What the f**k is going on. Done with this rabble

[suewhistle]

16 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

Bravo 👌🏼.  Saved me (and doubtless some others) the hassle / scratched the itch to correct 😄

I should apologise to whelk really, but whilst I'm on a roll it's 'bated' breath not 'baited' (see someone else above)! As for scratching an itch I've got my infected swollen arm for that and just hope the antibiotics are working: the steroids haven't had any effect!

[trousers]

41 minutes ago, tajjuk said:

No one pointed out the possibility that maybe we pushed Ings to go? The club said the offer was too good to turn down, we knew he wasn't signing a new contract, we know he has injury issues, we know his age. Maybe the club preferred him out of the door now for this very good offer, rather than going on a free at the end of the year or 2-3 days before the end of the window to say Spurs or Man City for like £15 million.

Just a thought. Maybe they said 'Hey Danny we know you want to go a Champions League club but none of those have shown any interest at all so far, Villa have made a bid for you, it's a really good deal for us, it gives us time and funds to find a replacement for you, please could you seriously consider it, they'll probably throw a lot of money at you'.

I remember back in the day that things came out of the club that they weren't too disappointed in the Shaw deal, because not only was it very good money but there were question marks about his diet and professionalism, which turned out to be pretty accurate. 

Maybe similar here, maybe a few things have come up behind the scenes in his medical report or his numbers pre-season have been off and the club have thought we need to get rid of him now for the best deal we can.  We don't know what goes on behind the scenes, I mean there was all this talk about him being professional and not letting his levels drop, but maybe they have, maybe he's not been at it since he's returned. 

 

I think that's a decent hypothesis. Villa have only posted one relatively low-key tweet about Ings joining them which gives the impression that the deal came as a much a surprise to them as it did to us. You'd normally expect to see a fanfare of tweets for such a high profile signing. So, yep, it's a fair hunch that it was Saints pulling the strings on this rather than the other way around. 

[tajjuk]

9 minutes ago, trousers said:

I think that's a decent hypothesis. Villa have only posted one relatively low-key tweet about Ings joining them which gives the impression that the deal came as a much a surprise to them as it did to us. You'd normally expect to see a fanfare of tweets for such a high profile signing. So, yep, it's a fair hunch that it was Saints pulling the strings on this rather than the other way around. 

I would be surprised if maybe be touted him around. 

[Saint86]

39 minutes ago, trousers said:

I think that's a decent hypothesis. Villa have only posted one relatively low-key tweet about Ings joining them which gives the impression that the deal came as a much a surprise to them as it did to us. You'd normally expect to see a fanfare of tweets for such a high profile signing. So, yep, it's a fair hunch that it was Saints pulling the strings on this rather than the other way around. 

It doesn't add up that we wanted him out whilst also offering him the most lucrative contract in the club's history though. 

[Matthew Le God]

 

[Baird of the land]

1 hour ago, tajjuk said:

No one pointed out the possibility that maybe we pushed Ings to go? The club said the offer was too good to turn down, we knew he wasn't signing a new contract, we know he has injury issues, we know his age. Maybe the club preferred him out of the door now for this very good offer, rather than going on a free at the end of the year or 2-3 days before the end of the window to say Spurs or Man City for like £15 million.

Just a thought. Maybe they said 'Hey Danny we know you want to go a Champions League club but none of those have shown any interest at all so far, Villa have made a bid for you, it's a really good deal for us, it gives us time and funds to find a replacement for you, please could you seriously consider it, they'll probably throw a lot of money at you'.

I remember back in the day that things came out of the club that they weren't too disappointed in the Shaw deal, because not only was it very good money but there were question marks about his diet and professionalism, which turned out to be pretty accurate. 

Maybe similar here, maybe a few things have come up behind the scenes in his medical report or his numbers pre-season have been off and the club have thought we need to get rid of him now for the best deal we can.  We don't know what goes on behind the scenes, I mean there was all this talk about him being professional and not letting his levels drop, but maybe they have, maybe he's not been at it since he's returned. 

 

I don' think for a second that is the case. If there was genuine chance of him getting a move to a big club by sitting put he would have and saints wouldn't have been able to do anything about it.

[tajjuk]

5 minutes ago, Saint86 said:

It doesn't add up that we wanted him out whilst also offering him the most lucrative contract in the club's history though. 

We offered him that contract months ago, like February wasn't it? And I'd presume he got offered that contract because he showed a preference to wanting to stay.

Over the last 4-5 months he has obviously changed his mind, maybe twice, going from wanting to stay, to wanting to move to champs league club, to possibly just wanting to move.  We then don't know know how that impacted his motivation, work rate etc. or the approach from the club. 

[Mr X]

One things a certainty he will score against us 😜

[Lighthouse]

49 minutes ago, trousers said:

I think that's a decent hypothesis. Villa have only posted one relatively low-key tweet about Ings joining them which gives the impression that the deal came as a much a surprise to them as it did to us. You'd normally expect to see a fanfare of tweets for such a high profile signing. So, yep, it's a fair hunch that it was Saints pulling the strings on this rather than the other way around. 

I’ve seen some non-sequiturs on here over the years but this one’s definitely up there. Because Villa didn’t post a flurry of enthusiastic tweets, it’s likely that we were the ones trying to sell him?

 

I’d say it’s an awful lot more likely, if we’re reading anything into Villa’s Twitter activity, that they know their star player is off imminently and having a massive fanfare over a signing like Ings probably won’t be too well received.

[SKD]

2 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

I’ve seen some non-sequiturs on here over the years but this one’s definitely up there. Because Villa didn’t post a flurry of enthusiastic tweets, it’s likely that we were the ones trying to sell him?

 

I’d say it’s an awful lot more likely, if we’re reading anything into Villa’s Twitter activity, that they know their star player is off imminently and having a massive fanfare over a signing like Ings probably won’t be too well received.

Exactly. And they rushed to announce this deal to soften the blow of losing grealish. 
 

Hence all the additional talk of cantwell. 

[Ted Bates Statue]

 

2 hours ago, StrangelyBrown said:

Who else have we "lost" to a rival? Not exactly a trend is it?

Matty Targett to Villa, Jay Rod to West Brom, Jose Fonte to West Ham, Jack Cork to Swansea. You see, we just can't hold onto our best players.

[Ex Lion Tamer]

20 minutes ago, Lighthouse said:

I’ve seen some non-sequiturs on here over the years but this one’s definitely up there. Because Villa didn’t post a flurry of enthusiastic tweets, it’s likely that we were the ones trying to sell him?

 

I’d say it’s an awful lot more likely, if we’re reading anything into Villa’s Twitter activity, that they know their star player is off imminently and having a massive fanfare over a signing like Ings probably won’t be too well received.

I think the transfer happened very quickly because Villa wanted to get it done before Grealish goes. There was talk of it being done in 24 hours. The fee may have been conditional on getting it done quickly. No time to prepare social media activity.

Saints will have said to him we've had a good bid from Villa and we want you to take it please seeing as you're not signing a new contract. Danny could have dug his heels in but evidently decided he was up for the villa project, and also perhaps felt it would help the club if he could leave for a good fee

[Sheaf Saint]

32 minutes ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

 

Matty Targett to Villa, Jay Rod to West Brom, Jose Fonte to West Ham, Jack Cork to Swansea. You see, we just can't hold onto our best players.

Assuming you're not being sarcastic (it's hard to tell):

None of those were ever our best players, with the possible exception of Fonte in his prime. The other three weren't even regular starters for us when we sold them.

[Sarnia Cherie]

17 hours ago, East Kent Saint said:

Is that the same as having long Covid .

?

No Long is more painful on the eyes than Long Covid.

[Weston Super Saint]

1 hour ago, Mr X said:

One things a certainty he will score against us 😜

No chance!

We're not playing them until November, he'll be on the doctor's couch by then  

[Lighthouse]

1 hour ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

Saints will have said to him we've had a good bid from Villa and we want you to take it please

Complete conjecture.

[Matthew Le God]

1 hour ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

Matty Targett to Villa, Jay Rod to West Brom, Jose Fonte to West Ham, Jack Cork to Swansea. You see, we just can't hold onto our best players.

Are you being serious? 🤔

[CB Fry]

2 hours ago, trousers said:

I think that's a decent hypothesis. Villa have only posted one relatively low-key tweet about Ings joining them which gives the impression that the deal came as a much a surprise to them as it did to us. You'd normally expect to see a fanfare of tweets for such a high profile signing. So, yep, it's a fair hunch that it was Saints pulling the strings on this rather than the other way around. 

He's getting squad number 47 at Villa apparently, just after a couple of highly rated academy lads.

[Saint86]

2 hours ago, tajjuk said:

We offered him that contract months ago, like February wasn't it? And I'd presume he got offered that contract because he showed a preference to wanting to stay.

Over the last 4-5 months he has obviously changed his mind, maybe twice, going from wanting to stay, to wanting to move to champs league club, to possibly just wanting to move.  We then don't know know how that impacted his motivation, work rate etc. or the approach from the club. 

I think this is little more than the club knew he wouldn't sign and villa offered us and amount we'd be crazy to turn down. The fact that it came utterly out of the blue for both clubs is a sign of desperation / craziness on the part of Villa. But ultimatley, if they cna keep him fit then it's a good deal for all parties. 

Edited 5 August, 2021 by Saint86

[Piran]

2 hours ago, Mr X said:

One things a certainty he will score against us 😜

I guess it is a certainty. If you're a raging pessimist, I suppose. And no doubt DT will agree with you.

[macca155]

4 hours ago, Ted Bates Statue said:

 

Matty Targett to Villa, Jay Rod to West Brom, Jose Fonte to West Ham, Jack Cork to Swansea. You see, we just can't hold onto our best players.

I think I'm biting here, Targett was no 2 to Bertrand (at the time), JRod was half the player he was before his injury, Fonte was finished (effectively) and Jack Cork was and is a very average player imo.

However you could have selected different players to support your claim, we are sadly a club that cannot hold on to managers or decent players.

[Manuel]

5 hours ago, Ex Lion Tamer said:

I think the transfer happened very quickly because Villa wanted to get it done before Grealish goes. There was talk of it being done in 24 hours. The fee may have been conditional on getting it done quickly. No time to prepare social media activity.

Saints will have said to him we've had a good bid from Villa and we want you to take it please seeing as you're not signing a new contract. Danny could have dug his heels in but evidently decided he was up for the villa project, and also perhaps felt it would help the club if he could leave for a good fee

Yeah, I'd go with this. 

I read about Ings/Ralph relationship turning sour but I don't really buy it.  He nearly got the golden boot under Ralph and this system.  Ok we lost Romeu, and a little form but I suspect at the end of the day it was all about money.  No surprises there I guess.  

[SaintTex]

22 hours ago, DarrenLeTiss said:

Look at the team tonight, it's terrible. Tella, Redmond, Adams? Where are the goals? Stephens still in defence?  The way we limped home last season with spineless, pathetic displays, I think we are going to be in a relegation battle all season, I'm not sure they have the guts to survive. Is the 30 million worth going down?

in regards to the match last night, we could have used a lot more 1-0 victories last season instead of our usual 1-3 losses.

Defense is where we really need to get better (that is assuming we buy an additional striker to freshen up our striker roster with Ings being gone)

[Charlie Wayman]

9 hours ago, Matthew Le God said:

Are you being serious? 🤔

Obviously he wasn't.

[egg]

16 hours ago, Saint86 said:

I think this is little more than the club knew he wouldn't sign and villa offered us and amount we'd be crazy to turn down. The fact that it came utterly out of the blue for both clubs is a sign of desperation / craziness on the part of Villa. But ultimatley, if they cna keep him fit then it's a good deal for all parties. 

I agree with that, although I wander if the whole thing came out of discussions about JWP, ie Villa enquired about him, we said he ain't available but offered Ings, and it went from there. I think the Minamino deal happened in a similar way last season.

The weird thing is I can't see where Ings will fit into their system, unless Watkins gets benched. Guaranteed starts here, a longer contract on the table, but he goes where he has competition and a shorter contract. 

[CB Fry]

19 minutes ago, egg said:

I agree with that, although I wander if the whole thing came out of discussions about JWP, ie Villa enquired about him, we said he ain't available but offered Ings, and it went from there. I think the Minamino deal happened in a similar way last season.

The weird thing is I can't see where Ings will fit into their system, unless Watkins gets benched. Guaranteed starts here, a longer contract on the table, but he goes where he has competition and a shorter contract. 

I think exactly this - Villa need the PR win post-Grealish, we've got more money than expected.

I think the club telling Ings "we've sold you, my son" has changed the dynamic somewhat. That's where the bad feeling has come from. We've bundled him off. I think Ings and his people probably thought they were in control. Maybe not.

On the balance of things, our club have got more of what they wanted than Danny Ings has got what he wanted.

The issue we have now is replacement.

Us doing well this season will be pretty much decided by getting that bit right. Not entirely convinced we will but let's see.

Edited 6 August, 2021 by CB Fry

[AlexLaw76]

Unsure the need for this thread?  Now, that is not to say our club is basically shit (under Gow), we all know it, and probably within 2 seasons of being relegated.

However, selling Ings for £25-30m, given the circumstances, is nothing bad.  Had he gone to Spurs for that price (or even a little less), I doubt anyone would worry so much. I think ego's have taken a knock here.  Villa (bigger club, no doubt), are showing us how we should have spent the Virgil money.  We utterly blew it, they are not. 

Fair play to them, and unsure why we care who gives us money like that for Ings given the circumstance.  The same will happen with Vestergaard as soon as a decent offer comes in.

What will highlight the shambles of our club, will be the piss poor effort to enhance the 1st team.  We will probably bring in squad players, who will not be as good as Ings, or like Salisu, need 6 months to look competant (and we still do not know if he is or not).  We will be relegated within 2 season IMO.

Edited 6 August, 2021 by AlexLaw76

[egg]

13 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

I think exactly this - Villa need the PR win post-Grealish, we've got more money than expected.

I think the club telling Ings "we've sold you, my son" has changed the dynamic somewhat. That's where the bad feeling has come from. We've bundled him off. I think Ings and his people probably thought they were in control. Maybe not.

On the balance of things, our club have got more of what they wanted than Danny Ings has got what he wanted.

The issue we have now is replacement.

Us doing well this season will be pretty much decided by getting that bit right. Not entirely convinced we will but let's see.

Yep. It's obvious that villa were never on his agenda, he probably wanted Spurs or City. They didn't want him, or at least not at our price. Once we knew what Villa were willing to pay I suspect we've been tough with him, possibly "stay and you ain't playing so good luck persuading anyone to take you next year". We've done well here and I couldn't give a monkeys which club gave us the money. 

[SKD]

58 minutes ago, CB Fry said:

I think exactly this - Villa need the PR win post-Grealish, we've got more money than expected.

I think the club telling Ings "we've sold you, my son" has changed the dynamic somewhat. That's where the bad feeling has come from. We've bundled him off. I think Ings and his people probably thought they were in control. Maybe not.

On the balance of things, our club have got more of what they wanted than Danny Ings has got what he wanted.

The issue we have now is replacement.

Us doing well this season will be pretty much decided by getting that bit right. Not entirely convinced we will but let's see.

Yep, everything about the deal stinks of Villa just trying to get an incoming before the confirmation that Grealish has gone. All PR. 

The whole situation has been a bit weird, the speed at which it moved and Absolutely no one knowing about it. Just as weird is the lack of send off from the club, clearly, something has gone on behind the scenes and I do wonder if it’s us forcing him out as you say. Although, obviously, he didn’t have to sign the deal with villa. 

I think it’s clear that Villa weren’t his first, second or even third choice. It seems an odd on for them as well, as I’m not sure they needed another striker (will he play ahead of Watkins? I’m not sure). 
 

For us, £30m is a very good deal and egg is right, it doesn’t matter who the money comes from (although it’s disappointing we’re losing players to clubs like villa And they’re seen as a better project than us). 
 

Ings, on the face of it, should be the prime example of the type of player we should have been able to retain. He’s coming towards the end of his career only has 1 last big contract in him, is a local lad, loved by the fans. But so be it, he’s gone now, as you say replacement is key, we cannot afford to get it wrong.