- Jun 8, 2012
- 18,257
- 70,419
I keep reading that Ings can play as a wide forward or attacking midfielder but when has there been any evidence of this. I've never seen him play anywhere but as a central striker, and then, mostly in a 442. He's direct and full of hustle bustle, but we could do with some craft and guile. I don't thin his hold up play and ability to bring in others or create for others is great.
We already have players like Chadli who are doing that kind of job. We need more craft, not more battering rams.
Why does everyone think Ings would be a great signing or that he's so versatile ? Genuine question, give me some examples of why you think this.
And on the subject of Mitchell, I'm not blown away by Pelè either.
Because it appears he's actually someone who the manager wants, and our chief scout wants because he suits what the manager has asked for?
Surely that's the only reason anyone should need?
There's a reason we have such a disjointed squad, because we don't seem to have been spending money on players who actually suit what the manager wants or expects from his players. It's time that stopped, and if Ings is indeed someone who has been identified by Poch & Mitchell, we should be happy enough if we actually sign the lad. No?