Watkins, Ings, both or neither?

[caster troy]

We've got better wingers than Ollie, so let's play them if available and keep him in his best position. Ings will have to fight for his place for now.

Gerrard does not play wingers, Ollie was not on the wing yesterday.

Ok. I was sat in on the left hand side of the Trinity and he was certainly the closest attacker to me in the first half, even if he wasn't exactly in a traditional 'hug the touchline' winger role. Avoiding terminology, I'm saying he should have been where Ings was, and I'd play Bailey/El Ghazi where Watkins was.

[Ad@m]

The beauty of Gerrard's preferred approach is that Watkins, Bailey, Buendia, El Ghazi, and Traore can all play the inside forward position.  Even Ashley Young was given a crack at it yesterday!

On top of that, Ings, Watkins, Archer and Davis (in case of emergency!) can play the #9 position.

So, just like big clubs should, we have a number of players competing for places, and if we can sort DCM out in January it'll then free up Cash and Targett to get forward and add even more width to the team which'll help Ings massively.

So, I think we need to avoid jumping to any conclusions on Watkins and/or Ings until we see how the team shapes up once they've been able to spend more time with the new management team.

[Rigadon]

I like both of them.  We need to play one of them and keep the other for the bench, because that's what big clubs do.

[tomd2103]

I would leave Ings up front as an out and out striker and allow Watkins a free role coming deep or going wide.

Honestly don't think he is good enough on the ball to play that kind of role Damo.  He needs to be leading the line as a centre forward. 

[wittonwarrior]

Oh God where do you start.  (I haven't voted) .  Ings is a centre forward doesn't get anywhere near the service he should.

Watkins talented player, who contrary to his early form last season is I believe better as a link up player with another forward.  My assessment though is totally blown out the water by the failure for him to work in tandem with Ings.  Watkins gave his best performance of the season yesterday by a million miles  at least he gave 110%. 

Moving forward if we were to keep Ollie Watkins think it would have to be with a more fluent front partner. 

[Legion]

Archer and Watkins would be formidable.

[wittonwarrior]

We've got better wingers than Ollie, so let's play them if available and keep him in his best position. Ings will have to fight for his place for now.

Gerrard does not play wingers, Ollie was not on the wing yesterday.

Ok. I was sat in on the left hand side of the Trinity and he was certainly the closest attacker to me in the first half, even if he wasn't exactly in a traditional 'hug the touchline' winger role. Avoiding terminology, I'm saying he should have been where Ings was, and I'd play Bailey/El Ghazi where Watkins was.

until Bailey gets premiership fit he is an impact player only.  El Ghazi is another who can't give a full 90 mins

[brontebilly]

It was hard to pick who the worst of our front three for most of the game yesterday. I thought Watkins could be an option for us out wide on occasion, given his experience there at Brentford. But he was hopeless there yesterday. His first touch has always been an issue but he just kept running into blind alleys. He was transformed once he went up top. With his pace, you always want to keep him on against tired defences so it's rare you would be taking him off. Ings was just the wrong man at the wrong time.

[Rudy Can't Fail]

We've got better wingers than Ollie, so let's play them if available and keep him in his best position. Ings will have to fight for his place for now.

Gerrard does not play wingers, Ollie was not on the wing yesterday.

Ok. I was sat in on the left hand side of the Trinity and he was certainly the closest attacker to me in the first half, even if he wasn't exactly in a traditional 'hug the touchline' winger role. Avoiding terminology, I'm saying he should have been where Ings was, and I'd play Bailey/El Ghazi where Watkins was.

until Bailey gets premiership fit he is an impact player only.  El Ghazi is another who can't give a full 9 mins

FTFY

As I've already said he's a better player without the ball than with it. Sell him in January to Spurs. They specialise with all fart no shit players.

[ez]

We've not done ourselves any favours playing Ollie out of position. I expect we are minus a few goals this season because of it.

[darren woolley]

I've gone for Ollie it was hard to chose but Ollie get's the nod for me.

[chrisw1]

Both for me.  I know Ollie looked a bit lost on Saturday, but I still think he can play the Mane / Salah role and score plenty of goals.  But If it was one or the other I think Ings would probably be the better link player in a narrow 3 up top.

[Neil Hawkes]

Archer and Watkins would be formidable.
[/quote

Archer and Watkins would be formidable.

Quite possibly mouth watering.

[LeonW]

Horses for courses. Some games one or the other depending on the game plan/opposition. Some both. There’s got to be a successful way of integrating both and making it work. We’ve got real options now so we’ve got to use them effectively over a long season.

[Hillbilly]

Watkins is better if you are playing forward to the striker or across the edge of the box. Ings is better if you are cutting back from the byline or across the 6 yard box. Options.