Ollie Watkins

[brontebilly]

Good analysis of him by Troy the boy Deeney on MOTD2. Also highlighted the easy chance he could have served up for Ings to win the game.

What did Deeney think?

Very harsh criticism here, he scores that chance at end (excellent movement to get in the position to start with) and he's probably our man of the match. He never stopped running, hold up play was actually decent, movement was top quality throughout and never hid.

On the flip side, aswell as a dog awful first touch, he isn't a good striker of a ball either really. But I'd keep faith with him for Forest. Gerrard will probably revert to Ings/Watkins.

[Des Little]

How many times have we said 'if' with Watkins?  He misses way, way too many chances to change games.  He just isn't clinical enough.

[chrisw1]

His finishing is woeful.

I know all strikers miss chances, but this season and last it seems to have become ridiculous.  He's costing us points.

We'd definitely miss his work rate and running, but I don't see how we can carry a striker who seems so hoplessly out of form in front of goal.

[Risso]

Work rate and running are fairly easy to replace, you could probably choose from a dozen or so Championship level strikers and get that effort. What's missing almost completely from Watkins is finishing ability and composure in front of goal. He isn't good enough, and if we don't go big for a striker in January then we're going to continue to be lower mid table, whoever the manager is.

[Abbeyfealeavfc]

I'd rather have Ollie up front working his butt off and at least getting into scoring positions (as he's doing) than have our present incumbent as manager.
I'm guessing Ollie's confidence has been shot to pieces at BH under the clueless one. The Ollie that performed under Smith with end product is the one we need returning to our team and for me this may only happen when we have somebody different in charge. Keep working hard Ollie and the goals will return.

[Brend'Watkins]

He's not an instinctive striker at all. If the keeper does what a keeper should do to stop a shot that's on target Watkins will not score on those occasions as he doesn't have the instinct to think he has to either lift the ball or bend it and lift it and in doing so giving the keeper little chance. 

[Vegas]

He works hard and presses well, but he can’t finish instinctively or when he has time, and he has very clumsy feet.

[eamonn]

Good analysis of him by Troy the boy Deeney on MOTD2. Also highlighted the easy chance he could have served up for Ings to win the game.

What did Deeney think?

Very harsh criticism here, he scores that chance at end (excellent movement to get in the position to start with) and he's probably our man of the match. He never stopped running, hold up play was actually decent, movement was top quality throughout and never hid.

On the flip side, aswell as a dog awful first touch, he isn't a good striker of a ball either really. But I'd keep faith with him for Forest. Gerrard will probably revert to Ings/Watkins.

Deeney was full of praise for Watkin's approach play but highlighted why his shooting was poor and what he should be doing (dinking it in the first half, "leathering it across goal" with one of his second half chances). Also mentioned how much Ings would be raging at not being given a tap-in chance when Watkins messed-up the cutback near the end.

They put up a graphic showing that Watkins was responsible for over 1.5 of our 2+ xG.

[Proposition Joe]

The German commentator during the Leeds match said something about Watkins and Gerrard having a full-on row in the summer and even now Watkins will barely speak to him. I'd not heard about this before. I think he said it was to do with Watkins wanting out but Gerrard blocking it.

[Ian.]

I had heard that during the summer. I have the feeling his man management doesn’t work very well, especially on players like Ollie. He’s definitely a confidence player.

[Nev]

There's a lot of noise about his relationship with the players, most of it is likely to be blown out of proportion but there is an underlying feeling that all is not well. Things (and our general play) feel dour, perfunctory and humourless, and that chimes in with the image of the Manager. Comments about palyers "not sleeping well" from him after Sunday are hardly going to inspire either, I thought that was crass and counterproductive however poor some of the players were.

[Ian.]

His interview with Preece and his answers about Archer stink of someone with a massive chip on their shoulder. He hasn’t stopped and thought for one minute how that sounds for Archer personally or any of the fans who are asking the same questions. All he’s doing is protecting his ego.

There is a bit of the O’Leary’s about him.

[ChicagoLion]

His interview with Preece and his answers about Archer stink of someone with a massive chip on their shoulder. He hasn’t stopped and thought for one minute how that sounds for Archer personally or any of the fans who are asking the same questions. All he’s doing is protecting his ego.

There is a bit of the O’Leary’s about him.

Good comparison

[john e]

Work rate and running are fairly easy to replace, you could probably choose from a dozen or so Championship level strikers and get that effort. What's missing almost completely from Watkins is finishing ability and composure in front of goal. He isn't good enough, and if we don't go big for a striker in January then we're going to continue to be lower mid table, whoever the manager is.

Hogan ran around a lot to be fair
Looked like he was being chased by a wasp most of the time and was rubbish
But like you say running bombing about and work rate shouldn’t be hard to replace its the rest of it we need

[VinnieChase84]

Watkins is one of those "training ground players". When zero pressure on, his finishing in training is top draw. It just doenst flow into games for whatever reason. He seems to get flustered and his touch horrendous.

Archer should get a run now imo