Unai Emery

[Risso]

I think even Footy would be embarrassed to have come up with that theory mate.

[LeeB]

I don't think it's that far fetched to think Emery decided to fuck off a few of those on that basis.

[boozey182]

I think even Footy would be embarrassed to have come up with that theory mate.

Haha! Footy is one of the great free-thinkers, so I am sure he would be embarrassed by my inane theories. There's no shame in that.

[Risso]

I don't think it's that far fetched to think Emery decided to fuck off a few of those on that basis.

He'd need to have started with himself if we're going down that route.

[PaulWinch again]

Stevenage wasn't just on Ings, but it absolutely demonstrated how little of a loss he would be - he was absolutely Blues, and dominated by League 2 defenders.

£15 million is a ridiculous amount for a 31 year old goal hanger on £150k+ a week who plays like that.  I'd want 25 goals a season from him to justify how little he offers elsewhere, not 6.

Yeah but judging him on one game is just ridiculous though. By that logic after scoring 2 goals and winning us the game against Brighton, a team factually better than us, should mean he’s worth what £50m and should have started every week?

[Pat Mustard]

Stevenage wasn't just on Ings, but it absolutely demonstrated how little of a loss he would be - he was absolutely Blues, and dominated by League 2 defenders.

£15 million is a ridiculous amount for a 31 year old goal hanger on £150k+ a week who plays like that.  I'd want 25 goals a season from him to justify how little he offers elsewhere, not 6.

Yeah but judging him on one game is just ridiculous though. By that logic after scoring 2 goals and winning us the game against Brighton, a team factually better than us, should mean he’s worth what £50m and should have started every week?

It’s not just one game though. He is a goal hanger who has scored 13 goals in his last 51 games - it’s not good enough when that is literally his sole contribution to the team.

[Risso]

Bailey was probably the worst player on the pitch, and didn't get past a single League 2 player even once. Yet he's started every game since, and has been utter shite in pretty well all of them.

[PaulWinch again]

Also I’m not convinced Ings was a goal scorer and that’s it. I remember him linking play well and making important passes. Either way there’s absolutely no way we’re better off without him for the remainder of the season.

[gpbarr]

Ings was a player that just never suited the style, or personnel around him. Never an Emery player. To get the price we did for an aging player on his way down, was the right thing to do and I'm not surprised the club sanctioned the move.

Its left us light short term but, long term its absolutely the right thing to have done - and it gives us the chance to blood Duran which I think is an exciting prospect.

[boozey182]

Also I’m not convinced Ings was a goal scorer and that’s it. I remember him linking play well and making important passes. Either way there’s absolutely no way we’re better off without him for the remainder of the season.

You might be right for the remainder of the season, ultimately we won't know what sort of impact Ings would have had - I never rated him, so I'm naturally going to assume that his influence was going to be pretty limited, but I will concede that he had the ability to score important goals at times.

But for next season and beyond, the minutes that Duràn picks up now could be the difference between having a first team player ready to go in August and having another promising young player that needs minutes to prove themselves.

If you would have asked me on January 1st, who would I rather have in the squad for the rest of the season: Danny Ings or a 19 year old 6ft 1, quick, skillful Columbia international, I would have almost definitely gone with the latter. It's just more fun, isn't it?

[Brazilian Villain]

Ings was a player that just never suited the style, or personnel around him. Never an Emery player. To get the price we did for an aging player on his way down, was the right thing to do and I'm not surprised the club sanctioned the move.

Its left us light short term but, long term its absolutely the right thing to have done - and it gives us the chance to blood Duran which I think is an exciting prospect.

Agreed.

[Dante Lavelli]

Ings was a player that just never suited the style, or personnel around him. Never an Emery player. To get the price we did for an aging player on his way down, was the right thing to do and I'm not surprised the club sanctioned the move.

Its left us light short term but, long term its absolutely the right thing to have done - and it gives us the chance to blood Duran which I think is an exciting prospect.

Agreed.

Yep, and it means Duran is likely to get minutes, possibly games, before the end of the season which could really kick start his career.  at the very least, we will have a better idea of how good/bad he will become.  Ings would have blocked that path.

[Allan C]

To be quite honest, it wouldn’t have bothered me if either Ings or Watkins had been sold. Clearly Emery prefers Watkins and so be it. What does bother me though is also letting Archer go too. We now have no specific striker alternative to Watkins which is surely a poor decision. To single out Ings for the Stevenage debacle is unfair. They were all equally shocking. Neither am I convinced by the Watkins rebirth and hopefully we have transfer targets in the summer that will take us to the next level

[olaftab]

Yes, some of you are absolutely right. Selling Ings was a great deal. It was a great deal for an insurance company, it was a shite deal for a football club intending to be competitive against its rivals in the League.

[Pat Mustard]

After watching him play for about 20 minutes it’s clear Duran is already more of a striker alternative for Watkins than Ings ever was or could be.