Jump to content

Danny Ings


HalfTimePost

Recommended Posts

Just now, cheltenham_villa said:

Do you think he's better than Archer right now?

I'm really not sure. 

Ings seem so slow moving and unfit to me. And it's not just last game. It's all season. 

We seem to be playing better as team without him and I think he is just aging very badly. Similar to Rooney.

As I've said I think his better days are well past him. 

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, villalad21 said:

I'm really not sure. 

Ings seem so slow moving and unfit to me. And it's not just last game. It's all season. 

We seem to be playing better as team without him and I think he is just aging very badly. Similar to Rooney.

As I've said I think his better days are well past him. 

We've signed an almost 1 in 2 goal striker since his move to Southampton who has played about 6 full games for us and you've been able to come to those conclusions how exactly?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, villalad21 said:

I'm really not sure. 

Ings seem so slow moving and unfit to me. And it's not just last game. It's all season. 

We seem to be playing better as team without him and I think he is just aging very badly. Similar to Rooney.

As I've said I think his better days are well past him. 

Understood. I can definitely see that transition happening but personally feel that given the right time in the team and the right system he would be a far better option.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, villalad21 said:

Ings seem so slow moving and unfit to me. And it's not just last game. It's all season. 

You can literally say the exact same about Ollie.  He’s looked less mobile and unfit all season.  Both have fortunately scored goals for us.

2 hours ago, villalad21 said:

I think he is just aging very badly.

Wow…just nope!

2 hours ago, villalad21 said:

As I've said I think his better days are well past him.

He’s 29 not 33.  I think you are well off mark here. It’ll be nice to see Ings under Gerrard now he’s getting his fitness back the last few games after being out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, nick76 said:

You can literally say the exact same about Ollie.  He’s looked less mobile and unfit all season.  Both have fortunately scored goals for us.

Wow…just nope!

He’s 29 not 33.  I think you are well off mark here. It’ll be nice to see Ings under Gerrard now he’s getting his fitness back the last few games after being out.

29 is old in footballing terms.

And some age worse than others.

Ings just seem way off the pace, and as I've said we seem to be playing better without him in the team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

29 is old in footballing terms.

And some age worse than others.

Ings just seem way off the pace, and as I've said we seem to be playing better without him in the team.

Have you actually watched him in person this season?

Prior to his injury, I was hugely impressed with his work off the ball, his running and pressing. He’s had a lay off and is returning to fitness in a system that might not exactly suit him. He will score plenty more for us.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, villalad21 said:

29 is old in footballing terms.

And some age worse than others.

Ings just seem way off the pace, and as I've said we seem to be playing better without him in the team.

29 is not old in footballing terms.

Ings isn’t off the pace. He had 3 goals in 9 appearances before Gerrard came and hasn’t been fully fit since and missed a number of games because of it.

We seem to be playing better because we have a new manager, all our players looked crap for 5 games at least beforehand in those 5 losses.  Gerrard has come in and they all look different players, we haven’t seen Ings in that yet because he’s been out injured and like Gerrard said he wanted Ings to get 30 minutes fitness against Norwich.  Gerrard hasn’t had Ings really to play with since he’s come so your point seem very premature.

Also criticising Ings when Ollie has been poor most of the season as well, defeats your point. Thankfully both have scored goals despite their performances with Ings at 1 goal every 291 minutes and Ollie at 1 goal every 254 minutes, with Ings getting more assists.  Both good pressing strikers, Ollie generally has more mobility but Ings generally a better finisher.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

35 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

29 is old in footballing terms.

And some age worse than others.

Ings just seem way off the pace, and as I've said we seem to be playing better without him in the team.

This is a bad, completely uninformed take. 29 is the athletic prime for most sports outside of maybe American football. Even their you have athlete's who are performing at a high level well into their late 30s. 

Now it's true as you enter your late 20s your body needs a little more care. Gotta cut out the late night ragers and fast food. You do that and you can absolutely perform at high level well into your 30s. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, villalad21 said:

29 is old in footballing terms.

And some age worse than others.

Ings just seem way off the pace, and as I've said we seem to be playing better without him in the team.

Lewandowski. Salah, De Bruyne, Mane, Ronaldo, Messi are all 29 or older

In the Ballon Dor only 2 players in the top 10 were under 29 and they came 9th and 10th

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, Zatman said:

Lewandowski. Salah, De Bruyne, Mane, Ronaldo, Messi are all 29 or older

In the Ballon Dor only 2 players in the top 10 were under 29 and they came 9th and 10th

Messi and Ronaldo was better in their early to mid 20's

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not just about us wanting to keep Ings, it's about whether he's happy to be a backup player to Watkins, because unlike under Smith that will be his role with Gerrard as manager. Ings is a good goal scorer, but he's not so good that he's worth unbalancing our attack to fit him into the same team as Watkins.

People were arguing against us signing Abraham, with the logic that he wouldn't want to sit on our bench and there's no way to fit him into our side unless we drop Watkins, well that's pretty much the same situation we have now DI20.

Off course ideally it would be good to be able to keep him as an option to come on whenever Watkins is sadly crocked or suspended or to come on when we need a goal in games, but Ings himself might not want that role, he won't have signed for us with that in mind, and given the money we paid for him, both in terms of wages and transfer fee, we wouldn't have signed him with that in mind either, so the club might have to make a financial decision on whether it's best to keep him or not as well

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Imagine Watkins, Archer, Davis or Wesley scoring that overhead kick. He's comfortably better than our other forwards and needs a run in our new look team, preferably without Watkins losing the ball between his feet as a #10.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, villalad21 said:

I'm really not sure. 

Ings seem so slow moving and unfit to me. And it's not just last game. It's all season. 

We seem to be playing better as team without him and I think he is just aging very badly. Similar to Rooney.

As I've said I think his better days are well past him. 

The same bloke who was being lauded for his work rate, all round game and acrobatic goal when we just signed him? 🤔

I might agree with you on the " seem to be playing better as a team without him " part but there are so many other variables to that!

The rest seems like hyperbole to drive home effect if I'm honest.

Edited by JAMAICAN-VILLAN
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...
Â