Brendan Rodgers has reportedly identified Burnley goalscorer Danny Ings as a potential January transfer target, and in a recent interview, the 21-year old vowed to become a 'better player' than Reds attacker Raheem Sterling. Are Liverpool actually interested, though?
According to multiple reports over the last week:
* Liverpool are interested in signing Ings in January.
* LFC scouts have watched the 21-year old several times over the last few weeks.
When asked yesterday about Liverpool's interest, Burnley manager Sean Dyche conceded that Ings is in demand, but dismissed the notion that the Reds had made any firm moves. He told the Burnley Express:
"[Transfer interest] is the reality of people doing well. It's just a natural progression of that. There isn't any factual interest [in Ings] that I know. No-one has rung me, so that's factual, but there are a million stories."
With 15 goals and 4 assists in 23 games this season, Ings is in superb form at the moment, and Burnley have reportedly slapped a £10m transfer fee on him as a result. In my view, that is excessive and optimistic, for the following reasons:
* Ings is not a proven goalscorer. He's on fire this season, but between 2010 and 2013, he grabbed just 14 goals overall.
* His injury history is a concern: Ings has been blighted with injuries over the last two seasons, and with Sturridge already injury prone, LFC don't need another striker susceptible to problems.
* It's a risk to spend £5m-£10m on a Championship striker so early in his career. Who's to say that Ings won't turn out to be a one-season wonder, or even a half-season wonder?
Burnley goalkeeper Tom Heaton is piling on the hype about Ings, and in a recent interview with the Bolton News, he raved:
“Ingsy...has been superb and to be honest I can only see [him] getting better,” said the Clarets keeper. When [he] is on fire, as he has been for the majority of the season so far, [he's] almost unplayable at this level"
Hmmm. I'm always suspicious of the use of the word 'unplayable' to describe a footballer. It's an exaggerated term that has no real meaning (IMO). After all, West Ham co-owner David Sullivan recently described Andy Carroll as unplayable (!)
Is Ings ready for the step-up, or would Konstantinos Mitroglou be a better, slightly cheaper option?
Author: Jaimie K
According to multiple reports over the last week:
* Liverpool are interested in signing Ings in January.
* LFC scouts have watched the 21-year old several times over the last few weeks.
When asked yesterday about Liverpool's interest, Burnley manager Sean Dyche conceded that Ings is in demand, but dismissed the notion that the Reds had made any firm moves. He told the Burnley Express:
"[Transfer interest] is the reality of people doing well. It's just a natural progression of that. There isn't any factual interest [in Ings] that I know. No-one has rung me, so that's factual, but there are a million stories."
With 15 goals and 4 assists in 23 games this season, Ings is in superb form at the moment, and Burnley have reportedly slapped a £10m transfer fee on him as a result. In my view, that is excessive and optimistic, for the following reasons:
* Ings is not a proven goalscorer. He's on fire this season, but between 2010 and 2013, he grabbed just 14 goals overall.
* His injury history is a concern: Ings has been blighted with injuries over the last two seasons, and with Sturridge already injury prone, LFC don't need another striker susceptible to problems.
* It's a risk to spend £5m-£10m on a Championship striker so early in his career. Who's to say that Ings won't turn out to be a one-season wonder, or even a half-season wonder?
Burnley goalkeeper Tom Heaton is piling on the hype about Ings, and in a recent interview with the Bolton News, he raved:
“Ingsy...has been superb and to be honest I can only see [him] getting better,” said the Clarets keeper. When [he] is on fire, as he has been for the majority of the season so far, [he's] almost unplayable at this level"
Hmmm. I'm always suspicious of the use of the word 'unplayable' to describe a footballer. It's an exaggerated term that has no real meaning (IMO). After all, West Ham co-owner David Sullivan recently described Andy Carroll as unplayable (!)
Is Ings ready for the step-up, or would Konstantinos Mitroglou be a better, slightly cheaper option?
Author: Jaimie K
Two words: Jordan Rhodes.
ReplyDeleteWith Flanno, Sterling and Henderson in the 1st team, we are attracting young promising players and that's a very good strategy and perhaps one of the main characteristics of Rodgers. Previous managers never gave much chance many chances (much trust) on young players. Rafa did buy alot of them but never gave them a run. Kenny tried with Robinson and Flanno but never lasted. Hodgson was sacked too early to see that.
ReplyDeleteI like the look of Ings better than Rhodes. One eye-catching movement he has which is one of the hallmarks of a quality player is the very rapid stutter step he does when moving the ball along on his left foot, threatening either to change feet for a pass or shot, or to change pace and go for the space behind the man he's lined up. It takes confidence and ability to pull that off. Dare I say he looks a bit like Alexis Sanchez -- in type if not in pure quality.
ReplyDeleteThe variety of finishes he has demonstrated this season is extraordinary, Suarez-esque: or perhaps Defoe would be a better model. Chips and dinks, acrobatic volleys, curlers, you name it. He has balance and resilience in the tackle, a bit of pace to escape, and he looks direct, the kind of player that causes the opposition problems. The injury record is a worry, but he's got plenty to offer I think, and a year or two at Liverpool might see him develop into a serious contender.