collapse collapse

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

Recent Topics

Aston Villa v Wolverhampton Wanderers Pre Match by Allan C
[Today at 06:23:47 AM]


All aboard the shuttle bus. by IFWaters
[Today at 06:20:45 AM]


Gordon Cowans by CT Villan
[Today at 02:12:50 AM]


Other Games - 2023/24 by Brazilian Villain
[Today at 01:07:18 AM]


Chris Heck - President of Business Operations by VillaTim
[March 28, 2024, 11:45:01 PM]


COLD BLOW LANE ... 1967 to 1975 ... Did anyone (dare to) visit the Den? by dcdavecollett
[March 28, 2024, 11:02:33 PM]


Youri Tielemans (confirmed) by Somniloquism
[March 28, 2024, 10:54:34 PM]


FFP by AV82EC
[March 28, 2024, 10:36:39 PM]

Recent Posts

Re: Aston Villa v Wolverhampton Wanderers Pre Match by Allan C
[Today at 06:23:47 AM]


Re: All aboard the shuttle bus. by IFWaters
[Today at 06:20:45 AM]


Re: Gordon Cowans by CT Villan
[Today at 02:12:50 AM]


Re: Gordon Cowans by JD
[Today at 01:37:32 AM]


Re: Other Games - 2023/24 by Brazilian Villain
[Today at 01:07:18 AM]


Re: Gordon Cowans by Percy McCarthy
[Today at 01:05:25 AM]


Re: Gordon Cowans by The Left Side
[Today at 12:52:12 AM]


Re: Gordon Cowans by tomd2103
[Today at 12:47:19 AM]

Follow us on...

Author Topic: Watkins, Ings, both or neither?  (Read 44075 times)

Offline Demitri_C

  • Member
  • Posts: 3695
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #180 on: December 26, 2021, 09:24:22 PM »
Still wish we went for tammy.  I said it at the time and i still stand by it.

Complete waste of money so far

richtheholtender

  • Guest
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #181 on: December 26, 2021, 10:06:10 PM »
Still wish we went for tammy.  I said it at the time and i still stand by it.

Complete waste of money so far



The problem would still be there though. Tammy wouldn't have come to play second to ollie. In my opinion, the issue isn't that ings can't play down the centre it's when that ollie can't or won't play wide to a sufficient standard.

Offline LeonW

  • Member
  • Posts: 1584
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #182 on: December 26, 2021, 11:10:31 PM »
Still wish we went for tammy.  I said it at the time and i still stand by it.

Complete waste of money so far



The problem would still be there though. Tammy wouldn't have come to play second to ollie. In my opinion, the issue isn't that ings can't play down the centre it's when that ollie can't or won't play wide to a sufficient standard.

I agree with this. If we want to push on to be a better team we’ve got to have a bigger squad with more quality options and tactical flexibility in those that play. Nobody can say that Ings isn’t an upgrade on Wesley, Davis or Kodjia. Ollie is likely to play more for England if he can play wide and up top. He needs to work on his game more in general because at the highest level you can’t waste the ball as often with the limited time you have. He’ll score more goals and get more assists if he does so.

Offline tony scott

  • Member
  • Posts: 745
  • Location: Kiama NSW
  • GM : 31.05.2020
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #183 on: December 26, 2021, 11:34:39 PM »
Neither by today’s performance.

Offline ASHTONVILLA

  • Member
  • Posts: 4442
  • Location: Woodplumpton
    • http://www.levitycropscience.com
  • GM : 01.08.2022
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #184 on: December 26, 2021, 11:38:49 PM »
Has to be one or the other, they get in each others way and have zero chemistry or understanding of each others game. Today Ings was the better of the two, Ollie is not good playing wider.

Would not be unhappy if we sold both and got two new players that fit the way Gerrard wants to play better.

Offline AV82EC

  • Member
  • Posts: 10235
  • Location: Macclesfield
  • GM : 22.02.2024
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #185 on: December 27, 2021, 09:12:45 AM »
As others have said there appears to be no chemistry or understanding between them. In Watkins case it’s because he’s being pissed about shuffling from the main central striker to one of the wider positions so he can’t get in any kind of rythmn and in Ings case he keeps getting injured and having periods out of the team but has to play as the main striker as he’s utterly ineffective as a wide forward and Watkins has to be compromised.

In my view Watkins is the main striker, Ings is his back up and the biggest mistake we made was not signing wide forwards in the summer or at a minimum players who can play across the front three. This continual need to shoehorn them both in is pissing me off.

To add insult to injury, we have two main central strikers backed up by a third player who can only play as the spearhead as well in Davis who in this scenario is a waste of a substitute space as Archer could I feel play either side in a wide forward position.

I realise we’ve changed Manager so we’ve gone from a 1 striker 2 wingers to a 1 striker 2 wide forwards scenarios but it means we lack any fluidity and connectivity between our forward players. How many times since Gerrard has arrived has our at times superbly fluid and incisive build up play floundered with poor passing, poor option taking and linking in the front three?

It’s the biggest flaw in the team at the moment for me.

Offline Nunkin1965

  • Member
  • Posts: 3137
  • Age: 58
  • Location: Planet Earth
  • This is only a problem.
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #186 on: December 27, 2021, 09:21:29 AM »
Getting both in the side is equating to us playing with 10 men at the moment.
It's just not working and I know Ollie played wide for Brentford but we're at a totally different level.
His dreadful cross to Ings inside the first few minutes summed it up for me.
He has to play upfront or not at all and Ings is backup as there seems to be no sign of any type of partnership between the two.

Offline ROBBO

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 7408
  • Location: MELBOURNE
  • GM : 15.01.2025
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #187 on: December 27, 2021, 09:25:50 AM »
I would have thought the last few weeks have proved the point that we have a very good striker with a good record but not when you play him as a left winger. We have to be ruthless and if ings gets upset too bad. The same problem with Archer a natural striker who clashes with Watkins, I would think that's why he's not on the bench. We could be looking for a centre forward in the Tammy mould, tall and beefy.

Offline AV82EC

  • Member
  • Posts: 10235
  • Location: Macclesfield
  • GM : 22.02.2024
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #188 on: December 27, 2021, 09:29:56 AM »
I would have thought the last few weeks have proved the point that we have a very good striker with a good record but not when you play him as a left winger. We have to be ruthless and if ings gets upset too bad. The same problem with Archer a natural striker who clashes with Watkins, I would think that's why he's not on the bench. We could be looking for a centre forward in the Tammy mould, tall and beefy.

I’m going to disagree on Archer, I think  from what little we’ve seen he has the ability to play across that front three.

richtheholtender

  • Guest
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #189 on: January 02, 2022, 10:12:28 PM »
Don't know if it's been mentioned elsewhere but linked with arsenal and rumours that he was taken out of the squad last minute. Thoughts? I'm not sure how I feel which to me means we could do better.

Offline Legion

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58253
  • Age: 53
  • Location: With my son
  • Oh, it must be! And it is! Villa in the lead!
    • Personal Education Services
  • GM : 05.04.2019
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #190 on: January 02, 2022, 10:14:18 PM »
I would have thought the last few weeks have proved the point that we have a very good striker with a good record but not when you play him as a left winger. We have to be ruthless and if ings gets upset too bad. The same problem with Archer a natural striker who clashes with Watkins, I would think that's why he's not on the bench. We could be looking for a centre forward in the Tammy mould, tall and beefy.

I’m going to disagree on Archer, I think  from what little we’ve seen he has the ability to play across that front three.

I've seen plenty and he can do the lot.

Offline Legion

  • Moderator
  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 58253
  • Age: 53
  • Location: With my son
  • Oh, it must be! And it is! Villa in the lead!
    • Personal Education Services
  • GM : 05.04.2019
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #191 on: January 02, 2022, 10:15:01 PM »
Don't know if it's been mentioned elsewhere but linked with arsenal and rumours that he was taken out of the squad last minute. Thoughts? I'm not sure how I feel which to me means we could do better.

Rumours? No. Bullshit? Yes.

Offline PaulTheVillan

  • Member
  • Posts: 23173
  • GM : 16.08.2022
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #192 on: January 02, 2022, 10:25:11 PM »
Been waiting for some horseshit about a Watkins bid

Offline tomd2103

  • Member
  • Posts: 14179
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #193 on: January 03, 2022, 12:20:21 AM »
Thought Ings looked much better today and took his goal very well.  It's a healthy position to be in to have two good options fighting for the same place.

Offline brontebilly

  • Member
  • *
  • Posts: 9283
  • GM : 09.06.2024
Re: Watkins, Ings or both?
« Reply #194 on: January 03, 2022, 12:24:19 AM »
Probably Ings best performance for us. Combined very well with Buendia who played more as a 10. Fine goal and probably should have scored late on. Always looked a threat anyway.

But we had no pace in our front three today which was an issue and Cash/Targett despite lots of possession delivered very little quality out wide. Targett in particular made a mess of two decent chances late on to get the ball across the box to better placed players.

 


SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal