Jump to content

Danny Ings - Official: Signs for Villa


Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, SKD said:

Nonsense. The latest England team had CM  starters from Leeds and West Ham. And started the euros with a CB from Villa. 

If you’re good enough, you’ll get in. 

If he moves to city, yes he’ll likely get in. Not because of the name of the club he plays for, but because at a better team, like city, he’ll bang in 20 goals. 

Yep. This perceived big club bias  comes from fans of smaller clubs who have the hump because their teams players don't get picked. If Ings was in form I think he'd have been picked, but after covid and injury, he wasn't quite the same and it was understandable decision. 

I do wander why people think an international manager (who's judged on results) might go out of his way to pick a lesser player from a bigger team. We had it with JWP too, but after the performances of Phillips and Rice that's all died down. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, egg said:

Yep. This perceived big club bias  comes from fans of smaller clubs who have the hump because their teams players don't get picked. If Ings was in form I think he'd have been picked, but after covid and injury, he wasn't quite the same and it was understandable decision. 

I do wander why people think an international manager (who's judged on results) might go out of his way to pick a lesser player from a bigger team. We had it with JWP too, but after the performances of Phillips and Rice that's all died down. 

I’m not sure you could ever really argue that some players haven’t had England caps based on the teams they play for. There was a time pretty much any player who’d played a minute for Spurs under Poch was getting an England call up. Harry Winks and Ryan Mason have 11 caps between them. Eric Dier had to have a completely disastrous season for Spurs this year to finally drop out of the England squad - he has 45 caps!! 

History shows plenty of players get into the England squad a lot easier if they play for one of the bigger clubs. And no, playing for a bigger club doesn’t necessarily make you a better player. Plenty of players come through academies at bigger clubs and get game time, but aren’t at the required level - Ryan Mason as I mentioned being one of them. Mason Greenwood was rumoured to be in Southgate’s this summer until injury - who’s done more at Premier League level; Ings, Bamford, Watkins or Greenwood? 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, saintwbu said:

I’m not sure you could ever really argue that some players haven’t had England caps based on the teams they play for. There was a time pretty much any player who’d played a minute for Spurs under Poch was getting an England call up. Harry Winks and Ryan Mason have 11 caps between them. Eric Dier had to have a completely disastrous season for Spurs this year to finally drop out of the England squad - he has 45 caps!! 

History shows plenty of players get into the England squad a lot easier if they play for one of the bigger clubs. And no, playing for a bigger club doesn’t necessarily make you a better player. Plenty of players come through academies at bigger clubs and get game time, but aren’t at the required level - Ryan Mason as I mentioned being one of them. Mason Greenwood was rumoured to be in Southgate’s this summer until injury - who’s done more at Premier League level; Ings, Bamford, Watkins or Greenwood? 

I disagree. Phillips and Rice play for smaller clubs. They were at the heart of our team at the Euros. White got picked ahead of players from bigger clubs. 

If we assume you're correct though, please explain why Southgate would pick lesser players and risk damaging his reputation. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, egg said:

I disagree. Phillips and Rice play for smaller clubs. They were at the heart of our team at the Euros. White got picked ahead of players from bigger clubs. 

If we assume you're correct though, please explain why Southgate would pick lesser players and risk damaging his reputation. 

I’m not saying players from small clubs don’t get picked, i’m saying a lot of players have been picked in the past just because they play for a big club. Rice and Phillips are both brilliant players, and would’ve been my choice to be the CM pairing for England - but did any English CM’s that were competing with them and play for bigger clubs get left out? I can’t think of any. Henderson would’ve started ahead of either of them if he’d been fit, but actually Rice is a much better footballer imo, so thankfully he wasn’t fit.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Greenridge said:

£75K pw is nearly £4M per year. Just one year. So, yes, he definitely needs to be concerned with securing his retirement fund.

Don't dismiss it lightly. For me and you, yes but rich people especially rich young footballers have a life-style that is beyond anything we can imagine. Everyone tends to live just beyond their means and rich young footballers will be no exception. If you have to retire at 32 (say) but are still socially active the total loss of income could be a huge blow for the unprepared - mortgage to meet, kids at posh schools, supercars to run etc, etc

Most of their income is taxed at the highest rate and over time inflation will eat away at any "nest egg" they have accumulated.

Edited by Charlie Wayman
  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, saintwbu said:

I’m not saying players from small clubs don’t get picked, i’m saying a lot of players have been picked in the past just because they play for a big club. Rice and Phillips are both brilliant players, and would’ve been my choice to be the CM pairing for England - but did any English CM’s that were competing with them and play for bigger clubs get left out? I can’t think of any. Henderson would’ve started ahead of either of them if he’d been fit, but actually Rice is a much better footballer imo, so thankfully he wasn’t fit.

I wasn't talking about players picked in the past, my focus was on Ings (and to an extent JWP) so apologies if we were at cross purposes. I agree that some shocking players have been picked, but I think Southgate got it right with the Euro squad and I don't see any big team bias at all there. In Henderson, if he was 100% I'd have started him in the Euros personally, but as it was, Phillips in particular really surprised me and Phillips was decent too. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, egg said:

I wasn't talking about players picked in the past, my focus was on Ings (and to an extent JWP) so apologies if we were at cross purposes. I agree that some shocking players have been picked, but I think Southgate got it right with the Euro squad and I don't see any big team bias at all there. In Henderson, if he was 100% I'd have started him in the Euros personally, but as it was, Phillips in particular really surprised me and Phillips was decent too. 

I disagree with Phillips. I don't think he offered anything in any game apart from the first game. Or was that in a warm up game before?

I can't recall anything he did in the final that helped England and nothing that a few english DM couldn't have!

As for Ings, he hasn't done anything wrong by running his contract down if that's what he wanted to do.

Clubs use players and players use clubs, that's just the way it goes. I would be more angry if he signed a new contract then wanted to leave before it ended!

 

Edited by saintquin
To add something about subject of the thread
Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, saintquin said:

I disagree with Phillips. I don't think he offered anything in any game apart from the first game. Or was that in a warm up game before?

I can't recall anything he did in the final that helped England and nothing that a few english DM couldn't have!

As for Ings, he hasn't done anything wrong by running his contract down if that's what he wanted to do.

Clubs use players and players use clubs, that's just the way it goes. I would be more angry if he signed a new contract then wanted to leave before it ended!

 

This. If a player wants to honour his contract and not sign a new one, that’s his prerogative. Can’t moan about it, that’s the term of his deal. If he doesn’t want to extend, that’s his call, down to the club then to either sell or release on a free.

Players that sign 5/6 year deals, then want to leave 6-12 months later and act like they’ve been detained in a North Korean labour camp is another matter (I’m looking at you Virgil).

  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, ErwinK1961 said:

This. If a player wants to honour his contract and not sign a new one, that’s his prerogative. Can’t moan about it, that’s the term of his deal. If he doesn’t want to extend, that’s his call, down to the club then to either sell or release on a free.

Players that sign 5/6 year deals, then want to leave 6-12 months later and act like they’ve been detained in a North Korean labour camp is another matter (I’m looking at you Virgil).

Yeah but at least with what Virgil done we got full valuation for him.. what ings and hojbjerg done is making us take a crap valuation because it’s better then losing for them nothing and we end up not even getting half of what they are worth 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, pimpin4rizeal said:

Yeah but at least with what Virgil done we got full valuation for him.. what ings and hojbjerg done is making us take a crap valuation because it’s better then losing for them nothing and we end up not even getting half of what they are worth 

Yeah, the Virgil thing worked for all parties at the time really. Thanks largely to rat face though, sounds like a gentleman’s agreement to leave after 2/3 years of signing the 6-year deal got withdrawn by him.

With Ings, I guess there was nothing stopping us offering him a 5/6 year deal but we instead went for 3. Made sense at the time I guess but with hindsight it should have been more.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Sunglasses Ron said:

Yeah, the Virgil thing worked for all parties at the time really. Thanks largely to rat face though, sounds like a gentleman’s agreement to leave after 2/3 years of signing the 6-year deal got withdrawn by him.

With Ings, I guess there was nothing stopping us offering him a 5/6 year deal but we instead went for 3. Made sense at the time I guess but with hindsight it should have been more.

Sadly it didn't really work for us because we pissed that once in a generation transfer fee up the wall on a load of complete and utter shit. Criminal what we did with the VVD money to be honest.

It should have been the basis to allow us to go on and evolve like Leicester for example, but sadly we had Ross Wilson and Les Reed running the charade.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, S-Clarke said:

Sadly it didn't really work for us because we pissed that once in a generation transfer fee up the wall on a load of complete and utter shit. Criminal what we did with the VVD money to be honest.

It should have been the basis to allow us to go on and evolve like Leicester for example, but sadly we had Ross Wilson and Les Reed running the charade.

Yup, a balls up of epic proportions. All too easy to piss money up the wall when you have too much of it. We got complacent and lazy and ended up worse off. Unbelievable Jeff!

Edited by Sunglasses Ron
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, pimpin4rizeal said:

Yeah but at least with what Virgil done we got full valuation for him.. what ings and hojbjerg done is making us take a crap valuation because it’s better then losing for them nothing and we end up not even getting half of what they are worth 

But what have Ings and PEH actually done though? Other than honour their contract? (Admittedly PEH saying he’d only join Spurs wasn’t helpful).

The fact they have one year left isn’t their problem, it’s the clubs. If we wanted “full value” we should have sold them earlier. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, ErwinK1961 said:

But what have Ings and PEH actually done though? Other than honour their contract? (Admittedly PEH saying he’d only join Spurs wasn’t helpful).

The fact they have one year left isn’t their problem, it’s the clubs. If we wanted “full value” we should have sold them earlier. 

 

IMHO plenty, it's one thing wanting to leave to improve your self (better wages, chance of honours etc.), but if you want to leave a club that in both instances have built/rescued their careers then fine but show a bit of gratitude and respect. Agree a new contract with a clause that says if a top x club comes in with an offer of y or above than they can go. Fair deal for both parties, but to shaft the club that helped you (adamidly Ings hasn't done that publicibly yet but nevertheless it hampers our preparations for the next season) is a kick in the teeth for the club showing them loyalty, but alas that's modern day football. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Red said:

IMHO plenty, it's one thing wanting to leave to improve your self (better wages, chance of honours etc.), but if you want to leave a club that in both instances have built/rescued their careers then fine but show a bit of gratitude and respect. Agree a new contract with a clause that says if a top x club comes in with an offer of y or above than they can go. Fair deal for both parties, but to shaft the club that helped you (adamidly Ings hasn't done that publicibly yet but nevertheless it hampers our preparations for the next season) is a kick in the teeth for the club showing them loyalty, but alas that's modern day football. 

By running the contract down the player will get better wages and a better signing on fee, due to the lack of a transfer fee. You are suggesting the player takes less money to give the club more income? If we let the player get within a year of the end of his contract then that's the clubs fault. 

BTW aren't we rumoured to be doing exactly the same to Blackburn? Not long left on the contract so we offer to pay less? It works both ways and I don't see it as "shafting" the club, more that way things are now.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pedantic Pete said:

By running the contract down the player will get better wages and a better signing on fee, due to the lack of a transfer fee. You are suggesting the player takes less money to give the club more income? If we let the player get within a year of the end of his contract then that's the clubs fault. 

BTW aren't we rumoured to be doing exactly the same to Blackburn? Not long left on the contract so we offer to pay less? It works both ways and I don't see it as "shafting" the club, more that way things are now.

 

I think it is a fair argument.

Where I do think that there is some shafting going on, is where a player on their last year has been tapped up and insists on only joining a single club - it means the negotiation abilities of the selling club is virtually zero. This seemed to be the case last year where Hojberg rejected the overtures of Everton and was only interested in going to Tottenham.   I am assuming this is why there appears to remain some bad blood between the clubs.

It wouldn't surprise me that something similar happens with Vestergaard, although I hope that Ings can aim higher ......  We'll see. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Pedantic Pete said:

By running the contract down the player will get better wages and a better signing on fee, due to the lack of a transfer fee. You are suggesting the player takes less money to give the club more income? If we let the player get within a year of the end of his contract then that's the clubs fault. 

BTW aren't we rumoured to be doing exactly the same to Blackburn? Not long left on the contract so we offer to pay less? It works both ways and I don't see it as "shafting" the club, more that way things are now.

 

The idea that we "let" the player run it down is naive. There's been negotiations with Ings going on for a year.

I don't get this idea that there are things that the club can do to lock down players like the players themselves don't have a decent idea of their own value, their own position of strength.

This was very visible in sagas like the Alderweireld affair where too many people thought all we needed to do was to "move fast" to "quickly", "lock down" the player, like we can do that before the player has any notion that other offers exist, other clubs exist, or that they don't know their own power and options.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/07/2021 at 09:25, egg said:

I disagree. Phillips and Rice play for smaller clubs. They were at the heart of our team at the Euros. White got picked ahead of players from bigger clubs. 

If we assume you're correct though, please explain why Southgate would pick lesser players and risk damaging his reputation. 

Funny that Leeds and West Ham are considered "smaller" clubs. Players have always been picked from West Ham, they are the FA darlings, just think about 1966. Leeds, small club, just because they have been in the doldrums for the last 20 odd years.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, VectisSaint said:

Funny that Leeds and West Ham are considered "smaller" clubs. Players have always been picked from West Ham, they are the FA darlings, just think about 1966. Leeds, small club, just because they have been in the doldrums for the last 20 odd years.

Smaller as in not one of the big boys.

This ain't 1966.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, ErwinK1961 said:

But what have Ings and PEH actually done though? Other than honour their contract? (Admittedly PEH saying he’d only join Spurs wasn’t helpful).

The fact they have one year left isn’t their problem, it’s the clubs. If we wanted “full value” we should have sold them earlier. 

 

Well its simply not the percieved thing to do and leaves clubs without any money to replace.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, LiberalCommunist said:

Villa have done everything they can to keep him. We wouldn't have put up a fight. No similarities. 

He'll leave them next summer for a massive fee, which will suit all parties. 

Am not so sure, it could be argued that we are doing all we can to keep Ings if rumours are true about the amount we are offering in his new contract. Yes, money the bigger clubs offer goes a long way, but if we were competing on Leicester's level, then I doubt we would see Ings and JWP linked with moves away. I hate Leicester but they have done everything that we should have done, even before they even thought about it. Wasted chance. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Villa have invested massively. Look at what they are doing with the U21 & U18. They are going to be a knocking around sixth in the next couple of seasons. Once he leaves, he will go on their terms so they will get the best possible price.

 

Nothing like us. We show no ambition, but expect loyalty. We try to tie contracts just for profit.

I love our club, but we are nothing like Villa. As next season and beyond will show. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, LiberalCommunist said:

Villa have invested massively. Look at what they are doing with the U21 & U18. They are going to be a knocking around sixth in the next couple of seasons. Once he leaves, he will go on their terms so they will get the best possible price.

 

Nothing like us. We show no ambition, but expect loyalty. We try to tie contracts just for profit.

I love our club, but we are nothing like Villa. As next season and beyond will show. 

The point is that they are spending more than us, so they can afford to keep players like Grealish (for longer, at least). It really is that simple

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LiberalCommunist said:

Money and ambition. 

We have neither. 

I believe the manager and the board as well as the players have ambition. 

The owner clearly doesn't. 

Therfore we have no money over and above what the business makes to achieve that ambition more easily. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, MarkSFC said:

I believe the manager and the board as well as the players have ambition. 

The owner clearly doesn't. 

Therfore we have no money over and above what the business makes to achieve that ambition more easily. 

 

The owner doesn't have money to invest, and the Chinese government wouldn't let him even if he did. Ambition is irrelevant

Link to post
Share on other sites

WE have to generate our own cash which ties the manager's hands and puts us at a big disadvantage. This is nothing new, its been this way for years. It's a triumph to have been in the top flight so long. The players, the manager and the Board have done an amazing job with no help from the owner. If we sell Ings I will not be sorry. He is in the twilight of his career, he is injury prone,, he will be worth nothing in a year's time or, if he signs a new contract we will be saddled with massive wages with him in treatment room. But with the cash we can plan a future with a younger fitter striker. Thank you Danny, you've been star quality when fit. If any other club is willing to take the risk, go for it!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, CB Fry said:

The idea that we "let" the player run it down is naive. There's been negotiations with Ings going on for a year.

I don't get this idea that there are things that the club can do to lock down players like the players themselves don't have a decent idea of their own value, their own position of strength.

This was very visible in sagas like the Alderweireld affair where too many people thought all we needed to do was to "move fast" to "quickly", "lock down" the player, like we can do that before the player has any notion that other offers exist, other clubs exist, or that they don't know their own power and options.

 

I agree, it takes two to tango and the closer that the player gets to the end of a contract then the more it tempting it must be to run it down and take the bounty that comes with a free transfer. 

I didn't mean that the club are to blame, apologies if it read that way..I think it's just they way it is now, if any club doesn't keep topping up contracts to keep them at 2 years plus then the run the risk of the contract being run down. However, you don't want to be giving everyone really long contracts or you risk ending up with some players you can't get rid of (whether it because they aren't good enough or they are injured etc.

I think it's a no win scenario for the club, i don't blame them for the situation and I don't think the players should be blamed. It's just business and each party have to do what's right for them- there isn't any sentiment involved!

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, WALK DMC said:

I think it is a fair argument.

Where I do think that there is some shafting going on, is where a player on their last year has been tapped up and insists on only joining a single club - it means the negotiation abilities of the selling club is virtually zero. This seemed to be the case last year where Hojberg rejected the overtures of Everton and was only interested in going to Tottenham.   I am assuming this is why there appears to remain some bad blood between the clubs.

It wouldn't surprise me that something similar happens with Vestergaard, although I hope that Ings can aim higher ......  We'll see. 

I do get that, but I think it probably works for us as much as it happens to us. I am sure there have been instances where we have used the fact a player wants to come to us over a competitor to ensure the price is where we want it to be?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 16/07/2021 at 18:24, Red said:

IMHO plenty, it's one thing wanting to leave to improve your self (better wages, chance of honours etc.), but if you want to leave a club that in both instances have built/rescued their careers then fine but show a bit of gratitude and respect. Agree a new contract with a clause that says if a top x club comes in with an offer of y or above than they can go. Fair deal for both parties, but to shaft the club that helped you (adamidly Ings hasn't done that publicibly yet but nevertheless it hampers our preparations for the next season) is a kick in the teeth for the club showing them loyalty, but alas that's modern day football. 

If the players who want to leave at the end of their contact are morally obliged to sign new deals out of loyalty, is the club equally obliged to offer new contracts to players it doesn't really want to keep? Or does the expectation of loyalty only go one way? And let's not pretend that we were the only option before retirement for a promising Bayern youngster and a proven PL goal scorer in his mid-twenties - we weren't doing either of them a favor.

Being upset with players who are still under contract agitating for a move is one thing, but holding it against players if they leave when their contracts are up is just pointless.

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, verlaine1979 said:

If the players who want to leave at the end of their contact are morally obliged to sign new deals out of loyalty, is the club equally obliged to offer new contracts to players it doesn't really want to keep? Or does the expectation of loyalty only go one way? And let's not pretend that we were the only option before retirement for a promising Bayern youngster and a proven PL goal scorer in his mid-twenties - we weren't doing either of them a favor.

Being upset with players who are still under contract agitating for a move is one thing, but holding it against players if they leave when their contracts are up is just pointless.

 

Fair point. Although I think Saints are pretty good at making sure players we no longer want are cared for - we try and find new clubs etc. Let them train with us for no cost. You could argue that we have given players contracts they did not earn/deserve at the end of their usefulness (Long etc.). Look at how much we have stuck with the absolute abject failures, who we have tried to rebuild their careers elsewhere rather than just pay them off (suspect that would have been cheaper for the club).

To be clear I am not saying that players have to stay against their will, just that be fair to a club that has looked after you - in case of Ings, if he wants to go fair enough but be open with the club, give early notice and don't leave us hanging. For example by us offering to make him the best paid player ever at Saints others will now demand an increase. If he wasn't going to sign a new contract then be honest and then there is no need to create unrest in the rest of the camp.

Just my opinion - what do I know apart from being really disappointed at how the game is going these days - all commercial and no real grass roots fun. I had the pleasure of meeting Emlyn Hughes at an event and for me he and his era was the magic of the sport - he was paid £100 per week when he won the European cup!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Think there’s much more to Ings situation than him being a fly in the ointment. He’s been training with the squad - can’t imagine Ralph and crew would allow that if Ings was being anything but professional about it all…there is still a chance he might still be with the club next season if the right offer doesn’t come in. Contract talks are rarely black and white affairs.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, the saint in winchester said:

If the club won't sell him, and he won't re-sign for us (so he says), is he really likely to throw himself into 50/50 balls or push himself to breaking point this coming season? Another serious injury during the season could leave him out of contract with us, and at risk of not finding a new employer for the following season.

Precisely why it's not good for either party as Ralph has been saying and supposedly telling Ings. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, the saint in winchester said:

If the club won't sell him, and he won't re-sign for us (so he says), is he really likely to throw himself into 50/50 balls or push himself to breaking point this coming season? Another serious injury during the season could leave him out of contract with us, and at risk of not finding a new employer for the following season.

Perhaps one could argue that if he knows he'll out of contract at the end of the season, he needs to put himself in the shop window and perform well?  

I wonder if him not signing might ultimately work out ok for us.  Ok we won't get any money which is a big loss, but knowing our luck, we'd have signed him up for another few years and he'd end up critically injured after the first.  

Edited by Manuel
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, the saint in winchester said:

If the club won't sell him, and he won't re-sign for us (so he says), is he really likely to throw himself into 50/50 balls or push himself to breaking point this coming season? Another serious injury during the season could leave him out of contract with us, and at risk of not finding a new employer for the following season.

He still wants to be in the World Cup squad so he will

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Manuel said:

Perhaps one could argue that if he knows he'll out of contract at the end of the season, he needs to put himself in the shop window and perform well?  

I wonder if him not signing might ultimately work out ok for us.  Ok we won't get any money which is a big loss, but knowing our luck, we'd have signed him up for another few years and he'd end up critically injured after the first.  

Another way of looking at the “no money” situation is he has arguably kept us in the premier league two seasons running, so for an outlay of 20m plus wages he had more than paid for himself?

I’m not saying it wouldn’t be nice to get a juicy fee btw.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Far que said:

The club knows he’s leaving 

I suspect the club is alluding to the idea of him staying to hold his value and will sell for about £20m if they need to. Doubt we sell beneath that though, might be better to have him for half a season and sell him for an inflated price in Jan to someone desperate.

Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, LiberalCommunist said:

Sell him in Jan?

Wow, this really could be the most exciting relegation battle ever!

I'm quite looking forward to it. No pretend positions this time, just a straight out fight for a point on day one.

First job is to beat the bookies who have us as third fav for the drop already. 

What do you mean by "pretend positions"?

And odds checker has us as joint 7th favourite:

1) Norwich
2) Watford
3) Brentford
4) Palace
5) Burnley
6) Newcastle
7) Wolves
=7) Us

At about 5/1. Not ideal but certainly not third fav's for the drop. What bookie were you looking at as basically everyone has all three promoted sides as almost evens and palace at 2/1 at best whereas not one site has as any shorter than 4/1? Source: https://www.oddschecker.com/football/english/premier-league/relegation

Edited by TWar
Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems to have gone from "Danny will be here next season" to "It's far from ideal situation".  
Sounds to me that it's moving towards him leaving, which would be a shame. I just hope we don't leave it so late, and then lose out on Armstrong deal because of it. It's a big summer and we don't seem to be winning it at the moment. Obviously still a long way to go til the end of the window, but I'm sure Ralph would prefer to have full squad in pre season.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Saint Garrett said:

Seems to have gone from "Danny will be here next season" to "It's far from ideal situation".  
Sounds to me that it's moving towards him leaving, which would be a shame. I just hope we don't leave it so late, and then lose out on Armstrong deal because of it. It's a big summer and we don't seem to be winning it at the moment. Obviously still a long way to go til the end of the window, but I'm sure Ralph would prefer to have full squad in pre season.

I'm not sure they are mutually exclusive situations. 

I hope he signs but if not I would prefer we sell and replace but I predict he will stay and leave for free next summer, which is not ideal for either party. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Lighthouse changed the title to Danny Ings - Official: Signs for Villa

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

View Terms of service (Terms of Use) and Privacy Policy (Privacy Policy) and Forum Guidelines ({Guidelines})