Danny Ings

[Laughable Chimp]

45 minutes ago, useless said:

Wilson wasn't 'shit' for Bournemouth, even in his final season he scored eight goals and assisted three, his first season with Newcastle he scored twelve and provided six assists in 29 appearances, and has already scored six in fifteen appearances this season, it was obvious he was a decent goalscorer despite what was being written on here when he was linked with us.

Also not so sure if Ings had a great season last season, his goal tally makes it look like he did, but I remember going on a Southampton forum last season before we were linked with us, and the overwhelming opinion seemed to be that they weren't impressed with him and seemed to think he'd 'downed tools' because he wanted a move. I think most were happy to see him sold when they realized how much we were going to pay for him.

I'm not saying that Wilson is better than Ings, just they have very similar goal scoring records and are similar in terms injuries as well, they're also similar type of players in the sense that primarily they're both goal poachers, or players that do their best work inside the box.

8 goals and 3 assists is pretty shit considering he started almost every game for Bournemouth that season. His goal return was between 1 in 4.5 games. That's a shit return for any main striker.

What does him doing well with Newcastle after have to do with anything? The point is that he had been coming off a poor season which is why people were understandably not keen on him. Ings record in the 2 seasons before coming to us was definitely better than Wilson's form the 2 seasons prior to that summer.

 

I actually kind of agree that Ings wasn't that good last season. He had a monster season prior to that and followed it up with a solid but unspectacular season. Hence why when people bring up his prior achievements, they're always somehow including his form from 2 seasons ago. For example, second most non penalty goals scored in the PL in the past 2 seasons.

 

 

 

 

Edited January 1, 2022 by Laughable Chimp

[useless]

What does Wilson doing well at Newcastle have to do with anything? Well it proves that those that were saying he was 'shit' when we were linked were wrong, if you're going to ask that then you could equally ask what does Ings doing well at Southampton two seasons ago have to do with anything, you only want to count Wilson's 'poor' final season with Bournemouth, but when it comes to Ings want to count his final two seasons, he wasn't anywhere near as good last season for Southamton as he was the season before, that wonderful 19/20 season has been a one off in his career.

My point isn't that Wilson and Ings are good or bad players, one thinks they're both decent goal scorers, and as long as he's happy in that role then Ings will be a good bench option for us, for if Watkins ever gets injured we will be surely grateful to have him as back up, just that they're very similar, so I didn't really understand the difference in reception to the two links.

'so I didn't really understand the difference in reception to the two links'... ... I think part of it might be that people got it into their heads that Ings can play as a No.10, I'm not sure why, he only ever played anywhere other than as centre-forward for the Saints because they had no other options, but basically I think this idea might have lead people to think that perhaps he's better all round player than he actually he is, yes he's technically very good, but that doesn't always translate to a player that can play as a playmaker, in ings case he uses his technical ability mostly to help him score goals, which is fine, he's good at what he's good at, scoring goals, so as long as we don't try and shoe-horn he and Watkins into the same team he will be a good option whilst he's here.

[Laughable Chimp]

24 minutes ago, useless said:

What does Wilson doing well at Newcastle have to do with anything? Well it proves that those that were saying he was 'shit' when we were linked were wrong, if you're going to ask that then you could equally ask what does Ings doing well at Southampton two seasons ago have to do with anything, you only want to count Wilson's 'poor' final season with Bournemouth, but when it comes to Ings want to count his final two seasons, he wasn't anywhere near as good last season for Southamton as he was the season before, that wonderful 19/20 season has been a one off in his career.

My point isn't that Wilson and Ings are good or bad players, one thinks they're both decent goal scorers, and as long as he's happy in that role then Ings will be a good bench option for us, for if Watkins ever gets injured we will be surely grateful to have him as back up, just that they're very similar, so I didn't really understand the difference in reception to the two links.

'so I didn't really understand the difference in reception to the two links'... ... I think part of it might be that people got it into their heads that Ings can play as a No.10, I'm not sure why, he only ever played anywhere other than as centre-forward for the Saints because they had no other options, but basically I think this idea might have lead people to think that perhaps he's better all round player than he actually he is, yes he's technically very good, but that doesn't always translate to a player that can play as a playmaker, in ings case he uses his technical ability mostly to help him score goals, which is fine, he's good at what he's good at, scoring goals, so as long as we don't try and shoe-horn he and Watkins into the same team he will be a good option whilst he's here.

 

What does Wilson doing well at Newcastle have to do with anything? Well it proves that those that were saying he was 'shit' when we were linked were wrong,

Yes, these people were wrong about Wilson. How is that relevant though? We're arguing whether it was understandable for people to not to be as keen on Wilson as they were on Ings. His post Bournemouth form is irrelevant because that was not the period in which there was any chance of Wilson joining us. The people who are dismissing Wilson were dismissing him purely for his recent Bournemouth form, not his future Newcastle form.

 

if you're going to ask that then you could equally ask what does Ings doing well at Southampton two seasons ago have to do with anything, you only want to count Wilson's 'poor' final season with Bournemouth, but when it comes to Ings want to count his final two seasons, he wasn't anywhere near as good last season for Southamton as he was the season before, that wonderful 19/20 season has been a one off in his career.

I'm not applying 2 different standards here. Regardless, you could look at the previous season or the previous 2 seasons for both players, Ings still has the better form either way. 19/20 and 20/21 Ings is better than 18/19 and 19/20 Wilson. Purely 20/21 Ings is better than purely 19/20 Wilson. Hence, the difference in the receptions toward links for both players.

 

 

 

Edited January 1, 2022 by Laughable Chimp

[useless]

It wasn't just that people were little less keen on one over the other, if it was as simple as that then I could have understood people having a slight preference for Ings. When we were linked with Wilson that link was met by many with vitriol and anger, and people constantly insisting how rubbish he was, whereas the Ings signing was met with the total opposite reaction, people were reacting if we had signed one of the best players in the league and it was a sign of how far we'd come - my point isn't that those things aren't true, just that the extent to the difference in reaction to the Ings and Wilson links don't make sense looking back.

It's not even as if Ings was massively better in his final season with Southampton than Wilson was in his final season with Bournemouth, Ings scored four more goals, he scored in ten games, whereas Wilson scored in seven seperate games, also bearing in mind Wilson was playing in a team that were struggling far more than Southampton were last season, for example if you'd have put Ings in that Bournemouth team that were relegated then I doubt he would have done much better than Wilson did, and by the same token if you'd have put Wilson in Southampton's team last season I'm sure he would have got close to Ings' twelve goals.

[VillaChris]

Main issue with Ings is how mediocre he is pressing.

I mean he played for a few years under Hasenhuttl who demands that from his forwards so I was expecting him to be as energetic as Ollie generally has been for us off the ball but Ings has been on the fringes of that and so many games he's barely made an impact.

Strange he didn't look that good in a two with Ollie either, last season he played a decent number of games alongside Che Adams who'd do plenty of the running and going back 6-7 years he played in a two at Burnley in the prem as Dyche always plays 4-4-2.

His record really isn't good at all. 3 goals in 15 games. One was last minute penalty at Watford (game he made little impact in), second was that great strike v Newcastle but no forward can score that sort of goal regularly so really that close range header v Wolves is only typical goal you'd expect so far.

I do think he's trying but simply has a feel of another big money striker signing who just isn't going to work out for us in the long run. At least this time we shouldn't be making massive loss on him compared to Hogan  and McCormack in recent times, Brighton would pay 15-20m as that's exactly the type they lack in final third.

Despite Gerrard being with him at Liverpool I do think in six months he'll be ruthless and realise Ings simply isn't the correct fit for us. Very similar to when we signed Darren Bent 2-3 years too late.

[VillaChris]

10 hours ago, useless said:

It wasn't just that people were little less keen on one over the other, if it was as simple as that then I could have understood people having a slight preference for Ings. When we were linked with Wilson that link was met by many with vitriol and anger, and people constantly insisting how rubbish he was, whereas the Ings signing was met with the total opposite reaction, people were reacting if we had signed one of the best players in the league and it was a sign of how far we'd come - my point isn't that those things aren't true, just that the extent to the difference in reaction to the Ings and Wilson links don't make sense looking back.

It's not even as if Ings was massively better in his final season with Southampton than Wilson was in his final season with Bournemouth, Ings scored four more goals, he scored in ten games, whereas Wilson scored in seven seperate games, also bearing in mind Wilson was playing in a team that were struggling far more than Southampton were last season, for example if you'd have put Ings in that Bournemouth team that were relegated then I doubt he would have done much better than Wilson did, and by the same token if you'd have put Wilson in Southampton's team last season I'm sure he would have got close to Ings' twelve goals.

Yeah I didn't get the Wilson criticism either. IIRC loads were pointing out he regularly got injured even though he'd actually average 30 games or so in his last two seasons at Bournemouth.

Ings has probably a worse record considering he's had a couple of ACLs in last 5 years.

I think in the summer main idea was to get in someone who could play wide and also play CF when required hence links to that Alvarez guy who fitted the profile. Then Ings was signed completely out of the blue.

Eagerly awaiting the full story from the Athletic or another print on how we signed him as there were no links whatsoever in the days before he came in.

[useless]

The Athletic are reporting today that we will be seeing more of Watkins and Ings in the same team as the season goes on, could just be guesswork from them based on an assumption that we will have to find a way to keep them both happy, but Gerrard did sometimes play with Roofe and Morelos in the same team at Rangers.

[VillaChris]

5 minutes ago, useless said:

The Athletic are reporting today that we will be seeing more of Watkins and Ings in the same team as the season goes on, could just be guesswork from them based on an assumption that we will have to find a way to keep them both happy, but Gerrard did sometimes play with Roofe and Morelos in the same team at Rangers.

Hope not.

Just feels like fitting square pegs in round holes again which got DS into a real muddle and eventually meant he lost his job.

Our best general performances this season have been at Palace, Man. City (second half), Leicester and Norwich. Ings didn't feature in any of them. He also went off at 0-0 v Brighton.

Ollie hasn't had a brilliant season himself but his style at CF just suits what we need so much better and he has chipped in with goals recently so I'd prefer to continue the template of him leading the line with inverted 10s/advanced CMs as that has generally worked out well for us in last 18 months.

[useless]

I think it was probably just the Athletic guessing, I don't have a subscription, but from what I have seen, over the last year or so they seem to have become more clickbaity and speculative.

[villalad21]

58 minutes ago, VillaChris said:

Main issue with Ings is how mediocre he is pressing.

I mean he played for a few years under Hasenhuttl who demands that from his forwards so I was expecting him to be as energetic as Ollie generally has been for us off the ball but Ings has been on the fringes of that and so many games he's barely made an impact.

Strange he didn't look that good in a two with Ollie either, last season he played a decent number of games alongside Che Adams who'd do plenty of the running and going back 6-7 years he played in a two at Burnley in the prem as Dyche always plays 4-4-2.

His record really isn't good at all. 3 goals in 15 games. One was last minute penalty at Watford (game he made little impact in), second was that great strike v Newcastle but no forward can score that sort of goal regularly so really that close range header v Wolves is only typical goal you'd expect so far.

I do think he's trying but simply has a feel of another big money striker signing who just isn't going to work out for us in the long run. At least this time we shouldn't be making massive loss on him compared to Hogan  and McCormack in recent times, Brighton would pay 15-20m as that's exactly the type they lack in final third.

Despite Gerrard being with him at Liverpool I do think in six months he'll be ruthless and realise Ings simply isn't the correct fit for us. Very similar to when we signed Darren Bent 2-3 years too late.

His pressing numbers if you look at the stats are actually good.

But that's the problem with stats sometimes it can be very misleading.

Problem is he doesn't press with any intensity or pace required for it to be effective in us winning the ball higher up.

I'd like to think this lack of pace is a case of not being fully match fit yet but I'm afraid he is just coming off age.

Edited January 1, 2022 by villalad21

[nick76]

21 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

His pressing numbers if you look at the stats are actually good.

But that's the problem with stats sometimes it can be very misleading.

Or you may not want to believe them because you aren’t sure of him. His pressing is good, he’s out of form but he’s been working hard.  People dismiss stats when they don’t suit their argument/view and include them when it supports their argument.  We all do it.  Ings has good pressing stats which is a fact.  How people want to try and interpret them is an opinion.

Ings on the other hand hasn’t scored many goals but I view that as lack of service to him which has been poor, and I feel the same for Ollie.  Both out of form but they’ve lacked decent service all season. So that’s me looking at stats and dismissing them somewhat.

Ings is a great presser and stats back that up, he can still be out of form.  I don’t think his age is causing a problem because both Ollie and him have looked a yard slower this season.

[villalad21]

24 minutes ago, nick76 said:

Or you may not want to believe them because you aren’t sure of him. His pressing is good, he’s out of form but he’s been working hard.  People dismiss stats when they don’t suit their argument/view and include them when it supports their argument.  We all do it.  Ings has good pressing stats which is a fact.  How people want to try and interpret them is an opinion.

Ings on the other hand hasn’t scored many goals but I view that as lack of service to him which has been poor, and I feel the same for Ollie.  Both out of form but they’ve lacked decent service all season. So that’s me looking at stats and dismissing them somewhat.

Ings is a great presser and stats back that up, he can still be out of form.  I don’t think his age is causing a problem because both Ollie and him have looked a yard slower this season.

No I don't dismiss stats but the eye test is much more important to me when judging players.

A striker can score a goal and still have a crap game.

Context often get missed with these modern fans.

Edited January 1, 2022 by villalad21

[El-Reacho]

Pressing isn’t an individual attribute. Ings can press all he wants but if it’s not done as a team it’s a waste of energy and teams can easily move the ball up the field. Under Smith this season the pressing wasn’t working for whatever reason. Gerrard has got a system working sort of but Ings hasn’t really played a major part of it yet. There’s no reason why Ings and Watkins can’t work together if Gerrard and his team coach them well enough so when they press it’s as a team and not individuals.

[nick76]

4 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

No I don't dismiss stats but the eye test is much more important to me when judging players.

A striker can score a goal and still have a crap game.

Context often get missed with these modern fans.

oh I agree with that but that is also subjective.  Ollie has been poor all season apart from a few glimpses.  His decision making has been poor, his hold up play hasn’t been as good, his mobility has been less, he seems to be slightly slower and his team play weaker but he’s still scored 5 goals.  So yes scoring goals can make a player look better.  

A few people don’t think Ings presses well, I think he does and the stats prove that.  He does that but then doesn’t receive any goal scoring service in the box so then people think he’s poor.  

Fortunately we can see similarities between Ollie and Ings which to me shows it’s more than the individuals but the team, we aren’t creating chances for them, we don’t support the attacking third enough thus two quality attacking strikers are being made to look poor and it’s not all their fault.

[villalad21]

1 minute ago, nick76 said:

oh I agree with that but that is also subjective.  Ollie has been poor all season apart from a few glimpses.  His decision making has been poor, his hold up play hasn’t been as good, his mobility has been less, he seems to be slightly slower and his team play weaker but he’s still scored 5 goals.  So yes scoring goals can make a player look better.  

A few people don’t think Ings presses well, I think he does and the stats prove that.  He does that but then doesn’t receive any goal scoring service in the box so then people think he’s poor.  

Fortunately we can see similarities between Ollie and Ings which to me shows it’s more than the individuals but the team, we aren’t creating chances for them, we don’t support the attacking third enough thus two quality attacking strikers are being made to look poor and it’s not all their fault.

Ultimately Ollie is a lot more athletic and pacy than Ings and those are key ingredients in this league.

It's the same with Wilson. A name who has been brought up here. More powerful and athletic than Ings.

No one is saying Ings is a bad footballer but he just doesn't fit how we play.

Ings is more suited in a 2 striker system which is why I thought this signing wasn't well thought through.

[nick76]

4 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

Ultimately Ollie is a lot more athletic and pacy than Ings and those are key ingredients in this league.

It's the same with Wilson. A name who has been brought up here. More powerful and athletic than Ings.

No one is saying Ings is a bad footballer but he just doesn't fit how we play.

Ings is more suited in a 2 striker system which is why I thought this signing wasn't well thought through.

Not sure I agree, I think we need a presser and a clinical goal scorer. We just don’t create many goal scoring chances and need to be more clinical which isn’t Ollie.  Ings can take those chances and is a very good presser.  We just haven’t used either Ollie or Ings or both very well together yet this season.

I’m not going to engage on the Wilson discussion because it’s pointless.  We have two quality strikers that Gerrard likes and neither going anywhere in the near future, we need to utilise Ings finishing skills and we need to get Ollie back to the way he was last season.  He’s doing neither that on his own or as a pair with Ings. It seems the Ings/Watkins partnership will be given more tries and let’s see what happens.

I don’t think you can argue about whether Ings fits our play given we’ve had no Bailey or Traore and Buendia hasn’t fitted/settled yet.  Ings, like Ollie is a presser but our creative players haven’t been there yet so it’s hard to judge who fits.  I certainly think Ings fits our play when our creative players play as they can.  In fact in some ways is a better fit than Ollie because he can finish the chances they create at a higher percentage than Ollie.  As I’ve said before Ollie is a better for fit for certain types of games whereas Ings is a better fit for other types of games. 

[jimmygreaves]

Sorry, so far Ings flatters to deceive.... it's Ross Barkley all over again.

Hope something changes and performances improve but he's been anonymous for the majority of time he's been on the pitch.

[TRO]

On 31/12/2021 at 22:03, villabromsgrove said:

Ings is a very effective goal scoring "poacher". You have to balance criticism of his effectiveness for Villa with the very limited number of times we actually get into the opposition's box. If you look at the stats perhaps we should be criticising our ability to provide for a goal poacher rather than put the blame on the player himself.

fair point.

 

[TRO]

just one aspect is, the quality of our crossing, cannot be helping the front 2.

I am not particulary impressed by the crosses coming in to Danny or Ollie.

[villalad21]

9 hours ago, jimmygreaves said:

Sorry, so far Ings flatters to deceive.... it's Ross Barkley all over again.

Hope something changes and performances improve but he's been anonymous for the majority of time he's been on the pitch.

We're not in a position where we are able to carry a goal poacher.

We need our number 9 to be our focal point, and Hold the ball up.

Ings would benfit being in a 2 striker system like at Southampton. We're just not that club.

Just a bad fit.