Ollie Watkins

[Steero113]

Just now, Mark_1989 said:

No one left that game today and their lasting impression was that Ollie Watkins won us that game but if that’s what you want to think then cool. 

I don't think it. 

It is a fact. 

It is a literal fact. 

[Tom13]

Yeah, just because one of his actions led to us winning the game, doesn't mean he didn't limit us in other ways. His performance as a whole definitely didn't win us that.

Edited September 16, 2023 by Tom13

[Tom13]

13 minutes ago, romavillan said:

Strikers miss, he will get near 20 goals this season.

I'd be surprised tbh. His current streak is 1 in 12 in the league.

[Steero113]

3 minutes ago, Tom13 said:

Yeah, just because one of his actions led to us winning the game, doesn't mean he limited us in other ways. Simplistic to say his performance as a whole won us that.

1-1 in the 95th min, he won the penalty to make it 2-1 and win the match, that's a decent contribution towards winning the game. 

He was dogs**t for most of the day. But if he makes PL match winning contributions on his off days, I can somewhat live with that. 

Edited September 16, 2023 by Steero113

[GingerCollins29]

21 minutes ago, Mark_1989 said:

 

Missing that chance at 0-0 was criminal, score that and I think we run out 2,3,4-0 comfortably. Paid to score goals, need to bury them kind of chances. It’s all too common with him tbh.

Plus when cash crossed the ball across goal and he didn't go for it, just stood there

[Tom13]

1 minute ago, Steero113 said:

1-1 in the 95th min, he won the penalty to make it 2-1 and win the match, that's a decent contribution towards winning the game. 

He was dogs**t for most of the day. But if he makes PL match winning contributions on his off days, I can somewhat live with that. 

But you just admitted he was dogs**t for most of the game. So with another player, who was actually decent for most of the game and not dogs**t, we may have won it more comfortably and not had to rely on a 90th-odd minute penalty. Palace also had a couple of dangerous counters through Eze where they could have scored a second.

[Steero113]

Just now, Tom13 said:

But you just admitted he was dogs**t for most of the game. So with another player, who was actually decent for most of the game and not dogs**t, we may have won it more comfortably and not had to rely on a 90th-odd minute penalty. Palace also had a couple of dangerous counters through Eze where they could have scored a second.

The point I am contesting was that he didn't win the game? He had a huge hand in winning the game. 

You've gone miles off-piste. 

[fruitvilla]

The problem for Watkins is the ponderous build from the back. Watkins is playing against a set defence most of the time.

[Adam2003]

The one he curled onto the post was absolutely beautiful. More then deserved a goal. Would think he’ll get up to 4/5 for the season in Warsaw and then hopefully kick on. We’ve scored 19 in 7 games with him as our main striker, several of them assisted by him, so regardless of his streak if anyone thinks he’s not contributing it’s confirmation bias.

[lexicon]

47 minutes ago, Mark_1989 said:

Making excuses for him like most do, not surprised. 

Whatever Mark, carry on your tirade against one of our players for reasons unknown despite the fact that we won and him winning the pen was a massive factor in that victory. 

[tinker]

9 minutes ago, Tom13 said:

But you just admitted he was dogs**t for most of the game. So with another player, who was actually decent for most of the game and not dogs**t, we may have won it more comfortably and not had to rely on a 90th-odd minute penalty. Palace also had a couple of dangerous counters through Eze where they could have scored a second.

He's won us the penalty that made it 2-1, without that we wouldn't have scored the 3rd. He's tried until the 95th minutes he missed chances but his head never dropped and in the end he won us the game, its a rather simple fact to try a grasp, isn't it? 

[lexicon]

11 minutes ago, Tom13 said:

But you just admitted he was dogs**t for most of the game. So with another player, who was actually decent for most of the game and not dogs**t, we may have won it more comfortably and not had to rely on a 90th-odd minute penalty. Palace also had a couple of dangerous counters through Eze where they could have scored a second.

Ok well enjoy living in opposite land where Eze scored a second and Watkins didn't win the game winning pen.

[villa4europe]

3 minutes ago, fruitvilla said:

The problem for Watkins is the ponderous build from the back. Watkins is playing against a set defence most of the time.

Apart from it's not ponderous, it's controlled and designed to pull them out from being set

Watkins problem is that he's often up against 2 CBs who have no interest in it, the likes of Diaby benefit hugely from it and the fact that Watkins occupies the CBs, then once that trap is sprung they should be looking to feed it in to watkins

It'll come, villa fans seemingly have an unrealistic expectation as to what our striker will be, who else is out there etc and I'm not sure why as we've hardly been spoiled by strikers in the past

Said before Liverpool have their own version of Watkins upfront, he cost £82m, this perfect guaranteed goalscorer that people pine for doesnt exist, Watkins is just about good enough (and to pre empt the "unai won't settle for good enough" guff, unai will know exactly what the striker market is right now)

[Don_Simon]

26 minutes ago, Steero113 said:

Facts aren't excuses though are they. 

It's a fact that he won us the game today. 

Fact. 

This is a **** incredible take.

[Steero113]

1 minute ago, Don_Simon said:

This is a **** incredible take.

Please explain to me how him directly winning a penalty with the game at 1-1 in the 95th minute does not constitute him massively contributing to winning the game?

If that's a "**** incredible take" I'd love to hear your reaction to most of the absolute dogs**t takes that get hauled around on this forum. 

[Adam2003]

19 minutes ago, Tom13 said:

with another player, who was actually decent for most of the game and not dogs**t, we may have won it more comfortably

The good thing about the “whatever just happened, another player might have played better than Player X and then it might have been a better result” argument is it’s totally irrefutable. You are 100% correct that a better hypothetical striker might possibly have scored 12 goals in the biggest win in PL history, can’t argue with it as a position 

[PaulC]

13 minutes ago, Adam2003 said:

The one he curled onto the post was absolutely beautiful. More then deserved a goal. Would think he’ll get up to 4/5 for the season in Warsaw and then hopefully kick on. We’ve scored 19 in 7 games with him as our main striker, several of them assisted by him, so regardless of his streak if anyone thinks he’s not contributing it’s confirmation bias.

People forget that. I think people are over critical of him.  

[Steero113]

22 minutes ago, Tom13 said:

Palace also had a couple of dangerous counters through Eze where they could have scored a second.

I could have been born with a 15 inch wanger and married Halle Berry in 2000. 

But it didn't happen did it. 

[Demitri_C]

Ollies only had one decent game so far this season hibs

In the league he has been average to poor this season 

I swear durans scored more than him already in the league this season with much less minutes?

[Don_Simon]

3 minutes ago, Steero113 said:

Please explain to me how him directly winning a penalty with the game at 1-1 in the 95th minute does not constitute him massively contributing to winning the game?

If that's a "**** incredible take" I'd love to hear your reaction to most of the absolute dogs**t takes that get hauled around on this forum. 

It does contribute.

But that's not what you said. You said "It's a fact that he won us the game today. Fact".

Which it isn't. Luiz had to score the penalty. Martinez had to make excellent saves. Tielemens had to play the pass for Watkins to win the penalty.

You will be the only person on Terra Firma to think Watkins won us today's game.