• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

Danny Ings - Burnley's Number 10

Gazza said:
More chance of Ings being a starter here than Kane staying no?
Click to expand...

29 years old, if Kane stays another year I don't see us relying on a 30 year old Ings.

If he comes, he's likely always to be #2/#3 (depending on how you see Son)
 
Raziel said:
ok, but back to my original answer, is that 2 +Son or is that Kane/Son or Kane/backup?
Click to expand...
If we play two up front it should increase the game time a new striker gets significantly.

As always if the game is tight you don't take off Kane, I can see arguments for doing it, but like you say it doesn't happen.

With two strikers though. I think it's a lot easier to justify taking Son off rather than Kane. Or moving Son wide and play Kane + one up front.

From that and the amount of game time available due to injuries and suspensions doubling (in theory at least) that makes that striker role more attractive and viable imo.

Is going two up front, if the plan is a back four. As an option yes, but I doubt it will happen most of the time.
 
Gazza said:
More chance of Ings being a starter here than Kane staying no?
Click to expand...
It would be sensible to sign Ings along with a young hotshot like Vlahovic if we were selling Kane. Would be a big gamble otherwise if expecting a young player to come in from overseas and immediately hit the ground running.
 
Raziel said:
Not disagreeing mate, like I tried to tell @Kandi1977 it's not me, it's how the club/managers have executed.

I genuinely don't see the point of how we manage backup strikers, they fail almost always because
- We don't change our style to accommodate them or their strengths
- We don't really play them other than vs. sub par opposition in early rounds of lesser cups or when injury happens
- To your point, we don't leverage them to give Son/Kane even 10-15 minutes.

Like I said, if it was up to me last season
- I'd have played Vini/Dele (thought there was something there with a guy able to hold up play, do knock downs and Dele's run beyond game) in cups
- Any game we were 2-0+ up and controlling, swap in Vini for one of Kane/Son (so he gets game time and learns to play with each)
- We should have also built a system for supporting Vini (he was an in the box poacher)

so yes, I think based on historically evidence expecting anyone to come in and suddenly be playing regularly/rotating is not going to happen, hence the reporting is off the mark.
Click to expand...

We can all hope the new manager might see things differently, I guess the main difference this year is it is just the League and certain domestic cup games we have to go strong in - Europe is a bit of a free hit.

I agree with all you have said, I actually thought Southgate managed Kane correctly in the group games and its something we should be looking at.

I hope Nuno has a different mindset to previous managers and sees no one as undroppable.
 
Legohamster said:
We can all hope the new manager might see things differently, I guess the main difference this year is it is just the League and certain domestic cup games we have to go strong in - Europe is a bit of a free hit.

I agree with all you have said, I actually thought Southgate managed Kane correctly in the group games and its something we should be looking at.

I hope Nuno has a different mindset to previous managers and sees no one as undroppable.
Click to expand...
Kane is, or has been. It's either in his contract, or the club hasn't wanted to upset our star player. I might be wrong, but it felt like Jose was the first club manager prepared to even sub him off. Like you say, hopefully Nuno manages his game time to the benefit of the club, rather than Kane's goal scoring records.
 
I like Ings and the idea of Kane having someone who can either play the 9 to his 10 or deputise for him as that would mean we wouldn’t have the lack of game time issues we have tried with all his other back ups (who also seem to miss out to Son even when opportunities for arise). but would this partnership that leave us a little short of pace up too and marginalise Son who’s been playing more like Kane’s partner than a winger?
 
MKSpur said:
I like Ings and the idea of Kane having someone who can either play the 9 to his 10 or deputise for him as that would mean we wouldn’t have the lack of game time issues we have tried with all his other back ups (who also seem to miss out to Son even when opportunities for arise). but would this partnership that leave us a little short of pace up too and marginalise Son who’s been playing more like Kane’s partner than a winger?
Click to expand...
Ings is the best English striker in the country behind Kane
His injuries still occur but at Southampton he seems to to get over them much quicker
He also is very creative and plays a great link up role with Che Adams
He would take a goal scoring burden off Kane and Son which can only be a good thing
100 Games in last 3 season at Southampton and 48 goals
 
Bedfordspurs said:
Ings is the best English striker in the country behind Kane
His injuries still occur but at Southampton he seems to to get over them much quicker
He also is very creative and plays a great link up role with Che Adams
He would take a goal scoring burden off Kane and Son which can only be a good thing
100 Games in last 3 season at Southampton and 48 goals
Click to expand...

Would be a great signing for us for sure. Not as glamorous as a lot of fans would like, but he's a great player. Always gives our defenders hell whenever we play him.
 
Daisuk said:
Would be a great signing for us for sure. Not as glamorous as a lot of fans would like, but he's a great player. Always gives our defenders hell whenever we play him.
Click to expand...
He tears out defenders apart
I will agree our defender ain’t all that… but you still have to do it against them
 
JerusalemMan said:
What is it about his game that doesn't convince you?
Click to expand...

Multiple reasons:

Age - too old.
Opportunity to blood Spurs youth. I would rather give Scarlett or Parrott a chance than buy Ings.
55 goals in 140 matches. Only one season with more than 15 goals in the league.
Failure to cut it at Liverpool. Less pressure IMHO at Southampton.
Although not injury prone at Southampton, I still have an eye on his injury record at Liverpool.
 
afsoc4life said:
Multiple reasons:

Age - too old.
Opportunity to blood Spurs youth. I would rather give Scarlett or Parrott a chance than buy Ings.
55 goals in 140 matches. Only one season with more than 15 goals in the league.
Failure to cut it at Liverpool. Less pressure IMHO at Southampton.
Although not injury prone at Southampton, I still have an eye on his injury record at Liverpool.
Click to expand...

With Ings I assume we’d be looking at an alternative to Kane, or maybe even to play alongside him, in certain PL games, rather than just cup games against lowly opposition. That would be a massive step up for both Scarlett and Parrott - I’m not sure either are ready for that just yet. Loans would be better for them and us I think. But even if kept with us, we’d still need a decent, proven (somewhere) back up striker.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back