Danny Ings left Southampton in controversial circumstances 3 years ago and incurred the wrath of Saints supporters in doing so, it didn't turn out well for for either the player of Southampton FC, can time be turned back for both.

The rumour that Danny Ings might be returning to Southampton is gathering pace with southamptonfcnews claiming that a £6 million bid is on the table.

When Danny Ings left St Mary's it was done with indecent haste and the feeling was that Ings had left for the money and not his career.

In hindsight it proved shrewd business for Southampton, Ings had scored only 12 Premier League goals in the previous season, in fairness not a bad total, but not the 22 he had scored the year before that.

The £30 million fee softened the blow, much bigger than his valuation at the time, but the truth was we didn't replace him and that started the rot that ended in relegation in season 2022/23.

For Ings it proved even more disastrous, he effectively ended his England career as he went from a squad member to not even in consideration.

At Aston Villa his career went from bad to worse, although he would score in his first 3 games he ended with only 7 Premier League goals in his first season at Villa Park and to rub it in his best game was against Saints when he scored 1 and had 2 assists in our 4-0 drubbing at Villa Park.

His second season was a little better and the rumours started that he would be sold in the January 2023 transfer window, a little under 18 months after his arrival.

Villa were happy to sell and snatched West Ham's hand off and pocketed £12 million plus a £3 million add on as the Hammers had avoided relegation.

But he wasn't a hit for the Hammers and in 17 appearances would score in just one game, his two goals being his only strikes.

Ings would score just twice at West Ham in his first half season and added to the 6 goals he had scored at Villa and ended with 8 from the season overall.

Last season in the League he would be an unused sub 18 times, he would get off it on 17 occasions and start just 3 games, scoring just once in only 405 minutes of football.

So on the face of it Southampton's bid for Danny Ings does not look a good one, Ings will turn 32 next month and has just had an awful season.

But the question is whether that was more down to a manager who just didn't fancy him as a player, than his poor performances.

Strikers thrive on confidence and it is true to say Ings has not had a lot of it since his early days at Villa Park, so could he rediscover that back in his home City and perhaps in doing so restore his reputation with Saints supporters.

Those that say Ings is a crock are wide off the mark, he has been in the matchday squad in every game of the last two seasons and in his first season at Villa he would be unavailable just 5 times, all but one of those coming in the first few months.

So Ings has been fit and raring to go for virtually all of the three seasons since he left St Mary's, the issue has been game time and that that could help prolong his career.

The gamble is paying £6 million, but that is cheap by Premier League standards and there is an argument that for the forthcoming season, Saints have to concentrate on the short term, it is about staying in the Premier League at the end of the season, so short term cheap fixes like Danny Ings could play a big part in that.

Ings is a good player and good players don't become bad ones overnight without good reason, from that perspective it could be said that Ings has been at the wrong clubs at the wrong time, his confidence is at rock bottom, could coming back to Southampton FC restore it, if it could then it could be the best £6 million we have spent.

Photo: Action Images

allsaint54 added 09:21 - Jun 19 No, no, no. 2 awful seasons, lost what little pace he & sharpness in the box. Wages would still be high. Spend 6M elsewhere. Only worthwhile if Downes could be signed on the back of the deal.
2

underweststand added 09:47 - Jun 19 Depends what we have as alternatives. There are some arguments against this deal.. his age, fitness and recent form, but the main reason that players " fail " after a move is they have to play in another formation to that which brought their success. Danny wasn't first choice for David Moyes' set-up (only as sub. for Antonio,) whereas DM was happy to sign Prowsey, for his midfield but now might end up being "frozen out " under the new WHam manager who uses a different formation. I don't see Danny getting 20 goals ever again, and he won't get a 4 year contract again either, but acouple of seasons of " vintage Ings" might make the difference between survival ...and relegation. What we know is that on his day he can be a " match-winner " and helped save us over two seasons before our eventual relegation without him. For our first season back up we need to consolidate and survive our first couple of seasons, and signing some " smart kid ", who has scored a lot in someone's U21 side is not the same as starting in a Prem. League game every week, and whenever he does score, we suddenly declare a special holiday in the city to celebrate. No thanks - too chancey. Even if we get a little " Ings-action " for only 60 minutes each match, and few goals more he'd bring experience to our already " too-young " squad and help " the young and the newcomers " settle in before they have to bear the burden of being first on the team sheet every week and needing to perform.

1

Saidou added 12:32 - Jun 19 I am only worried about his ageing injury prone body. He is the sort of striker that needs game time and patience to unleash the beast inside of him. We signed Lallana and are now going for Ings,my Question for Nick is; who do you think is making these decisions. Is it RM or some office guy?
1

Block8 added 12:49 - Jun 19 Not for me, unless he takes a massive wage cut, and is he the main man or second fiddle to Ross Stewart, who everyone seems to have forgotten. Also with our system of play we need someone who can play with his back to goal and hold onto the ball & that's not Danny!
4

Ali_Diarea added 18:30 - Jun 19 Definitely worth a punt at that price. I think Ings would fit well into our formation and style of play, more so than Adams currently does (although I would be pleased if Adams stayed). Adams is a back to the goal type of striker whereas we seem to be at our best when we have forwards running the channels and running at defenders, so I think he Will be more effective with Saints than he was at the Hammers

-2

codge added 21:07 - Jun 19 We sound like we’re building the over the hill gang.
0

Monksway added 21:23 - Jun 19 Not for me either. Don't expect a lot of game time from Lallana and even less from Ings. Much prefer Ben Brereton- Diaz.
0

saintmark1976 added 21:40 - Jun 19 Lallana and Ings are both over the hill injury prone has beens. We are a football club, not a rest home for players nobody else is interested in.
0

WanderingSaint added 23:14 - Jun 19 He can barely run ffs, i'm extremely concerned at the return of both Lallana & Ings.
0

SanMarco added 09:51 - Jun 20 I hear Mick Channon is available...
0

felly1 added 14:00 - Jun 20 Happy to have Ings back for 6m. Happy to have Lallana back on a free transfer, 1 year deal. In recent Prem seasons we tried, Onuachu, Armstrong A, Adams, Carrilio... 60 plus milion quid for less goals than Ings got in one season... He's 31 and has potentially 2 good seasons in him.
0

Blogs 31 bloggers

Stoke City Polls