Jump to content

Danny Ings


HalfTimePost
 Share

Recommended Posts

11 minutes ago, villalad21 said:

I don't care about Ings feeling.

I want to play the best team and the best system and Ings is not better than Watkins for me.

I’ll put it another way, Ings wasn’t signed to sit on the bench. Whether that’s good for the team we don’t know yet. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, jim said:

I’ll put it another way, Ings wasn’t signed to sit on the bench. Whether that’s good for the team we don’t know yet. 

Well he either have to bench one of them or play an unfavorable system.

We know our midfielders aren't strong enough to get away with playing in a 2.

Look how poor we looked against Watford in a 2 and look how good we looked against Chelsea in a 3. It's so blatantly obvious to see what system we need to play.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On balance, I think it's unlikely we choose to spend £30m on a bench warmer, and equally unlikely we signed a player without considering what we wanted them for.

A single game against the european champions might not necessarily be giving the system a fair chance.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

On balance, I think it's unlikely we choose to spend £30m on a bench warmer, and equally unlikely we signed a player without considering what we wanted them for.

A single game against the european champions might not necessarily be giving the system a fair chance.

That is true. But if you follow your logic, in this system we played yesterday there's no place for Buendia and Bailey. 

So did we sign THEM to be bench warmers?

When everyone is fit, one of new signings will need to be benched unless we play some sort of 4-4-2 formation. And I see us stronger with 3 in midfield. For me, personally, Ings would be the one to bench.

Edited by Czarnikjak
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites


1 hour ago, Davkaus said:

On balance, I think it's unlikely we choose to spend £30m on a bench warmer, and equally unlikely we signed a player without considering what we wanted them for.

A single game against the european champions might not necessarily be giving the system a fair chance.

 

Exactly. Hard to see the club as it's  run today making a big decision like that without some thought.

And are we likely to play multiple systems depending on injury/oppsition/form? Yesterday worked well first half at least it seems,  but wouldn't want to play that formation against, say, Norwich at home. Could see Ings, Watkins +1 as a fluid front three. Harder to see both  in  4231, but then we have better options and depth on the wings, so it's not a bad thing if one had to drop out. 

Also allows us a lot more

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Strange opinions here.

Ings didn't have his best games, he didn't really get any chances and thats all he needs.

Looking at it realistically though he was playing with a new striker, in a team with a changed formation from usual, against the European Champions. He's done great in the last 3 games and he will be a huge asset to us this season alongside Watkins.

I actually think first half Watkins and Ings linked up very well at times.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/09/2021 at 12:41, Czarnikjak said:

That is true. But if you follow your logic, in this system we played yesterday there's no place for Buendia and Bailey. 

So did we sign THEM to be bench warmers?

When everyone is fit, one of new signings will need to be benched unless we play some sort of 4-4-2 formation. And I see us stronger with 3 in midfield. For me, personally, Ings would be the one to bench.

This. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


8 minutes ago, PussEKatt said:

Are you sure Ings even player on Saturday ?

I cant remember seeing him doing much.

Was totally shut out by the Chelsea defence. 

But the benefit of this was the space and opportunities consequently afforded to Ollie Watkins. 

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Talldarkandransome said:

Most of the last few seasons people moaned that we didn't have a plan b.

Now we have those few extra players to enable a plan b or even c they are now moaning about having paid lots of money for bench warmers.

Honestly, some of the comments on here make me wonder what the point of everything is

 

Well yes eventually the ice caps will melt and we will all be dust.

In the meantime I will continue to waste most of my spare time watching millionaires contractually obliged to follow a ball around a football pitch.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/09/2021 at 13:09, Davkaus said:

On balance, I think it's unlikely we choose to spend £30m on a bench warmer, and equally unlikely we signed a player without considering what we wanted them for.

A single game against the european champions might not necessarily be giving the system a fair chance.

On one hand, I agree with you, on the other, I think, as we progress, so will our bench, in both quality and value.

We simply have to do what's best for the team and opposition we are playing.

Watkins is a better all rounder for me, and crucial to how we play, Ings is lethal on goal, I'm not sure how we find the balance, and how we keep both happy.

People are also dead set against Ollie being wider ( Even though he seems to often drift anyway ), so it's difficult. However the other way to accommodate both would be to do the Liverpool system of basically 3 " forwards ". Bailey left, Ings central, Ollie right? Or some kind of system where Ollie plays slightly deeper, or vice versa.

Having a couple of good, slightly disgruntled players on the bench, is seeming increasingly unavoidable.

 

Edited by JAMAICAN-VILLAN
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can see Ings ending up being our new Barkley. 

His goals aside I've not been impressed with his general play, at all. 

Against Chelsea he ghosted. 

Playing Ollie alone up top is the obvious thing to do right now. 

I'm not writing Ings off I just get a bad feeling about that signing. I don't think he suit how we play. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


49 minutes ago, JAMAICAN-VILLAN said:

On one hand, I agree with you, on the other, I think, as we progress, so will our bench, in both quality and value.

We simply have to do what's best for the team and opposition we are playing.

Watkins is a better all rounder for me, and crucial to how we play, Ings is lethal on goal, I'm not sure how we find the balance, and how we keep both happy.

People are also dead set against Ollie being wider ( Even though he seems to often drift anyway ), so it's difficult. However the other way to accommodate both would be to do the Liverpool system of basically 3 " forwards ". Bailey left, Ings central, Buendia right? Or some kind of system where Ollie plays slightly deeper, or vice versa.

Having a couple of good, slightly disgruntled players on the bench, is seeming increasingly unavoidable.

 

That’s absolutely right, without a quality bench we have no options and won’t progress. Chelsea started the game on Saturday with 5 European Cup Final players on the bench. If we want to eventually compete at the top we have to think that way. I think the club know this, just some of the fans that need to get up to speed. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/09/2021 at 16:25, alreadyexists said:

Controversy for controversy’s sake.

 

Also, I’m at Leamington Food Festival and I think I just saw him. Didn’t have the balls to say anything, but 99% sure it was him.

On his own  or in the pocket behind Watkins?

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of use Terms of Use, Cookies We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.

Â