Danny Ings

[notnowcato]

49 minutes ago, DT said:

Smoke screen for them getting Kane I reckon. So in that sense would be awful for us if Levy offers £10m for Danny... Can't see it happening. Perhaps destabilising him for the FA Cup Final 😉

Why would City be interested in a smoke screen?  

Smells more agent placed story - link Ings to City, gets the media attention for his client who is out of contract in 15 months time, in a slow football news week

[VectisSaint]

17 minutes ago, SKD said:

It’s not rubbish. They’ve spoken to him. He’s basically been touted out to all of the top clubs.

 

And you know that because? If they have that is a flagrant breach of the rules (tapping up is still a breach of the rules despite what Jurgen Klopp and Liverpool think). They may have spoken to his agent, and his agent may have spoken to Danny, but that's not the same thing. His agent may be touting him to all other clubs but again that is not the same thing. The report is rubbish, and its not even current, it was reported some time ago in The Athletic. Do you honestly believe Man City are trying to decide whether to go for Erling Haaland or Danny Ings. 

[AlexLaw76]

13 minutes ago, VectisSaint said:

And you know that because? If they have that is a flagrant breach of the rules (tapping up is still a breach of the rules despite what Jurgen Klopp and Liverpool think). They may have spoken to his agent, and his agent may have spoken to Danny, but that's not the same thing. His agent may be touting him to all other clubs but again that is not the same thing. The report is rubbish, and its not even current, it was reported some time ago in The Athletic. Do you honestly believe Man City are trying to decide whether to go for Erling Haaland or Danny Ings. 

Man City will probably go for both.

They bought Ake and Diaz last summer

[SKD]

19 minutes ago, VectisSaint said:

And you know that because? If they have that is a flagrant breach of the rules (tapping up is still a breach of the rules despite what Jurgen Klopp and Liverpool think). They may have spoken to his agent, and his agent may have spoken to Danny, but that's not the same thing. His agent may be touting him to all other clubs but again that is not the same thing. The report is rubbish, and its not even current, it was reported some time ago in The Athletic. Do you honestly believe Man City are trying to decide whether to go for Erling Haaland or Danny Ings. 

Because I know. His representative have spoken to city, along with other clubs. He is a credible option for them along with other targets. 
 

He might not be first choice, but he is an option. It’s not rubbish. 

[Lord Duckhunter]

33 minutes ago, VectisSaint said:

And you know that because? If they have that is a flagrant breach of the rules (tapping up is still a breach of the rules despite what Jurgen Klopp and Liverpool think). 

Do you still believe in Father Christmas? 

[Saint Billy]

Well I hope one of these big clubs is fool enough to pay us big bucks for him because he is no good to us being in and out of the side with injuries. 

The likes of Man City can afford to have a player on the sidelines for half a season, we definitely can't. 

He kept us up last season but hasn't been the same player since with injuries and his head being elsewhere, so him going is probably going to benefit us more than how it is at the moment. 

[DT]

14 minutes ago, Saint Billy said:

Well I hope one of these big clubs is fool enough to pay us big bucks for him because he is no good to us being in and out of the side with injuries. 

The likes of Man City can afford to have a player on the sidelines for half a season, we definitely can't. 

He kept us up last season but hasn't been the same player since with injuries and his head being elsewhere, so him going is probably going to benefit us more than how it is at the moment. 

Agreed. Much happier if this is true given their wealth than Spurs sniffing around, which would make me ill. Don't get me started on Vestergaard

[Baird of the land]

I can’t see Danny ending up at one of the truly big clubs. I still think he may end up at Leicester.

[Red]

9 minutes ago, DT said:

Agreed. Much happier if this is true given their wealth than Spurs sniffing around, which would make me ill. Don't get me started on Vestergaard

This. The more clubs involved the more likely we will get a better price for him. Bin dippers seem to think they have a 20% sell on clause as well which is not great. To be honest I would be happy to get enough to be able to replace him with a decent younger up and coming (proven to a point and not completely untested) forward - possibly from Europe. It appears Ings wants to leave and if so let him, but for a fair deal to all sides, which is not to Spurs as history indicates. I am not sure he will prosper elsewhere mind.

[Chapel End]

I've given up caring if he goes and who he might go to, we have to accept it either way.

If he stays then great.

If he goes then so be it

[saintwbu]

The City thing makes perfect sense to me. A club of their size/quality should have 3 good forwards to choose from, in reality once Aguero goes they don’t have any. Jesus isn’t good enough to rely on, so Ings and Haaland (or Kane) together would be good business. Not many proven goal scorers would sign to be back up to Kane/Haaland, but Ings probably would. 

[Scallysaint]

The above spat between le god and others is a bit pointless. Ings clearly wants to leave for a final big pay day. Let’s get as much money as we can and reinvest. From the moment he leaves he is just another player who cares.

[JustinSFC]

26 minutes ago, Baird of the land said:

I can’t see Danny ending up at one of the truly big clubs. I still think he may end up at Leicester.

Yeah, I really can't see City and that's not to discredit anyone with knowledge, but do City REALLY need to go for Danny Ings even as a backup? 

And it's not even like they might do if he's cheap, City don't need to bargain shop but they aren't going to pay over the odds for him either, and I think what we paid was probably over the odds @£20M and it would still be over the odds at that price.

He's 29, get's injured often and less than 18months left on his contract, he's a £12M player.

I can see Spurs or Leicester.

And my personal take is, if City win the CL or the Quad this year that's Pep done there, I think he'll move on.

Even if he just wins the CL he's won everything here after that, what else does he stay there for?

And Brendan Rodgers I think will end up at Spurs because I can't see Mourinho being there next year.

[Dorchester Saint]

Oh FFS this is ridiculous, Man City are not interested in signing an injury prone Danny Ings who will be 29 this summer.....Ings ticks all of the boxes of a West Ham style signing 🙄

Edited 22 March, 2021 by Dorchester Saint

[so22saint]

I posted this last November.  A mate of mine was at school with Ings and is still a mate, and he said Danny told him he is off to Man City for a last pay day.

That big Olivers Battery house won’t pay for itself :-)

[JustinSFC]

4 minutes ago, so22saint said:

I posted this last November.  A mate of mine was at school with Ings and is still a mate, and he said Danny told him he is off to Man City for a last pay day.

That big Olivers Battery house won’t pay for itself 🙂

I might well know your mate.

I didn't go to school with Danny and I don't know him, I'm a few years older but I went to the same secondary school as him. Hamble.

That would explain the loss in form after the January window shut...

I don't think that moves going to happen now, not City.

 

 

 

[S-Clarke]

30 minutes ago, Dorchester Saint said:

Oh FFS this is ridiculous, Man City are not interested in signing an injury prone Danny Ings who will be 29 this summer.....Ings ticks all of the boxes of a West Ham style signing 🙄

There's clearly something in it, whether it's agent talk or genuine 'feelers', there's something going on.

We all need to accept he's gone, and I hope the club are planning night and day for his replacement.

[Dusic]

Since Ings has been at Saints his injury record hasn't really been a problem.

Yes he gets injuries but he is also being played for usually 90mins in every game he is available for.

For a top club he would be an excellent squad option. Cheap, English, highly professional, great character and an excellent player.

I don't begrudge him a good move, but is extremely frustrating that despite how much his form and reputation has increased during his time at Saints we will likely just get our £20m back or thereabouts.

For teams in the bottom half a striker like Ings is golddust.

We will get quoted 30m for a decent Championship option.

[Whitey Grandad]

For him to get the move that he wants, if he wants one, he will need to be doing the business in the next few months.

[Dusic]

7 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

For him to get the move that he wants, if he wants one, he will need to be doing the business in the next few months.

I doubt it will make a huge difference. Teams know how good he is, another 10 games won't really add or take away from that really.

His motivation will be on making the Euros squad, what a shame for Saints fans that its in these circumstances i.e when on the verge of leaving.

Edited 22 March, 2021 by Dusic

[SaintsLoyal]

He and his agent are taking the piss.

[Chez]

28 minutes ago, Whitey Grandad said:

For him to get the move that he wants, if he wants one, he will need to be doing the business in the next few months.

yep, hence that agent placed advert/reminder by his agent, perhaps to ensure Spurs hurry up/don't rest on their laurels.

[davefizzy14]

29 minutes ago, LeG said:

I will find out re the city link

LeG is there any update on the contract offer for Danny? 

[Patrick Bateman]

If Ings goes, which it looks like he will, he's just another c*nt who played for Saints for a little bit. 

As Saints fans, people should be used to this by now - they're here and decent, they move on, f*ck them.  There will be a next one, I don't understand why people get so weirdly attached. 

[washsaint]

Couldn't really care less if he stays or goes.  He was brilliant last season but this season and his first at Saints have been OK but no more than that.  In recent months he has looked a shadow of last years player and no matter what anyone says, he gets more injuries than most.

It's not worth keeping players who don't want to be here. 

[Hayling Saint]

7 minutes ago, washsaint said:

Couldn't really care less if he stays or goes.  He was brilliant last season but this season and his first at Saints have been OK but no more than that.  In recent months he has looked a shadow of last years player and no matter what anyone says, he gets more injuries than most.

It's not worth keeping players who don't want to be here. 

Totally agree with this.

[Dry Toast]

Yawn. Thanks, bye. Next.

[Patrick Bateman]

Just now, Dry Toast said:

Yawn. Thanks, bye. Next.

This.

[HarvSFC]

Do Liverpool have a 20% sell on clause? First I’ve seen of it tonight, Liverpool Echo reporting it.

[AlexLaw76]

Ings going - it happens.  He has not been that good this season (aweseome last season) but still a very good striker. 

We have lost players like Ings before but my worry is the state of his replacement (if any).  Probably some unknown from France who takes at least half a season to get a start, with fans being really happy about it as we fight for 17th. 

Give it a couple of weeks and Redmond will be talked up as the new Ings. 

Edited 23 March, 2021 by AlexLaw76

[Dusic]

Its a shame as a fanbase that we have become so accepting of losing our best players so easily, but totqlly understandable.

Obviously all different cases but Bournemouth gave Callum Wilson something like 4 new contracts in 5 years to keep him until they went down. Brighton have done similar with Lewis Dunk.

The likes of Palace and Leicester have fought off interest in Zaha and Vardy pretty well.

Grealish also on a LT contract to protect value.

I am totally onboard with our business model and general transfer approach, but we surely have to stop players entering their final year otherwise we are executing the buy low/sell high strategy quite awfully. The same will happen with Vestergaard and in two years time it will be Salisu probably.

Ings case it will be particularly galling to get a paltry fee for a player who has been such a difference maker.

Hopefully he at least goes to someone like City or Chelsea and not West Ham or Leicester.

Edited 23 March, 2021 by Dusic

[ozzmeister]

Ings replacement for Aguero - decent player, at a decent cost to be second / third choice to come off the bench and nick a goal? Would suit Ing's injury situation not being the focal point, would make him a better prospect for Ings (just being at a top club sadly does) and will give him a few winners medals to finish his career.

 

I could very much see this happened (similar to Lambert at Liverpool).

[SKD]

13 hours ago, Baird of the land said:

I can’t see Danny ending up at one of the truly big clubs. I still think he may end up at Leicester.

I think it’s between him and Edouard as their top 2 targets, although that was before iheanacho found a bit of form. 
 

But I agree with you, I think that’s where he’ll end up, which will be disappointing given we’ve bent over backwards to keep him. I could just about stomach one of the big boys.  
 

It’s clear he’s off though and I’m not sure I blame him. The club in its current form is going nowhere, just a constant cycle of battling relegation which will end badly one year, probably next. He wants to get out and a move to a big club before it’s too late and I think that’s probably fair enough. 
 

His body, previous injuries and playing style, probably only got 2/3 seasons left at the top level. 

[JRM]

If he does go hopefully it is to Man City and they pay a bit extra to at least give us a chance of replacing him. If he can sign off with a winning goal in the cup final that would be fitting. 

I can see Saints trying the loan market again next season and doing things on the cheap, depressing really. 

[SKD]

2 minutes ago, JRM said:

If he does go hopefully it is to Man City and they pay a bit extra to at least give us a chance of replacing him. If he can sign off with a winning goal in the cup final that would be fitting. 

I can see Saints trying the loan market again next season and doing things on the cheap, depressing really. 

City won’t ’pay a bit extra’. History proves they’re pretty smart with their purchases and don’t get dragged into transfer battles (see Harry Maguire). 
 

Chelsea would be the best option for us, if they are keen. They have many reserve players not getting a game. We could try and position a swap deal for someone like Abraham, which would suit us. 

[SKD]

10 hours ago, davefizzy14 said:

LeG is there any update on the contract offer for Danny? 

Still on the table. Imo, we need to give him a deadline (we may have done). We need an answer so we can plan either way. 
 

The trouble for Ings here is that he could end up blowing his chance to play in a cup semi / final. 
 

It’s got Fonte situation written all over it. Wants and expecting a move to a big club, they’ll move to other targets and he’ll end up at someone like West Ham. 

[SKD]

13 hours ago, Dorchester Saint said:

Oh FFS this is ridiculous, Man City are not interested in signing an injury prone Danny Ings who will be 29 this summer.....Ings ticks all of the boxes of a West Ham style signing 🙄

But you’d admit that they would be interested in Kane, who is a similar age and has a just as bad, if not worse injury record. The difference here is Kane would cost £100+ m, ings £20m. 
 

He’d be a very solid back up option for them to be in their squad at that price. 

[tajjuk]

Also saying Liverpool have a 20% sell on clause......

So if that is true, we could end up struggling to even get £15 million and would need double that to replace him at least. 

[Depressed of Shirley]

3 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

Also saying Liverpool have a 20% sell on clause......

So if that is true, we could end up struggling to even get £15 million and would need double that to replace him at least. 

If that's the case, then don't sell him as the replacement will be more than £15m anyway. He's still under contract for another year, make him earn it.

[Alanh]

5 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

Also saying Liverpool have a 20% sell on clause......

So if that is true, we could end up struggling to even get £15 million and would need double that to replace him at least. 

I would have thought it would be 20% of profit on any deal, not 20% of the total fee.  I think that's the general way that sell on clauses work.

[JustinSFC]

42 minutes ago, SKD said:

But you’d admit that they would be interested in Kane, who is a similar age and has a just as bad, if not worse injury record. The difference here is Kane would cost £100+ m, ings £20m. 
 

He’d be a very solid back up option for them to be in their squad at that price. 

Thing is, I see the similarity but Harry Kane is in a different universe imo.

Kane even with his injuries you're guaranteed 20 goals a season and he's done it year in year out even with his injuries.

Danny has had one season.

Spurs will want a fortune for him, because it will take a fortune to replace his goals. Spurs without Kane are a mid table team.

Edited 23 March, 2021 by JustinSFC

[Charlie Wayman]

Do a swap with Aguero. 

 

[DT]

So all of those who thought his body language had changed were...right

Bloody big balls players. Need to cut and collect. Shrewd foreign signing from nowhere, please

[SKD]

40 minutes ago, JustinSFC said:

Thing is, I see the similarity but Harry Kane is in a different universe imo.

Kane even with his injuries you're guaranteed 20 goals a season and he's done it year in year out even with his injuries.

Danny has had one season.

Spurs will want a fortune for him, because it will take a fortune to replace his goals. Spurs without Kane are a mid table team.

I 100% agree. Kane is clearly the level above ings, I’m not disputing that. 
 

But if you’re ruling Danny out because of his age and injury record, you’d surely have to say the same about Kane, who’ll cost 5x the price. 
 

Both woulD score a hat full for them. But for £20m, there is incredible value in ings, it’ll allow them to get him and another. 

[DT]

The other factor in the equation is that we might 'need' to sell Ings to try and balance books a bit better. And especially if we go down...(sorry)

[Forester]

My preference would be for him to sign contract extension.  Fully fit he is one of the best around.  However, every player has his price and in the three seasons we have had him he has had injury problems in two of them.  History suggests the closer to 30 players get, they rarely suffer fewer injuries.

 

So this becomes a cold hard “every player has his price” situation.  In my opinion we need to sign two strikers in the summer, assuming we will look to move Long on.  This could provide useful funds to do so

[ErwinK1961]

4 hours ago, Dusic said:

Its a shame as a fanbase that we have become so accepting of losing our best players so easily, but totqlly understandable.

Obviously all different cases but Bournemouth gave Callum Wilson something like 4 new contracts in 5 years to keep him until they went down. Brighton have done similar with Lewis Dunk.

The likes of Palace and Leicester have fought off interest in Zaha and Vardy pretty well.

Grealish also on a LT contract to protect value.

I am totally onboard with our business model and general transfer approach, but we surely have to stop players entering their final year otherwise we are executing the buy low/sell high strategy quite awfully. The same will happen with Vestergaard and in two years time it will be Salisu probably.

Ings case it will be particularly galling to get a paltry fee for a player who has been such a difference maker.

Hopefully he at least goes to someone like City or Chelsea and not West Ham or Leicester.

Agree, but not sure when we could have offered a contract sooner on this occasion. First year of contract he was here on loan and was generally poor.

Last season he started on the bench, it was only after the Skates game he started to step up. Seems we've been trying to get him to sign a deal for the last 12 months, so not sure what else we could do? To maximise his value would have meant selling him in the summer window last year, which after his excellent form at the end of the season and the short turnaround to this one, was never going to happen.

Similarly on Vestergaard - lets be honest, until this season most people thought he was a waste of money and were willing to drive him up to Leicester for a move. Think it's safe to assume that we've probably been trying to get him to sign a new deal for most of this season, but he hasn't. 

Unfortunately we can offer all the contracts we want, but as a club we're hardly the most appealing option right now. 

 

[Streaky]

22 minutes ago, LeG said:

No contracts will be signed until we are safe.

Danny himself doesn't know what will happen.

This suggests to me that his agent is putting feelers out there and will present Danny with his options at the end of the season. Obviously the agent will be favouring a move. Personally, i think he will be off. He would have signed by now. 

He could have signed an extension last season and chose not too. Hes off everyone knows it. Would love to see us go after Ivan Toney. Obviously depending if Brentford come up.

[S-Clarke]

3 minutes ago, Streaky said:

He could have signed an extension last season and chose not too. Hes off everyone knows it. Would love to see us go after Ivan Toney. Obviously depending if Brentford come up.

He'd cost us upward of £35m I reckon.

We will replace Ings on the cheap as a best case scenario.

The most likely scenario is that the club propaganda moves into over drive and starts talking up Redmond as the perfect foil for Adams, and how Adams has developed etc etc. Then we won't need to spend a penny.

Edited 23 March, 2021 by S-Clarke

[Toussaint]

Talksport is pretty much dedicating today's programming to the Danny Ings transfer.