club?

I was looking at exactly that earlier and I believe he has done so once - started six in a row in December 2023 (four goals, two assists) before going to AFCON and then three in a row after he got back (three goals, one assist). Not sure if there were any games between those two spells that he could have played but didn't because although I'm sad enough to have looked those things up, I'm not quite sad enough to find out the dates he departed and returned.

Edited 26 March by Guest

[shen]

2 minutes ago, Wasyls Pec Deck said:

A solid turd perhaps. Come on, he’s rubbish. There’s no need for all this nonsense revisionism. 

It probably didn't happen often, I admit. When those plays happened (and they did ) they probably stood out. Not trying to do any revisionism, just adding some perspective and context. 

[funkyrobot]

51 minutes ago, shen said:

I'd counter with Perez being weak in possession and physically average at best. If you compare him to Maddison, the difference is stark, yet we paid £13m more for Perez?

His strike rate for a forward was poor and while he did play the majority of games on the right, he had ample opportunities centrally behind the striker or even as the front man.

Then you also have to consider the minutes/starts that he got in that side.

Did Daka ever had a run of five or more starts when Vardy and Iheanacho were at the club?

 

My mind may be playing tricks and doing Daka favours here, but I thought his link up play around the box was usually solid - he would often be the bouncer in quick one-two's.

In today's team, he hardly gets any touches or gets involved in any link up play, so his passing and dribbling skills are kind of moot points anyway. 
You look at the profile when we got him and he was distinctly a running poacher type of player, who would probably have been better suited to the style we had when we were primarily a counter-attacking side pre Rodgers. He was wrong type of striker to get for a Rodgers team.

Yeh you have a bad memory for Perez, very rarely played centrally behind a striker. Not sure why you are even comparing him to Daka. Daka was signed as replacement for Vardy, Perez wasn’t. They are two very different players with different roles.

Your mind is most definitely playing you tricks (as you suspect to be fair to you) Daka’s link up play other than simple short passes is very loose. Whatever style we play his poor technique will always prevent him from being any consistent threat even at Championship level.
 

Stop comparing him to a different player in a different role, Daka has been a catastrophic signing for the club - the worst one in the last ten years considering the time he’s been with us and the levels of failure he’s experienced in that time.

[murphy]

Somehow, for me, Perez was an even worse signing than Daka.  Flyaway, lightweight nothing player.  Not as bad a player as Daka but for the level we were at, bringing in Perez cost us so dearly. The one glaring weak link in that team.

 

If we had got that one right who knows what we might have achieved or where we might be now. 

 

 

[LeePhilpottsBaldSpot]

23 minutes ago, murphy said:

Somehow, for me, Perez was an even worse signing than Daka.  Flyaway, lightweight nothing player.  Not as bad a player as Daka but for the level we were at, bringing in Perez cost us so dearly. The one glaring weak link in that team.

 

If we had got that one right who knows what we might have achieved or where we might be now. 

Sorry but Perez was a much better signing.

 

Perez started every game of our FA Cup winning run and was instrumental in the final goal. He also scored a hat-trick in the 0-9.

 

I'd argue neither of those things would have happened if Dennis Praet played instead of Ayoze Perez.

 

He delivered a hell of a lot more than Daka, who also joined when we were good lest we forget.

[HankMarvin]

One goal in his last 10 starts for Zambia, so it’s not just a Leicester thing. Amazed that he has been allowed to see out his contract here. Absolute dogshit 

[Jattdogg]

Can we just retire this thread at 200 pages? Lol

[LCFCJohn]

I’ve said it before but look at the thread when he signed. Everyone was buzzing. Nobody was saying it was anything other than a great signing of a young striker who was scoring for fun in a decent/good (not top 5/6) European league.

 

The problem as always, comes back our good old Rudders and ‘the deal’. Between the fee (on the high side for the Austrian league) and the wages (hugely over inflated), the circumstances were set to struggle to move him on.

 

As @shensays, there is more to it than a player (any player really) being just a terrible footballer. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. His output in the first couple of seasons was ok for a young striker coming to a new league and culture.
 

The difference is, most clubs would have had the ability to move the player on when things didn’t kick on and he started to struggle. And you’d just move on. I guess more like us with Kramaric going back. Maybe if Kramaric has stayed for years after he did, we’d have had similar conversations as he likely would have declined after initially not kicking on. 

Anyone who thinks that what has followed is purely about a lack of ability and not a completely mentally broken player is failing to look at the situation in a balanced manner. I will add that mentally broken players or ones who have no confidence are no good to us. We need the mentality we saw in the Pearson era.

[Trav Le Bleu]

8 hours ago, volpeazzurro said:

Let’s be honest, it’s like trying to decide which turd has had the most glitter sprinkled on it because you can’t polish either of them!

Or can you?

 

 

[murphy]

7 hours ago, LeePhilpottsBaldSpot said:

Sorry but Perez was a much better signing.

 

Perez started every game of our FA Cup winning run and was instrumental in the final goal. He also scored a hat-trick in the 0-9.

 

I'd argue neither of those things would have happened if Dennis Praet played instead of Ayoze Perez.

 

He delivered a hell of a lot more than Daka, who also joined when we were good lest we forget.

The fact that Perez was a regular starter for us is precisely why he was a more damaging signing.

 

Don't get me wrong, Daka was an awful signing and a worse player than Perez and I say that as someone who was very excited when we signed him.  He was the chosen successor to Vardy and signed after the FA Cup win which I would call the beginning of our decline.  We were shielded by Daka's crapness however, because Vardy continued to play for the next 3 years.

 

Perez was Rodgers first marquee signing in 2019 and played for the Champion's League chasing sides.  We had quality from one to eleven in that team, except for the glaring powder puff weakness that was Ayoze Perez.  I don't know why you bring Praet into it (another terrible signing)  since they play in different positions, but I believe that had we got that final piece of the jigsaw right we would have got over the line in terms of CL qualification and who knows what might have been on the back of that, hence why he was a more damaging signing.  I also think that because of his price tag along with the fact that we suspect he was Rodgers' pick, meant that we persevered with him for far too long.

 

The accidental pre-assist in the final when the ball hit him on the thigh and dropped to Luke Thomas remains his greatest achievement in a Leicester shirt.

 

 

Edited 27 March by murphy

[filbertway]

7 hours ago, LeePhilpottsBaldSpot said:

Sorry but Perez was a much better signing.

 

Perez started every game of our FA Cup winning run and was instrumental in the final goal. He also scored a hat-trick in the 0-9.

 

I'd argue neither of those things would have happened if Dennis Praet played instead of Ayoze Perez.

 

He delivered a hell of a lot more than Daka, who also joined when we were good lest we forget.

absolute wind up merchant

 

That's worse than when thr commentators were sucking off Foden for his assist for Eze for England a few months back haha.

[OntarioFox]

5 hours ago, Jattdogg said:

Can we just retire this thread at 200 pages? Lol

Rudkin has put a clause in his contract that he gets a four year extension on £60k a week if the Foxestalk thread makes 200 pages.

[Blue.Fox84]

Crazy to me people still want him playing and defend him, all because he runs around 🤣

 

No strength, no awareness, horrendous first touch and shocking in front of goal on a ridiculously (and overpriced) high wage. The bar of expectation is so low, you can find lads in non-league who can give you more on a fraction you pay for Daka. We knew we had no strikers going into the season (poor by the club), it’s obvious Daka and Ayew don’t work, an alternative system or player needs to be found - Mavididi (just as poor but looked okay in central area a few weeks ago tbf), a young lad like Hutchinson or a different system. We’ll be lucky if we get more than 1 goal from Daka till the end of the season 

[Mike Oxlong]

Has the control of someone playing with a football on a bungee rope 

[volpeazzurro]

6 hours ago, Trav Le Bleu said:

Or can you?

 

 

🤣🤣 yes, sadly I watched that right through to the end, who’d have known! I think there’s potential in replacing our current coaching staff with a couple of these guys! Admittedly there’s a lot of material for them to work with and whether they could achieve over 70 on the gloss index with many of them could be doubtful but surely worth a try isn’t it?