DCJonah Posted January 15, 2022 Share Posted January 15, 2022 In hindsight, we'd have been better off not signing him and the CF position could have been a priority signing in the summer. Because of the money invested in Watkins and Ings, I can't see us investing much in this area. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted January 15, 2022 Share Posted January 15, 2022 6 minutes ago, jimmygreaves said: It's true, I'm not a fan of players who don't perform the basic requirement of working hard. But he does. I was in the Holte watching him chasing things down, making movements but things weren’t being created for him (or Ollie to be fair). 7 minutes ago, jimmygreaves said: If Ings was this master finisher, as is being declared Our xG this season is really poor which answers this, he’s not been given service 8 minutes ago, jimmygreaves said: and he coupled it with something approaching a work ethic Did he have better pressing stats than Ollie not so long ago, I’m not sure what the latest stats are but I’m guessing at worst he’s probably on about par with Ollie if not better 9 minutes ago, jimmygreaves said: Alas, the more I watch him the more I'm pursueded that he's got his big payday transfer and that's enough. Ok, sure! Bizarre! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nick76 Posted January 15, 2022 Share Posted January 15, 2022 4 minutes ago, DCJonah said: In hindsight, we'd have been better off not signing him and the CF position could have been a priority signing in the summer. Because of the money invested in Watkins and Ings, I can't see us investing much in this area. I can’t agree mate, we desperately needed another striker. Ollie even got injured for the first few games and he’s also been way off form so we needed another quality striker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoony Posted January 15, 2022 Share Posted January 15, 2022 Genuinely didn’t even see him on camera today. I’d play him over Watkins to see what we can do with our new creative outlets but that’s ONLY because all Watkins can do is run, fall over and end attacking opportunities. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post Spoony Posted January 15, 2022 Popular Post Share Posted January 15, 2022 2 hours ago, villanmac said: He's played 4 games without Watkins?... Watford, Newcastle, Brentford, Norwich and he's got 3 goals in 4, admittedly thats v weak teams and one was a pen but I'd want to see him up top with Coutinho and Buendia behind before judging him. He's gone from a perfect strike partner in terms of awareness unselfishness and link up play in Che Adams to a nightmare one in Watkins who doesn't have that ability at all. A thousand million percent this 7 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sheepyvillian Posted January 16, 2022 Share Posted January 16, 2022 I really don't think the signing of Ings is going to be what we hoped for. It's just not clicking for him. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nepal_villan Posted January 16, 2022 Share Posted January 16, 2022 Sounds cliché, but I trust SG on this. He'll sort it out quickly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TomC Posted January 16, 2022 Share Posted January 16, 2022 I would take last year's Watkins over Ings, but I will take Ings over this year's Watkins, at least for a run of 5-6 matches to see how it goes. Watkins is great at holding up the ball and pressing, but his passing isn't there right now. Ings reads Buendia much better and will probably read Coutinho better. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
abdulaziz1 Posted January 16, 2022 Share Posted January 16, 2022 7 hours ago, DCJonah said: In hindsight, we'd have been better off not signing him and the CF position could have been a priority signing in the summer. Because of the money invested in Watkins and Ings, I can't see us investing much in this area. Easy, sell Watkins (as he’s the one that’s going to get us the money) and get a proper all round striker. With Ings as the reliable backup. Archer for the squad. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoony Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 On 16/01/2022 at 00:43, abdulaziz1 said: Easy, sell Watkins (as he’s the one that’s going to get us the money) and get a proper all round striker. With Ings as the reliable backup. Archer for the squad. Agree with this. Now that we are linked with Suarez everyone seems so quick to want to sack of Ings. Why??? He’s only 29, he’s a proven goal scorer and I think he has loads to give. He’s had a bit of a shitty start admittedly but he deserves a chance like any other signing. I’d rather give Ings a chance than sign Oldy McBitey Teeth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoony Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 I think the lack of posts in this thread is quite telling (most of them are from me!). Did the total lack of fanfare not help his cause? We signed him completely out of the blue, it was shadowed by Grealish leaving, there was barely any coverage or him after he signed, he seems to generally avoid the media and he has unfortunately been totally anonymous on the pitch. It’s like he’s not even a Villa player. He is quality so I’d hate for him to be written off so quickly but the fit just doesn’t seem to be there does it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Demitri_C Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 Ings looked really good when watkins wasnt in the team. Watkins is on some really poor form. For me he would be the one dropped. Seems to be suffering second season syndrome 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WallisFrizz Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 59 minutes ago, Spoony said: I think the lack of posts in this thread is quite telling (most of them are from me!). Did the total lack of fanfare not help his cause? We signed him completely out of the blue, it was shadowed by Grealish leaving, there was barely any coverage or him after he signed, he seems to generally avoid the media and he has unfortunately been totally anonymous on the pitch. It’s like he’s not even a Villa player. He is quality so I’d hate for him to be written off so quickly but the fit just doesn’t seem to be there does it. You’re last sentence sums up how things are at the moment. He’s been talked about loads in other threads but everyone goes round in circles. We appear to have signed him in a panic over the Grealish departure with no real plan how to use him or if there was a plan it quickly became apparent it didn’t work unless Ollie was out. We’ve now got one of our highest earners either forced into the side to the detriment of both strikers or he sits on the bench. And it might have prompted Ollie to think about moving (although if rumours are true Arsenal are interested, I think he’d look to leave anyway and we’d accept a bumper fee). I like Danny Ings and I hope the move works out for him but I don’t think we play enough games to keep all our strikers happy (I mean what’s the plan with Cameron Archer?) and I kind of agree that noises re a Suarez summer move would suggest that one of them is on the move in the summer and I would suspect that would be Ings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WallisFrizz Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 11 minutes ago, Demitri_C said: Ings looked really good when watkins wasnt in the team. I’d also agree with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 On 15/01/2022 at 22:29, DCJonah said: In hindsight, we'd have been better off not signing him and the CF position could have been a priority signing in the summer. Because of the money invested in Watkins and Ings, I can't see us investing much in this area. I think without hindsight...no one could see where he fitted in under Smith. Never suited the formation and it was very ugly when we tried 352 to get them both on the pitch. Not a similar player to Watkins at all so it didn't even make sense to come in as a back-up, they aren't interchangeable players. There's actually a better chance he'll have some success now with two proper 10s behind him. He could oust Watkins if he can put away a few chances. As of right now, it was a very silly signing. I generally don't like the move we've made in our last three major signings clearly just been named by Purslow or the manager and not coming through the recruitment team. I hope it's not too frequent, it's asking for trouble. What's good is I think Gerrard is too sensible to do it long-term. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 It’s starting to look like this was a high profile signing to cushion the blow of losing Grealish rather than considering what the squad needed. Watkins was excellent last season and whilst he needed cover we probably didn’t need an expensive striker that the coach is then obliged to play. As for playing them both together ? I only think it’s happening because of injuries and fitness of players. Once Coutinho is up to speed and Bailey/Traore are back I doubt we’ll see them both together again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WallisFrizz Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 1 minute ago, Tomaszk said: I generally don't like the move we've made in our last three major signings clearly just been named by Purslow or the manager and not coming through the recruitment team. I hope it's not too frequent, it's asking for trouble. What's good is I think Gerrard is too sensible to do it long-term. Danny Ings was random. Countinho was commercial and I think we’ve done a good deal with the reduced wages, loan audition period and option to buy -it’s low risk and Lucas Digne is a quality signing for a position we need to upgrade when an opportunity presented itself - I think the recruitment team would have been fully behind that one. Ings was definitely the panic purchase made when the club was having a mini meltdown a week or so before the season started. However he’s far from a disaster and I still think he’ll get some important goals for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vive_La_Villa Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 I think the way the club dealt with this signing showed the owners intent and how much they care about the clubs profile. It was important to announce something the week we had no choice but to sell our star player. Ings may not have worked out as we all wanted but I still think it was a good move by the club at the time. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lord Willard Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 Ings is definitely a more clinical finisher and more intelligent runner off the ball. Has to start over Watkins for me. Watkins is quicker and harder working (not that Ings doesn't work hard) but link up play and passing is pretty poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tomaszk Posted January 19, 2022 Share Posted January 19, 2022 21 minutes ago, Lord Willard said: Ings is definitely a more clinical finisher and more intelligent runner off the ball. Agree. 21 minutes ago, Lord Willard said: Has to start over Watkins for me. I think Ings will work better off the bench still. I don't think we're dominant enough on the ball from the off in games to do without the Watkins out ball. 21 minutes ago, Lord Willard said: Watkins is quicker and harder working (not that Ings doesn't work hard) but link up play and passing is pretty poor. Agree. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts