Scored yesterday U23 game
Bodes well for the re united VINGS partnership

Ings watch commences.

IanMcL wrote:Ings watch commences.

couldn't help myself

ReturnIngs ?

Does Ings Watch cost 5k?

Billyhamilton1982 wrote: couldn't help myself

It's a good call.

I'd be surprised if Liverpool turned down a loan move. I very much doubt he'll ever make Liverpool's starting 11 again, so it would make sense if we paid some of his wage. I'm far from convinced though. He'd be the last choice, if all other options were exhausted, due to his injuries.

I'd still rather have him over Chris Wood, he's too similar a player to what we have already.

whiffa wrote:I'd still rather have him over Chris Wood, he's too similar a player to what we have already.

Ings would spend most of this season on the treatment table. I'd rather have someone who scored 27 goals in the Championship and be able to play every game.

Imagine we resign Ings and he scores the winner on his debut at Ewood

chipbutty wrote:Does Ings Watch cost 5k?

Probably but its no twix watch

FactualFrank wrote:Ings would spend most of this season on the treatment table. I'd rather have someone who scored 27 goals in the Championship and be able to play every game.

He's gone Frank,get over it!

FactualFrank wrote:Ings would spend most of this season on the treatment table. I'd rather have someone who scored 27 goals in the Championship and be able to play every game.

Hi Frank, we've got 2 loan places, I believe. I'd love Danny Ings to take one of these places - and we pay when he is fit to play. Will work for Clarets, will work for Lpool and will work for Danny.

But, who do we leave out from yesterday's heroes?

UTC

Why does this mb duplicate sometimes?

Paul Waine wrote:Hi Frank, we've got 2 loan places, I believe. I'd love Danny Ings to take one of these places - and we pay when he is fit to play. Will work for Clarets, will work for Lpool and will work for Danny.

But, who do we leave out from yesterday's heroes?

UTC

JBG FOR ME

Nobody, they join the others on the bench

Paul Waine wrote:Hi Frank, we've got 2 loan places, I believe. I'd love Danny Ings to take one of these places - and we pay when he is fit to play. Will work for Clarets, will work for Lpool and will work for Danny.

But, who do we leave out from yesterday's heroes?

UTC

Paul, that's a good question, but it's a nice problem to have.

Vokes obviously, did very well, but it was against 10 men for the majority of the game and against 9 men for the rest. And teams like Man City will camp in our half unless we have pace to kill them on the break. I just think he'll hardly ever play for us. I mean, how long has he been at Liverpool and how many games has he played? I think it's a last option.

FactualFrank wrote:Paul, that's a good question, but it's a nice problem to have.

Vokes obviously, did very well, but it was against 10 men for the majority of the game and against 9 men for the rest. And teams like Man City will camp in our half unless we have pace to kill them on the break. I just think he'll hardly ever play for us. I mean, how long has he been at Liverpool and how many games has he played? I think it's a last option.

I think a loan is risk free - so long as we take a striker permanently in addition in case Danny cannot get fit or breaks down again. We all know what Danny can offer us, if we take him on loan with view to a permanent it will be a great deal.

I haven't yet seen any compelling evidence of anything in this though. Seems to be wishful thinking to much, there hasn't been a peep from any reliable source in the press etc.

I don't think we can afford to include Ings in our squad of 25 with doubts about his fitness, unless we have not been able to name 25 by the end of the window

jedi_master wrote:I think a loan is risk free - so long as we take a striker permanently in addition in case Danny cannot get fit or breaks down again. We all know what Danny can offer us, if we take him on loan with view to a permanent it will be a great deal.

I haven't yet seen any compelling evidence of anything in this though. Seems to be wishful thinking to much, there hasn't been a peep from any reliable source in the press etc.

I know where you're coming from and providing we have no other loan targets, I agree with you. I guess it depends on whether we have other targets that could take his slot. And yeah, I've not seen anything in it either. He's perhaps someone who is in our transfer mix, but not yet taken any further. I'm still far from impressed though. I feel it's a last option.

Not saying that we have a chance of signing him, but if we do does anybody seriously think we won't give him sort sort of medical even if it's just a loan ?????

Vegas Claret wrote:Not saying that we have a chance of signing him, but if we do does anybody seriously think we won't give him sort sort of medical even if it's just a loan ?????

Far too many question marks. I'd give him a medical and consider him, but like I've said before, it would be one of my last targets.

Vegas Claret wrote:Not saying that we have a chance of signing him, but if we do does anybody seriously think we won't give him sort sort of medical even if it's just a loan ?????

Why on earth would Dyche even consider signing Ings? He is a crock who has made millions from sitting on his arse.
Time to move on guys.

Jamesy wrote:Why on earth would Dyche even consider signing Ings? He is a crock who has made millions from sitting on his arse.
Time to move on guys.

Yep why on earth would Dyche try and sign a player who scored 20 goals plus for him, won the player of the championship, has played for England and is arguably the best player he has ever had play for him ?!!!!

I'd have him on loan if there was a chance we could get him - would not risk buying him with the injuries he has had

Ings the best player Dyche has had play for him?

Can I point you in the direction of Defour.

All the things you've said about Ings happened before his injury and NO ONE knows if he's the same player, certainly no one on here.
He won't be coming here on loan unless he's proven he's over it.

[quote="FactualFrank"]

Vokes obviously, did very well, but it was against 10 men for the majority of the game and against 9 men for the rest.

You've bee telling us for months about how brilliant Chris Wood is and that he ia a better player than Vokes. You claim to know better than the rest of us because you live in Leeds, so how come the the mighty Wood didn't find the net yesterday against PNE, when Leeds were playing against 10 men for over 30min? After all you make it sound so easy.

Paul Waine wrote:Hi Frank, we've got 2 loan places, I believe. I'd love Danny Ings to take one of these places - and we pay when he is fit to play. Will work for Clarets, will work for Lpool and will work for Danny.

But, who do we leave out from yesterday's heroes?

UTC

Does he even start for us?

TVC15 wrote:Yep why on earth would Dyche try and sign a player who scored 20 goals plus for him, won the player of the championship, has played for England and is arguably the best player he has ever had play for him ?!!!!

Because he's spent the majority of the last 2 years on the treatment table? He makes a very valid point. He's not a player I'd put at the top of my shopping list.

HuncoatClaret wrote:

What are you drinking?

HuncoatClaret wrote:Vokes obviously, did very well, but it was against 10 men for the majority of the game and against 9 men for the rest.

You've bee telling us for months about how brilliant Chris Wood is and that he ia a better player than Vokes. You claim to know better than the rest of us because you live in Leeds, so how come the the mighty Wood didn't find the net yesterday against PNE, when Leeds were playing against 10 men for over 30min? After all you make it sound so easy.

What are you drinking?

I think they word 'arguably' suggests that there are other candidates. And Ings has certainly been one of his best players. Defour could certainly turn out to be too, but not as yet.

Defour isn't even close to being the best player we have had under Dyche. Not even top 20. Ings far outstrips him though there are of course fitness doubts (to both of them).

On raw ability, quite possibly. But add in work rate, desire, fitness, team spirit and Premier League know how and last season he fell way short.

Top players are gauged on a basket of attributes, some of which Defour has in spades, others he possibly lacks. Top players deliver. Ings did. Defour didn't. Hopefully this time next year that comparison will look very different, yesterday being a great start.

Sidney1st wrote:Ings the best player Dyche has had play for him?

Can I point you in the direction of Defour.

All the things you've said about Ings happened before his injury and NO ONE knows if he's the same player, certainly no one on here.
He won't be coming here on loan unless he's proven he's over it.

Which is why I'd take him on loan rather than buy him - and of course only if he passes the medical tests

As for whether Dyche would think Ings was a better player for him that Defour - there's no doubt in my mind that he would. There is Michael Keane who would be up there with Ings and Tripps

Think I prefer the 4 5 1 we played against Chelsea and cannot see where Ings would fit into that unless he took the place of Vokes. I don't think he would have been anywhere near as effective as big Sam in that position.
Alternatively, it may require 4 4 2 which leaves us vulnerable to being outplayed in midfield against many of the teams in the premier league. Who would play in the middle if we had a front two of Vokes and Ings, and against what teams would 4 4 2 be better than the 4 5 1 we played Saturday?

TVC15, I think you need to look past the old Ings and see the current player.
Injury prone, will almost certainly pick up niggly injuries when he starts playing again like our lads do after long lay offs etc.

We've moved on and he's not what we need right now because he's very much an unknown quantity.

He would have taken the place of jbg with hendrick wider and Danny behind Sam. Like that wonderful season they had together.

Perhaps we're going to have a bit more diversity to our tactics this season and employ 451 away from home and 442 at home?

The only other times I remember Dyche swapping tactics from his favoured 442 have been disastrous.

Ings would play wide in that system, a bit like Rashford today.

Notable that Dyche seems to be focusing on firming up the middle at the expense of wingers protecting the full backs. Chelsea exploited that second half with one centre back and the others pushing wide and up. I'm undecided as to what I think he will do at home - probably 4-4-2 for that reason. Brady and Gudmundsson make it more of a 4-3-3 when in possession and 4-5-1 when not. Ings could do that, as could a variety of other quick centre forwards with a bit of trickery and movement.

Think we might be able to utilise Ings with a 4-3-3
formation more easily than a strict 4-4-2 so
we'd still retain Cork, Defour and Hendricks in midfield
and have Ings with Vokes upfront with Brady outwide.

Even if Ings does come back I suspect it will be a while afore he starts
and Dyche is likely to stick with 4-5-1 and revert to 4-4-2 if necessary.

We'll certainly need to be flexible and esepcially if another few arrivals
turn up.

No Ney Never wrote:Think I prefer the 4 5 1 we played against Chelsea and cannot see where Ings would fit into that unless he took the place of Vokes. I don't think he would have been anywhere near as effective as big Sam in that position.
Alternatively, it may require 4 4 2 which leaves us vulnerable to being outplayed in midfield against many of the teams in the premier league. Who would play in the middle if we had a front two of Vokes and Ings, and against what teams would 4 4 2 be better than the 4 5 1 we played Saturday?

It would give us another option, change formations where it would be better against certain teams.

As earlier, I can't see who could be left out to give Danny Ings a start, but we've got 37 more games, and there will be injuries and there will be drops in form.

Great problem to have.... isn't that what we are trying to do in the transfer market?

UTC

FactualFrank wrote:What are you drinking?

Asahi. Anyway, I thought you were always a Liverpool fan?

If fit he would be exactly what needed for a 441 option. Can't think of anyone else I would rather have that we had a chance to get (on loan). We have very little to lose subject to a medical for a loan signing. We won't have 24 others over age for the squad.
.

Rumours on twitter he could be going to Celtic on loan.

If we get an opportunity to bring Danny Ings back on loan its a no brainer. Would improve our attacking options hugely. Obviously his injuries of late are a concern but i for one would be willing to take the risk. If he does come back and perform however there would be no chance of a permanent deal. Someone like bournemouth would blow us out the water

Sidney1st wrote:TVC15, I think you need to look past the old Ings and see the current player.
Injury prone, will almost certainly pick up niggly injuries when he starts playing again like our lads do after long lay offs etc.

We've moved on and he's not what we need right now because he's very much an unknown quantity.

I'm on about taking him on loan not building a team around him. We don't have another striker like him though - and the chemistry him and Vokes is one of the best I have ever seen - they brought out the best in each other.

I would also want to spend £15m to £20m on another striker but if we could strike a loan deal with Liverpool for Ings which costs us 600 or 700 grand personally i think it's a risk worth taking for a player of his quality.

Always pre occupied on here with players who chose to move elsewhere.the pining for jay fell on deaf ears...he chose WBA.and I would imagine ings will end up at Bournemouth sometime in the future when they return back to the championship .move on!

summitclaret wrote:If fit he would be exactly what needed for a 441 option.
.

Are we going 4-4-1 just to copy Chelsea.

The more I think about it, the less I think taking Ings is a good idea.

There are lots of football reasons why it might not be a great idea, but the one thing that hasn't got much airtime is whether the dynamics would work out. Ings was generally a decent enough sort, but he was the poster boy for the club and the system was set up to his strengths because (perhaps along with Trippier) he was recognised as our key player. He went on a free as a bit of a prodigal son who had outgrown the club.

I don't think that would ever be the case now - we've moved on over the last 2 years and even in a squad as close knit as ours, we'll have other players (Defour, say) who want or even need the team to be set up to their strengths. How would Ings take to coming back to Burnley and being pushed out onto the wing, because Dyche wants to accommodate Hendrick, Defour and Cork in the centre of midfield?

Steve-Harpers-perm wrote:Rumours on twitter he could be going to Celtic on loan.

Might as well go on loan to Fleetwood

He doesn't have to last a whole match or a whole season. The Prem is based on 25 players fulfilling just 38 matches and a handful of cup matches. Not to mention international breaks built in!