AndyM3000 Posted October 16, 2021 Share Posted October 16, 2021 Said it during pre-season and I'm still saying it now. We didn't need a Danny Ings despite how good he is, he can't play with Watkins and it's going to damage his development and our style of play when we try and cram them into a team together. No point having two good strikers on the pitch when we can't then get our creative players on and create chances. Once Bailey/Traore are back one of them has to be benched. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
M_Afro Posted October 16, 2021 Share Posted October 16, 2021 Ollie looks like a man who needs a break. He is a new dad and maybe that is taking it’s toll on him. He has plenty of credit in the bank in my view. Let him have a break and see what happens. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted October 16, 2021 Share Posted October 16, 2021 25 minutes ago, AndyM3000 said: Said it during pre-season and I'm still saying it now. We didn't need a Danny Ings despite how good he is, he can't play with Watkins and it's going to damage his development and our style of play when we try and cram them into a team together. No point having two good strikers on the pitch when we can't then get our creative players on and create chances. Once Bailey/Traore are back one of them has to be benched. That maybe the case but while Bailey is injured and Buendia and Traore are only just coming back from injury, Smith hasn’t really had a choice. Even Ollie was injured the first few games and looked a bit off since. Thank god we brought Ings. Interesting to see who plays and what formation when all are fit. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HalfTimePost Posted October 16, 2021 Share Posted October 16, 2021 Yeah it's a weird one. On one hand the WatkIngs trial is not going well and seems to be harming Ollies development and our overall style and performances. That said. Can you imagine where we would be at the moment without Danny Ings' 5 League Goal involvements so far this year? Considering Bailey, Buendia, Bertrand and Bidace's injuries/missing games it's not like we could easily have fielded a 443 or 4231. We'd have been 442/352 anyway but with Wesley or just Archer (with a lot more pressure on him) Instead. Easy to say it's not working and needs to be dropped (I agree) but questioning the signing of Ings altogether is a tough one. Seemingly, yes it was a panic buy that is hurting us a bit. But also, maybe we were right to panic and then try and dress it up as a 'plan to replace Jack with Buendia, Ings and Bailey' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Ingram85 Posted October 16, 2021 Popular Post Share Posted October 16, 2021 People are really justifying Watkins crap season so far by blaming the other striker who is actually scoring some goals?! Ok. 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Delphinho123 Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 7 hours ago, AndyM3000 said: Said it during pre-season and I'm still saying it now. We didn't need a Danny Ings despite how good he is, he can't play with Watkins and it's going to damage his development and our style of play when we try and cram them into a team together. No point having two good strikers on the pitch when we can't then get our creative players on and create chances. Once Bailey/Traore are back one of them has to be benched. This. I feel dirty saying this but the Ings signing felt like something to placate the fans having lost Grealish. I’m not sure there was a plan behind it at all. Stunk of a panic signing. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villalad21 Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 3 minutes ago, Delphinho123 said: This. I feel dirty saying this but the Ings signing felt like something to placate the fans having lost Grealish. I’m not sure there was a plan behind it at all. Stunk of a panic signing. But now that he's here Smith shouldn't shoehorn him in. I will always. Always disagree with managers adapting to players. Players should adapt to the manager. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyp102 Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 Wasn’t at the races, looked to take a knock as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hippo Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 1 hour ago, Delphinho123 said: This. I feel dirty saying this but the Ings signing felt like something to placate the fans having lost Grealish. I’m not sure there was a plan behind it at all. Stunk of a panic signing. I can't see any argument to suggest otherwise. We lost a superstar and wanted another "name" any strategy went out the window. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Davkaus Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 8 hours ago, HalfTimePost said: Yeah it's a weird one. On one hand the WatkIngs trial is not going well and seems to be harming Ollies development and our overall style and performances. That said. Can you imagine where we would be at the moment without Danny Ings' 5 League Goal involvements so far this year? Nail on the head. I'm not sure it was a great signing, and the 2 up top isn't working, but one of them needs to be dropped, and it isn't Ings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 I rate Watkins as a player and on top form he is such an asset to us as he proved that frequently last season. But he is really off his game at the moment and we can't afford to carry attacking players particuarly when we're starting with a back 5. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eastie Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 2 hours ago, Davkaus said: Nail on the head. I'm not sure it was a great signing, and the 2 up top isn't working, but one of them needs to be dropped, and it isn't Ings. Exactly watkins should be back up striker to ings or wide left as he was at brentford Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Panto_Villan Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 I like Ollie but he shouldn't be on the pitch over Ings at the moment. Ings has been way better this season. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 Somebody said to me yesterday that the reason they thought the Watkins/Ings wasn’t working is due to Watkins being so off form. I wasn’t quite convinced but they said he’s struggling with his connection with most players at the moment but obviously the focus is on Ings and him, and Watkins link with other players gets missed. I did notice some of it during the game then as well. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodders0223 Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 12 hours ago, AndyM3000 said: Said it during pre-season and I'm still saying it now. We didn't need a Danny Ings despite how good he is, he can't play with Watkins and it's going to damage his development and our style of play when we try and cram them into a team together. No point having two good strikers on the pitch when we can't then get our creative players on and create chances. Once Bailey/Traore are back one of them has to be benched. We needed Ings because of Watkins lack of form now. Options and competition. I love the bloke and you can talk about systems and partnerships...the simple fact he is he couldn't trap a bag of cement or make a 5 yard pass yesterday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YLN Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 39 minutes ago, Brumstopdogs said: Nonsense stat. Does the number of pressures in a game not depend on what the opposition is doing and how much of the ball each team have. Liverpool probably didn't have that many pressures on Watford yesterday Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndyM3000 Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 Just now, rodders0223 said: We needed Ings because of Watkins lack of form now. Options and competition. I love the bloke and you can talk about systems and partnerships...the simple fact he is he couldn't trap a bag of cement or make a 5 yard pass yesterday. I agree we needed a striker or ideally a winger who can play up front. Like a Jota/Rashford/Son type. I like Ramsey and Nakamba so nothing against them but if we wanted to try and challenge the top 8 places this season then they shouldn't be getting many minutes. The money we spent on Ings could have been spent on a midfielder, we aren't in a position to have 2 x 30m forwards and put one of them on the bench, which is why Smith is trying to cram them in together. With our injuries I don't think he's had much option so far but time will tell if he continues with this when everyone is fit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DCJonah Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 Watkins at times looks such a technically poor player. I don't think it's the formation with him. Playing as a front two shouldn't impact on your ability to control and pass a ball. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brumstopdogs Posted October 17, 2021 Share Posted October 17, 2021 57 minutes ago, YLN said: Nonsense stat. Does the number of pressures in a game not depend on what the opposition is doing and how much of the ball each team have. Liverpool probably didn't have that many pressures on Watford yesterday Wouldn't just dismiss things so easily but, yes, overall performance can be impacted by what the opposition does and how much of the ball each team has. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts