Ollie Watkins

[alreadyexists]

On 14/08/2021 at 14:52, Phil Silvers said:

 

Never liked James Corden

[birdman]

Anyone know if Ollie has been training? Aston Villa social media severely lacking in training pics this week! 

[AVFCforever1991]

We need him back, he ups our whole intensity

[birdman]

OK getting concerned now. No one seems to know anything and the club are suspiciously quiet with training pics. Perhaps they don't want to give anything away or just trying to bury bad news! 

[DCJonah]

My dad bumped into him in a light store in Solihull yesterday. Asked if he was fit for Saturday and he said hopefully. 

That's my ITK info. Do I get a blue tick next to my name?

[Thug]

8 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

My dad bumped into him in a light store in Solihull yesterday. Asked if he was fit for Saturday and he said hopefully. 

That's my ITK info. Do I get a blue tick next to my name?

Maybe he was doing ‘light training’?

 

 

 

ill get my coat

[theboyangel]

1 minute ago, Thug said:

Maybe he was doing ‘light training’?

 

 

 

ill get my coat

Thanks for your illuminating thoughts… 

[Osirus]

Great attitude and a great guy, hope he reaches the 20 goals mark this season 

Excuse the random African football interlude at about 16 minutes...

Edited August 19, 2021 by Osirus

[birdman]

24 minutes ago, theboyangel said:

Thanks for your illuminating thoughts… 

Admin will take a dim view of these puns. 

[weedman]

On 14/08/2021 at 16:02, nick76 said:

What’s the point? How some didn’t see the obvious I don’t know.  From @villalad21 saying he’s genetically not going to get injured and Ollie didn’t even make the first game to generally other posters saying another quality striker wouldn’t get minutes.  I’m just glad the management saw it.

Not helping today so far though as it’s the defending that’s killing us.

I mean the whole debate (ignoring a certain poster who trolls every single thread he's in saying he'd genetically never get injured) was the talk of signing Tammy for £40m.

Most relatively sensible people were simply saying that we won't spend £40m on a backup, not that we didn't need a backup, no one was ridiculing anyone for thinking we needed a backup striker, aside from the obvious troll, most people were simply expressing Tammy at £40m to be a poor use of resources and also unappealing to a player wanting first team football. 

To be fair, even Ings is a bit risky, even at £20m or whatever there's a lot of people who have the belief he's not here to be a backup, he'll be starting games. Watkins will also be starting games. We won't keep either of them happy if one is on the bench every week, luckily both Watkins and Ings are relatively flexible and can play multiple positions across the front line - something Tammy cannot offer. 

Honestly I'm not even sure if this happened pre social media but it seems to me that every debate on virtually every subject these days has to be taken completely out of context by some people in order to gloat when they're "right", even if the way they're right is to completely change the other sides argument (or pick the most extreme view and assign that view to everyone that disagrees with you). Hell, I'm sure I do it as well, it's apparently the only way to debate these days. 

[Sulberto21]

1 hour ago, birdman said:

Admin will take a dim view of these puns. 

Oh delightful. Watt is it with these puns.

[nick76]

25 minutes ago, weedman said:

not that we didn't need a backup, no one was ridiculing anyone for thinking we needed a backup striker,

Simply not true, you only have to read the Tammy thread that it wasn’t just about Tammy 

26 minutes ago, weedman said:

most people were simply expressing Tammy at £40m to be a poor use of resources and also unappealing to a player wanting first team football. 

But people who didn’t want him. I like others said it would be for a lot less.  The fact he went for 34m for a 23 yr old compared to 25m upfront and 5m Ings for a 29 yr old suggests we were in a for a player at around the 30m mark.

29 minutes ago, weedman said:

we needed a backup striker

Plus I never said back up, I always think we need to think of a squad game and that Ollie and Ings and that maybe either or both depending on needs.

31 minutes ago, weedman said:

relatively flexible and can play multiple positions across the front line - something Tammy cannot offer.

Just boring , just this again and again, just becomes boring repetition 

33 minutes ago, weedman said:

has to be taken completely out of context by some people in order to gloat when they're "right"

No, the argument is not about being right it was always what was needed and Ollie being injured game one showed what was needed.  That we needed another top notch striker.  Yes the result didn’t go our way but again it wasn’t about me being right but showing what was needed, it was plainly obvious.

 

[Follyfoot]

On 05/08/2020 at 14:23, jim said:

Looks like Hogan MKII to me.

Change of view a year on? 

Edited August 19, 2021 by Follyfoot

[DCJonah]

Anyone who said we didn't need another striker was wrong. It was obvious last summer. 

I didn't think Tammy would come here to compete and I thought it was a lot of money to sign Tammy as back up/competition. 

Now Ings is a different prospect all together. He's a better player than Tammy, has played in a front two and can drift wide or drop deep and allow someone like Watkins to still play their game. 

Ings was the right signing. Tammy, for multiple reasons would not have been IMO.

[Delphinho123]

6 minutes ago, DCJonah said:

Anyone who said we didn't need another striker was wrong. It was obvious last summer. 

I didn't think Tammy would come here to compete and I thought it was a lot of money to sign Tammy as back up/competition. 

Now Ings is a different prospect all together. He's a better player than Tammy, has played in a front two and can drift wide or drop deep and allow someone like Watkins to still play their game. 

Ings was the right signing. Tammy, for multiple reasons would not have been IMO.

I agree Ings is better than Tammy but I don’t see a how we can fit Ings and Watkins in the same team without playing one out of position. 

[DCJonah]

20 minutes ago, Delphinho123 said:

I agree Ings is better than Tammy but I don’t see a how we can fit Ings and Watkins in the same team without playing one out of position. 

By playing them both upfront. Pretty simple. 

[Delphinho123]

Just now, DCJonah said:

By playing them both upfront. Pretty simple. 

Our midfield will be torn apart. 

[DCJonah]

Just now, Delphinho123 said:

Our midfield will be torn apart. 

Well we haven't played that way yet so let's see.

[Delphinho123]

Just now, DCJonah said:

Well we haven't played that way yet so let's see.

Fair. Fair. Hopefully we can make it work.

[TRO]

20 minutes ago, Delphinho123 said:

I agree Ings is better than Tammy but I don’t see a how we can fit Ings and Watkins in the same team without playing one out of position. 

I disagree,

Ollie leads the line, he presses and makes runs, Danny is more of a link player, reads the play very well, arrives in dangerous positions ( when a team is functioning properly) and is clinical at goal scoring.....Danny will most likely drop a tad deeper, but for me they will work out between them a partnership.

However, this is where, I think we have an issue.....our midfielders are not quite good enough to play a 2 in the centre, so we play a 3....If we do that, we can only play with one winger.

Hence my enthusiasm to get a top class central midfileder in.

We played with one winger, in our Halcyon days, with Morley switching flanks and Shaw & Withe playing in close proximity of each other, playing off each other....so I think it can be done.

I don't see a problem with us playing that way now......for me, Playing with one striker or a false 9 is temporary.....its not sustainable over a season....The centre forward role is probably the most demanding in a football team, they need help, the odd few games is ok, but not permanent....I think Ollie last season, worked wonders, but we don't want to kill the lad.