shurlock Posted 3 February, 2019 Share Posted 3 February, 2019 I have no idea what the number is and I did ask. If true, then I can imagine he'll be bench more towards the end of the season if we are safe but that's pure speculation on my part. If true.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shance Posted 3 February, 2019 Share Posted 3 February, 2019 If true.... Yes, that's what I said. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
derry Posted 4 February, 2019 Share Posted 4 February, 2019 Echo says felt his hamstring could miss Cardiff game. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 4 February, 2019 Share Posted 4 February, 2019 Echo says felt his hamstring could miss Cardiff game. I'm hoping it's just precautionary. He had only just come back from his hammy injury and played the full 90 in midweek against Palace. If it was feeling a little tight then it was probably wise to take him off when we did rather than risk doing any more damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSAINT Posted 4 February, 2019 Share Posted 4 February, 2019 Echo says felt his hamstring could miss Cardiff game. As Shurlock mentioned above, strikingly similar to the Watford game where he felt it in the warm-up & injured it during the game. I'm not convinced he can play midweek games as well as the weekend ones. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fatboy40 Posted 4 February, 2019 Share Posted 4 February, 2019 I'm not convinced he can play midweek games as well as the weekend ones. I'm not convinced he can play reliably for a season at all, if he genuinely could then he wouldn't be "on loan" to us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Posted 4 February, 2019 Share Posted 4 February, 2019 I have no idea what the number is and I did ask. If true, then I can imagine he'll be bench more towards the end of the season if we are safe but that's pure speculation on my part. If it is true it is even barmier not to have got a new striker in, even on loan, in the transfer window just gone. Which could just mean ongoing general transfer incompetence, or that it is just not true. Or both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SFC Forever Posted 4 February, 2019 Share Posted 4 February, 2019 or the players we were interested in were unavailable or much too expensive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Posted 4 February, 2019 Share Posted 4 February, 2019 or the players we were interested in were unavailable or much too expensive. I would say these two elements could probably have been found at about earlier, moving onto the next targets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
striker Posted 4 February, 2019 Share Posted 4 February, 2019 If Ings is so/so I'd rather see him sit for Cardiff. We can potentially win without him, and then he gets a good 2 weeks more to rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sheaf Saint Posted 5 February, 2019 Share Posted 5 February, 2019 I would say these two elements could probably have been found at about earlier, moving onto the next targets You're over-simplifying the situation. You identify your targets early on and begin negotiations, on the understanding that a deal 'could' be reached if it is right for all parties. The selling clubs and the agents hold out til the very last minute in the hopes of getting the best possible deal; and so does the buying club, hoping that as the window draws to a close the seller will be desperate enough to sell that they will cave in and drop to your lower offer. In most cases, this doesn't happen and the deal doesn't go through. This is why you have multiple targets, in the hope that if one falls through, another can be completed. It's not exclusive to Saints by any means, and it doesn't prove that the board are incompetent. Look at how many rumours were flying around about other club's transfer targets, and compare that to how many of them actually materialised. There are only a handful of clubs in England who are either rich enough or stupid enough to pay the over-inflated valuations of players in January. Ours is not one of them. Whether you think that is a good thing or a bad thing is up to you, but personally I am glad we're no longer in the business of throwing good money after bad, following Les Reed's disastrous transfer strategy over the last few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suewhistle Posted 5 February, 2019 Share Posted 5 February, 2019 I would say these two elements could probably have been found at about earlier, moving onto the next targets Targets like Carillo, I take it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Wayman Posted 5 February, 2019 Share Posted 5 February, 2019 For sure if it goes on like this we would be mad to make Ing's loan deal permanent in the summer. This really will be a tough decision for the club as the lad is clearly talented as we saw with his worldie against Arsenal but we just don't have enough money to indulge in sentimentality. Presumably they'll give Carillo & Boufal every chance of rehabilitation before pressing any buttons on Ings. Right now I'd be doing whatever it takes to get Augustin in the summer and let Danny go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nta786 Posted 5 February, 2019 Share Posted 5 February, 2019 For sure if it goes on like this we would be mad to make Ing's loan deal permanent in the summer. This really will be a tough decision for the club as the lad is clearly talented as we saw with his worldie against Arsenal but we just don't have enough money to indulge in sentimentality. Presumably they'll give Carillo & Boufal every chance of rehabilitation before pressing any buttons on Ings. Right now I'd be doing whatever it takes to get Augustin in the summer and let Danny go. yep. or the only other option I can see is that if we are forced to buy, then offer a contract with heavy incentives based on appearances/goal contributions but a lower basic wage (I doubt he would accept a pay as you play contract of course- are these even about anymore?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nordic Saint Posted 5 February, 2019 Share Posted 5 February, 2019 Targets like Carillo, I take it. I think we'll be looking at cheaper targets than Carrillo in future. At least less money will be wasted but it also means there is even less chance of them being good enough for the Premier League. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SW5 SAINT Posted 5 February, 2019 Share Posted 5 February, 2019 For sure if it goes on like this we would be mad to make Ing's loan deal permanent in the summer. This really will be a tough decision for the club as the lad is clearly talented as we saw with his worldie against Arsenal but we just don't have enough money to indulge in sentimentality. Presumably they'll give Carillo & Boufal every chance of rehabilitation before pressing any buttons on Ings. Right now I'd be doing whatever it takes to get Augustin in the summer and let Danny go. I thought we were committed to buying Ings. You would have hoped that some sort of clause regarding availability might have been inserted, but this is Southampton...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 5 February, 2019 Share Posted 5 February, 2019 I think it was made clear at the time that we were committed to buying Ings - where has the idea that we can send him back if he's no good come from? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IFHP Posted 5 February, 2019 Share Posted 5 February, 2019 Danny Ings is a great player when fit and is exactly what we need. However there is a reason why he is in a relegation battle with Saints rather than a title battle with Liverpool. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 5 February, 2019 Share Posted 5 February, 2019 I think it was made clear at the time that we were committed to buying Ings - where has the idea that we can send him back if he's no good come from? Just BS from one poster on here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Munster Posted 5 February, 2019 Share Posted 5 February, 2019 yep. or the only other option I can see is that if we are forced to buy, then offer a contract with heavy incentives based on appearances/goal contributions but a lower basic wage (I doubt he would accept a pay as you play contract of course- are these even about anymore?) It's a loan with an obligation to buy. Which would mean the contract he signed covers next season and beyond and is non-negotiable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlie Wayman Posted 6 February, 2019 Share Posted 6 February, 2019 It's a loan with an obligation to buy. Which would mean the contract he signed covers next season and beyond and is non-negotiable. Surely we can just say NO, it's a very powerful word when we still have the cash! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
waylander Posted 6 February, 2019 Share Posted 6 February, 2019 Surely we can just say NO, it's a very powerful word when we still have the cash! And be sued for breech of contract Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint Garrett Posted 6 February, 2019 Share Posted 6 February, 2019 This is what was reported by The Daily Echo at the time... https://www.dailyecho.co.uk/sport/16409919.southampton-sign-danny-ings-on-loan-from-liverpool-on-transfer-deadline-day/ Danny Ings has made an emotional homecoming after the Saints fan signed for the club he loves in a dramatic deadline day deal. The 26-year-old striker, who grew up playing football on Netley Recreation Ground, was a shock late signing for Saints. Indeed, the move came so late in the day that Saints had to submit a deal sheet to the Premier League to grant them a two-hour extension to the transfer window to get the deal done. Ings has joined from Liverpool on loan for the rest of the season ahead of a permanent switch next summer for a fee of £16m. Don't think it's terrible value at £16m in todays market. but seems like it's obligatory, not an option. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 6 February, 2019 Share Posted 6 February, 2019 And be sued for breech of contract Naive, no is not a strong word in contract law. We will also have already paid a substantial instalment so technically "we don't still have the cash". Sooner some people realise we have already bought Danny Ings the better, there is no getting out of it even if we wanted to. The loan is a technicality. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusic Posted 6 February, 2019 Share Posted 6 February, 2019 Hopefully and end of season rest and then a proper, full pre season (which he didnt have this year) would really help him. For £16m he is good value IMO. You don't get much for that and he is a quality player, plus clearly has a connection with the club. A bigger problem is the other strikers when he isnt available. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodsaint Posted 6 February, 2019 Share Posted 6 February, 2019 Hopefully and end of season rest and then a proper, full pre season (which he didnt have this year) would really help him. For £16m he is good value IMO. You don't get much for that and he is a quality player, plus clearly has a connection with the club. A bigger problem is the other strikers when he isnt available. Totally agree. Danny obviously wants to be the number one striker but he cant expect that to be the case with a constant injury record. If hes here next season as our 2nd or 3rd choice then I would be pretty happy. Augustin (or Poulsen), Adams, Ings, Obafemi and Barnes would be good depth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qwertyell Posted 6 February, 2019 Share Posted 6 February, 2019 Hopefully and end of season rest and then a proper, full pre season (which he didnt have this year) would really help him. You're just reheating the same straw-clutching bargaining that has been Charlie Austin's domain for the past three years: if he can only get a full pre season under his belt... How's that worked out? Austin actually, finally managed to get fit for the start of this season, but he's still a physical wreck that we can't even sell for scrap. The good news with Ings is at least his popodom knees haven't exoloded yet. It's the rest of his body that's failing - perhaps as a result of trying to compensate for reduced powers caused by long-term injuries. Even when he has been fit it's clear that he's not the player he was - his pace is nothing like it used to be. It'd be amazing if he got consistently fit, sharp, and started banging them on the the regular, but I just don't see it happening, sadly. For £20m we haven't got, it's not looking like the shrewdest business at this stage. Sent from my F3311 using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dusic Posted 6 February, 2019 Share Posted 6 February, 2019 Ings is miles better than Austin. Besides, we clearly have to sign him so hopefully a full pre season helps him. If we had better backups then we could rest him for midweek games if that helps. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 6 February, 2019 Share Posted 6 February, 2019 A decent preseason would help get an unfit player fit but there's a difference between being unfit and injury prone; Ings is the latter. All preseason is to him is another chance to get injured. I look forward to being told he has picked up a knock in a friendly against Real Sociedad and will miss the opening game of the season, only for that to mysteriously drag out until late September with little explanation given. Cynical, me?! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Give it to Ron Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 What exactly did Obafemi do to be out this long? Sent from my SM-G930F using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shroppie Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 What exactly did Obafemi do to be out this long? Sent from my SM-G930F using TapatalkThink it was hamstring. Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSAINT Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 Ings hamstring. 2 to 3 weeks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saints foreva Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 Really is a shame that there is no get out clause in our deal with Liverpool and we look set to waste more money on signing him. He's missing Cardiff and probably Fulham - two massive, must win games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SuperSAINT Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 Really is a shame that there is no get out clause in our deal with Liverpool and we look set to waste more money on signing him. He's missing Cardiff and probably Fulham - two massive, must win games. & hamstring's tend to be tricky. It's possible he could be out longer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
whiteleySaint30 Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 & hamstring's tend to be tricky. It's possible he could be out longer. Lucky for us we bought in the Adam's- hang on........... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dalek2003 Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 Ings would be a great player if he did not spend so much time in the treatment room. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Munster Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 Lucky for us we bought in the Adam's- hang on........... In fairness to the club, who could've predicted Ings would get injured? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilchards Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 In fairness to the club, who could've predicted Ings would get injured? Considerng the amount of games he’s missed for us already and dare I say it Liverpool then it’s predictable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pancake Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 Considerng the amount of games he’s missed for us already and dare I say it Liverpool then it’s predictable. You must be such a laugh at parties. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pilchards Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 You must be such a laugh at parties. Forking our 20m is hardly a laugh is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 In fairness to the club, who could've predicted Ings would get injured? I was pretty confident he'd get injured at least one more time the second half of the season. I'll even predict now that he'll come back fit and play again, but finish the season injured. As good as he is when he plays I wouldn't go through with the deal if possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lighthouse Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 Dont worry Munster, I got it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CB Fry Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 In fairness to the forum, who could've predicted that Pilchards would miss a very obvious joke? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saint_clark Posted 7 February, 2019 Share Posted 7 February, 2019 Dont worry Munster, I got it. Ah yeah, ok, my bad. In my defence I am working nights so my brain is frazzled... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shance Posted 8 February, 2019 Share Posted 8 February, 2019 Just BS from one poster on here. How is it bul****? It's just a snippet I was given from a reliable source that I don't really hear from much anymore. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted 9 February, 2019 Share Posted 9 February, 2019 Just BS from one poster on here. To be fair to Shance he's sort of right, there's a clause that says we are beholden to sign Ings if he's available for a certain number of games (note he doesn't have to start just be available), if it's under a threshold the purchase doesn't kick in. Also i've heard, but it's more of a rumour than the last one, that Ings himself has a "get out clause" if we get relegated. I thought this was all pretty well known to be honest, and i'm amazed people think it's bullsh*t as the club would be doing incredibly bad business if they'd committed to signing a player with long term injury problems. Oh and before people ask i have no idea what the threshold is, the person that told me didn't know the details of that, simply that there was one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 9 February, 2019 Share Posted 9 February, 2019 To be fair to Shance he's sort of right, there's a clause that says we are beholden to sign Ings if he's available for a certain number of games (note he doesn't have to start just be available), if it's under a threshold the purchase doesn't kick in. Also i've heard, but it's more of a rumour than the last one, that Ings himself has a "get out clause" if we get relegated. I thought this was all pretty well known to be honest, and i'm amazed people think it's bullsh*t as the club would be doing incredibly bad business if they'd committed to signing a player with long term injury problems. Oh and before people ask i have no idea what the threshold is, the person that told me didn't know the details of that, simply that there was one. Don't believe a word of it. You haven't seen the contract, nor have I. Shane's comments are bull**** in my opinion, there is no credible source for this and it.doesn't make any sense. The sooner people accept that Ings is our player the better. I understand some people don't like it but it's done. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ericb Posted 9 February, 2019 Share Posted 9 February, 2019 Don't believe a word of it. You haven't seen the contract, nor have I. Shane's comments are bull**** in my opinion, there is no credible source for this and it.doesn't make any sense. The sooner people accept that Ings is our player the better. I understand some people don't like it but it's done. Fair enough if that’s what you choose to believe mate, but I’ll go with what a first team player said instead Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VectisSaint Posted 9 February, 2019 Share Posted 9 February, 2019 Fair enough if that’s what you choose to believe mate, but I’ll go with what a first team player said instead Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Suppose it was Charlie ?. Believe what you want mate, though what you say makes some, sense, not the same as what Shane alleged. Having a clause that says we only purchase if he is available for more than, say, 0 games wouldn't surprise me. Would cover situations such as what sadly happened recently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wild-saint Posted 9 February, 2019 Share Posted 9 February, 2019 To be fair to Shance he's sort of right, there's a clause that says we are beholden to sign Ings if he's available for a certain number of games (note he doesn't have to start just be available), if it's under a threshold the purchase doesn't kick in. Also i've heard, but it's more of a rumour than the last one, that Ings himself has a "get out clause" if we get relegated. I thought this was all pretty well known to be honest, and i'm amazed people think it's bullsh*t as the club would be doing incredibly bad business if they'd committed to signing a player with long term injury problems. Oh and before people ask i have no idea what the threshold is, the person that told me didn't know the details of that, simply that there was one. Assuming you are correct, how would Liverpool prove whether Ings was available for any particular game but wasnt in the squad? Saints could easily say he wasn’t t up to the fitness level required. It’s torally inlrovable as it’s subjective. Surely a could only stipulate appearances. Couldnt imagine it going to court and Liverpool trying to argue that Ings was fit / available For that reason alone I don’t think your information is likely to be correct. Appearance based alone be realistic imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
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 accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now