Watkins, Ings, both or neither?

[Toronto Villa]

He’s not rubbish. He scored a lot of superb goals last season. But he’s not good enough to be our first choice. He’s having some second season challenges so we need someone who is legitimately top level to push on,

He hasn’t got Grealish setting him up any more.

That doesn't make him rubbish though. Our service without Grealish has been mostly abysmal all season. I'm not excusing the play of Watkins or Ings but we've not exactly done ourselves any favours with how we have supplied them.

[N'ZMAV]

the supply to them is poor - Coutinho and Digne will improve that.

[ROBBO]

When Watkins is playing the traditional centre forward role he plays well, Ings is the problem, not a bad player but just not suited to how we want to play.

[VILLA MOLE]

i feel watkins is restricted on the left at this level . he needs to be able to run both channels.  Ings is lost in our team at the moment

[AV82EC]

Watkins.

[LeeB]

Watkins all day long

[DB]

Watkins. Both were poor today, zings just was in the game and Watkins looked leggy - he was very slow on the ball, ManUre just kept pinching it off him.

[caster troy]

Hopefully today was the last we see of WatkIngs as a starting option. There seems to be a pattern of us doing better after Ings goes off in these games, not picking on him as I think it’s down to the system and we might just as well have seen similar turnarounds if it had been Watkins to go off. Off the top of my head I think this is the story when they’ve started.

Chelsea away we were 0-2 down with them on the pitch
Everton 3-0 win
United 0-0 then we scored after Ings went off
Spurs 1-2
Wolves 2-3
Arsenal 0-3 then scored after Ings went off
Brighton 0-0 scored two after Ings went off
Chelsea 1-2
United 0-1
United 0-2 scored two after Ings went off

From now on we rotate Coutinho, Buendia, Chuck, Bailey and Traore off either Watkins or Ings. That is some serious firepower.

[Legion]

Archer as well.

[Risso]

Ings looks more and more like a panic buy with every passing game. And unlike most he hasn't got the excuse of youth on his side.

[Clampy]

Neither. Both awful. Watkins is a lower league trier, Ings looks about 50.

Watkins a lower league trier? Blimey, that's miserable even by your standards.

[tomd2103]

Think we are trying to replicate some of the higher placed sides in the league who have a fluid front three (ie. Jota, Mane and Salah) who can interchange during the game.  I was in the North Stand today and Ings spent periods of the first half out on the left and looked completely lost.  I also don't think Watkins is good enough on the ball to play out wide at the top level and gives it away too many times when playing there.

If we continue with the same system and when all are available, we now have Coutinho, Buendia, Bailey, Traore, Trezeguet and P-Bidace for those two positions, so there is no need to employ Watkins or Ings in that role.

I would imagine that the first two on that list are the likely starters, so I guess the question then shifts to who is best suited to playing centrally with them?  Watkins holds the ball up better than Ings which will allow them to come on to the ball, but I would say Ings makes better runs in behind for balls to be played through. 

Let's face it, it's a pretty decent headache to have.

[edgysatsuma89]

How often as Ings played on his own? I can't think off the top of my head. I think I'd rather a finisher but they both lack what the other has which is why we need the machine from The Fly invented.

[ozzjim]

Sell both this summer and buy someone that's faster, better in the ball and can finish.

[edgysatsuma89]

Sell both this summer and buy someone that's faster, better in the ball and can finish.

SPG from The Young Ones? He should be decent in a ball. Well pre-radiator.