collapse collapse

Please donate to help towards the costs of keeping this site going. Thank You.

Recent Topics

Recent Posts

Re: Ollie Watkins by Monty
[Today at 08:10:20 PM]


Re: Ollie Watkins by Ianu
[Today at 08:09:48 PM]


Re: Tammy Abraham - almost done by Rudy Can't Fail
[Today at 08:08:34 PM]


Re: Ollie Watkins by Rudy Can't Fail
[Today at 08:07:38 PM]


Re: Tammy Abraham - almost done by cdbearsfan
[Today at 08:07:01 PM]


Re: Ollie Watkins by eamonn
[Today at 08:05:15 PM]


Re: Ollie Watkins by PaulWinch again
[Today at 08:02:02 PM]


Re: Other Games 2025-26 by Brazilian Villain
[Today at 08:01:53 PM]

Follow us on...

Author Topic: Ollie Watkins  (Read 1089602 times)

Offline PeterWithesShin

  • Member
  • Posts: 79868
  • GM : 17.03.2015
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10515 on: Today at 06:13:50 PM »

Online PaulWinch again

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 57098
  • Location: winchester
  • GM : 25.05.2026
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10516 on: Today at 06:22:37 PM »
I think Smirker is ok. He’s pushing the debate on. We all support the same team. Some fans don’t like certain players. Still legitimate. 6 months ago, you’d be abused for saying a bad word against Martinez, but now it’s more accepted.

Not sure anyone has said Ollie has had a good season, although his record since later last year is very good. Reasoned debate is fine, I think stating we’d be further up the league with a better centre forward and then citing a centre forward who has scored less league goals (in a better team) is at best ill informed, or it’s trolling.

Online Ianu

  • Member
  • Posts: 7
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10517 on: Today at 07:18:03 PM »
I think Smirker is ok. He’s pushing the debate on. We all support the same team. Some fans don’t like certain players. Still legitimate. 6 months ago, you’d be abused for saying a bad word against Martinez, but now it’s more accepted.

Not sure anyone has said Ollie has had a good season, although his record since later last year is very good. Reasoned debate is fine, I think stating we’d be further up the league with a better centre forward and then citing a centre forward who has scored less league goals (in a better team) is at best ill informed, or it’s trolling.

I don’t think it is. It’s condescending to say someone else’s viewpoint is ill informed or trolling. It’s just a viewpoint! Chill.

Online Smirker

  • Member
  • Posts: 8082
  • Location: Birmingham
  • GM : Sep, 2014
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10518 on: Today at 07:37:32 PM »
I think Smirker is ok. He’s pushing the debate on. We all support the same team. Some fans don’t like certain players. Still legitimate. 6 months ago, you’d be abused for saying a bad word against Martinez, but now it’s more accepted.

Not sure anyone has said Ollie has had a good season, although his record since later last year is very good. Reasoned debate is fine, I think stating we’d be further up the league with a better centre forward and then citing a centre forward who has scored less league goals (in a better team) is at best ill informed, or it’s trolling.

I don’t think it is. It’s condescending to say someone else’s viewpoint is ill informed or trolling. It’s just a viewpoint! Chill.

Thank you mate  8)

Online Monty

  • Member
  • Posts: 29972
  • Location: pastaland
  • GM : 25.05.2024
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10519 on: Today at 07:51:04 PM »
I think Smirker is ok. He’s pushing the debate on. We all support the same team. Some fans don’t like certain players. Still legitimate. 6 months ago, you’d be abused for saying a bad word against Martinez, but now it’s more accepted.

Not sure anyone has said Ollie has had a good season, although his record since later last year is very good. Reasoned debate is fine, I think stating we’d be further up the league with a better centre forward and then citing a centre forward who has scored less league goals (in a better team) is at best ill informed, or it’s trolling.

I don’t think it is. It’s condescending to say someone else’s viewpoint is ill informed or trolling. It’s just a viewpoint! Chill.

What if my viewpoint is both condescending and right?

Online PaulWinch again

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 57098
  • Location: winchester
  • GM : 25.05.2026
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10520 on: Today at 07:55:14 PM »
If it was not preceded by literally months of this, perhaps. But it has been a singular myopic focus on slagging Ollie off - again criticism of his performance earlier in the season is fine - but it went beyond that. He’s also been good since end of November, not every of course, but up there in terms of centre forward performance over that period - scoring several, good, and important goals.

To then cite a better option for getting us higher up the league as someone who has scored less league goals, is just a continuation of what has gone before.

Online Ianu

  • Member
  • Posts: 7
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10521 on: Today at 07:57:58 PM »
If it was not preceded by literally months of this, perhaps. But it has been a singular myopic focus on slagging Ollie off - again criticism of his performance earlier in the season is fine - but it went beyond that. He’s also been good since end of November, not every of course, but up there in terms of centre forward performance over that period - scoring several, good, and important goals.

To then cite a better option for getting us higher up the league as someone who has scored less league goals, is just a continuation of what has gone before.

It’s hard to say. Sometimes the unpopular opinion is the first to get shot down, but actually has value.

Online PaulWinch again

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 57098
  • Location: winchester
  • GM : 25.05.2026
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10522 on: Today at 08:02:02 PM »
Sometimes, often it’s unpopular for a reason. Like I say, I don’t think anyone is arguing Ollie hasn’t been at his best, it’s obvious. It’s the “he’s useless, he’s holding us back stuff”. On balance he looks on for around 14 goals or so, which would be a decent return. Replacing his consistency and wider value to our play is not impossible I’m sure, but not cheap or easy.

Online eamonn

  • Member
  • Posts: 35234
  • Location: Stay in sight of the mainland
  • GM : 26.07.2020
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10523 on: Today at 08:05:15 PM »
All comps please.

Ah, playing the Watkins doesn't score in Europe card?

8 goals and one assist for Gyokeres.

2 were penalties (35% of his goals for Sporting last season were from the spot too). Imagine getting 19(!) penalties in one season. Fair play for scoring them all but from open play he's a bit blose for what Arsenal need.

Online Rudy Can't Fail

  • Member
  • Posts: 42217
  • Location: In the Shade
    • http://www.heroespredictions.co.uk/pl/
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10524 on: Today at 08:07:38 PM »
I think Smirker is ok. He’s pushing the debate on. We all support the same team. Some fans don’t like certain players. Still legitimate. 6 months ago, you’d be abused for saying a bad word against Martinez, but now it’s more accepted.

Not sure anyone has said Ollie has had a good season, although his record since later last year is very good. Reasoned debate is fine, I think stating we’d be further up the league with a better centre forward and then citing a centre forward who has scored less league goals (in a better team) is at best ill informed, or it’s trolling.

I don’t think it is. It’s condescending to say someone else’s viewpoint is ill informed or trolling. It’s just a viewpoint! Chill.

What if my viewpoint is both condescending and right?

Something in all these years on H&V I've never seen, Monty. You're never right.

Online Ianu

  • Member
  • Posts: 7
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10525 on: Today at 08:09:48 PM »
Sometimes, often it’s unpopular for a reason. Like I say, I don’t think anyone is arguing Ollie hasn’t been at his best, it’s obvious. It’s the “he’s useless, he’s holding us back stuff”. On balance he looks on for around 14 goals or so, which would be a decent return. Replacing his consistency and wider value to our play is not impossible I’m sure, but not cheap or easy.

Not easy or cheap to replace, probably true.

“He’s useless”: agree- a tad too far.

However..

“Holding us back” - very much a viewpoint that one is entitled to have.


Online Monty

  • Member
  • Posts: 29972
  • Location: pastaland
  • GM : 25.05.2024
Re: Ollie Watkins
« Reply #10526 on: Today at 08:10:20 PM »
I think Smirker is ok. He’s pushing the debate on. We all support the same team. Some fans don’t like certain players. Still legitimate. 6 months ago, you’d be abused for saying a bad word against Martinez, but now it’s more accepted.

Not sure anyone has said Ollie has had a good season, although his record since later last year is very good. Reasoned debate is fine, I think stating we’d be further up the league with a better centre forward and then citing a centre forward who has scored less league goals (in a better team) is at best ill informed, or it’s trolling.

I don’t think it is. It’s condescending to say someone else’s viewpoint is ill informed or trolling. It’s just a viewpoint! Chill.

What if my viewpoint is both condescending and right?

Something in all these years on H&V I've never seen, Monty. You're never right.

Why I oughtta...

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal