Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain v Theo Walcott

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn

Wouldn't it be fair to say that with Walcott up front in the centre rather than RvP we'd be prime relegation candidates by now? I believe it is fair to compare Walcott with Ox because it's about the player being asked to perform a role for the team. Theo is doing that in a limited way with his improving willingness to track back, but he's more ineffective that has was a year ago in the attacking aspects of his game. If he can't dribble then he should concentrate on his control and passing which seem to be declining on a game by game basis. We could get the defensive cover Theo provides from a player like Gibbs who also has looked more dangerous going forwards, and it wouldn't cost nearly as much.

---

With that sort of logic you could argue that Wenger is right to play Djourou as a right back and that we should be comparing him to Sagna in a few years time. You can't simply put in a few hours of training and acquire a new set of skills that rivals someone that has been practicing that skill since childhood.

I read a stat about Owen years some years back when he was on fire. He spend spends less than 10 seconds on the ball after each match. He doesn't dribble with the ball or drop deep and take his man on, he's all about off the ball movement and exploiting space. If he touches the ball it's usually one touch and bang, he's shooting on goal. That's a discipline that has taken years to perfect. You can't push a player like that out on to the flanks and expect him to carry the ball past defenders and provide great crosses if he spends very little time with the ball at his feet. It won't work. Doesn't matter how hard he trains at it.

It's like the Gerrard and Lampard debate and people not understanding why they can't play together in a 4-4-2. You can't just throw players into positions and expect things to work and that example involves two central midfielders. Right now, we're talking about a kid that has been trained as a striker playing on the wings even though he can't dribble, playing in a team that plays the ball to feet, has a very weak midfield with players that are struggling to create chances and no real wingbacks. This team has issues and if we're not going to spend, we should make best of what we have.

You're missing that point and it's a little frustrating. During the Man Utd game, didn't I say that our wing backs need cover from the wide attackers to stop Man Utd exploiting Djourou? You dismissed it during the match thread at HT and said our wingers shouldn't have to cover but saw exactly what happened when we brought Arshavin on. But then you go on to slate Arshavin for not covering well. Also, Fergie made sure he exploited that weakness down Ashavin's side by switching Valencia to rightback and Park on the wing. That is what I call a smart tactical decision and making use of your resources the sort of thing Wenger should be doing. It was a similar story against Fulham. Wenger took off both of our wingers for Yossi and Rosicky and we end up losing even more possession and losing the game by two goals. Both came from wide positions.

I'm not saying Theo should be playing in a 4-3-3 ahead of RVP. But when you analyse clubs around the world and see what it is that makes a good striker/winger or why teams play a certain formation or style, it usually comes down to the sort of players they have to work with.

Walcott is average, the comparisons with Owen don't stand up, Owen scored a hatful even when he was young (at 19 he was scoring left right and centre)......Walcott will never get lots because his finishing isn't all that.

I'm sick of people defending this guy when he's had chance after chance and almost never delivered anything, if he put his chances away he might get his chance up front, he barely ever does though.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ItsMe

Walcott is average, the comparisons with Owen don't stand up, Owen scored a hatful even when he was young (at 19 he was scoring left right and centre)......Walcott will never get lots because his finishing isn't all that.

I'm sick of people defending this guy when he's had chance after chance and almost never delivered anything, if he put his chances away he might get his chance up front, he barely ever does though.

---

:gp:

Theo has scored 21 goals for us since he joined in 2006. Thats 136 appearances and 21 goals. At the same time, Dennis Bendtner has played 99 times and scored 22 times. This despite the fact that DB got much lesser chances to play in the first team. I am not trying to say DB is a world beater but if TW14 record pales in comparison to DB then we know that its time for him to be moved on.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ItsMe

Walcott is average, the comparisons with Owen don't stand up, Owen scored a hatful even when he was young (at 19 he was scoring left right and centre)......Walcott will never get lots because his finishing isn't all that.

I'm sick of people defending this guy when he's had chance after chance and almost never delivered anything, if he put his chances away he might get his chance up front, he barely ever does though.

---

This is getting silly. Why are you comparing the goal stats? Your missing the entire point.

If Houllier had played Owen on the right wing it would have been a waste of talent.

Same applies to players like Defoe, Hernandez, Welbeck....

It's not a comparison of the talent. I'm talking about the type of player he is and the reason why it would make little sense to play small players with no dribbling skills out on the flanks. Owen wasn't playing on the wings when he started at Liverpool and was playing as a striker straight away. This is mismanagement. Just as we've seen when Wenger has played Bendy on the right. I don't care how shit Bendy is, it makes zero sense playing a 6 foot tall slow striker out on the right wing.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

With that sort of logic you could argue that Wenger is right to play Djourou as a right back and that we should be comparing him to Sagna in a few years time. You can't simply put in a few hours of training and acquire a new set of skills that rivals someone that has been practicing that skill since childhood.

I read a stat about Owen years some years back when he was on fire. He spend spends less than 10 seconds on the ball after each match. He doesn't dribble with the ball or drop deep and take his man on, he's all about off the ball movement and exploiting space. If he touches the ball it's usually one touch and bang, he's shooting on goal. That's a discipline that has taken years to perfect. You can't push a player like that out on to the flanks and expect him to carry the ball past defenders and provide great crosses if he spends very little time with the ball at his feet. It won't work. Doesn't matter how hard he trains at it.

It's like the Gerrard and Lampard debate and people not understanding why they can't play together in a 4-4-2. You can't just throw players into positions and expect things to work and that example involves two central midfielders. Right now, we're talking about a kid that has been trained as a striker playing on the wings even though he can't dribble, playing in a team that plays the ball to feet, has a very weak midfield with players that are struggling to create chances and no real wingbacks. This team has issues and if we're not going to spend, we should make best of what we have.

You're missing that point and it's a little frustrating. During the Man Utd game, didn't I say that our wing backs need cover from the wide attackers to stop Man Utd exploiting Djourou? You dismissed it during the match thread at HT and said our wingers shouldn't have to cover but saw exactly what happened when we brought Arshavin on. But then you go on to slate Arshavin for not covering well. Also, Fergie made sure he exploited that weakness down Ashavin's side by switching Valencia to rightback and Park on the wing. That is what I call a smart tactical decision and making use of your resources the sort of thing Wenger should be doing. It was a similar story against Fulham. Wenger took off both of our wingers for Yossi and Rosicky and we end up losing even more possession and losing the game by two goals. Both came from wide positions.

I'm not saying Theo should be playing in a 4-3-3 ahead of RVP. But when you analyse clubs around the world and see what it is that makes a good striker/winger or why teams play a certain formation or style, it usually comes down to the sort of players they have to work with.

---

I agree you can't expect miracles from a kid thrown into a new position and asked to perform. Unfortunately for Walcott he's had years to get his shit together. If you're saying he's a totally one dimensional attacking option that can only play in one position and in one way then definitely get rid, I would have thought. In the modern game aren't defenders delighted when they come up against such limited opponents? Play Walcott in the middle and how many games does he have to play to get the 20 odd goals that would signify an effective striker? 50? 100? The rest of his career? Hard to imagine we have a goal scoring problem right now and Theo Walcott could be the solution.

Anyway, I thought we were talking about comparisons between Ox and Theo? If it's true what you say that Theo would be more effective in the middle, and if it's true that Ox is a destined to play the striking role too, then unfortunately we haven't had a chance to compare either in that roles as yet. So we have to look at what contributions they have made so far, regardless of where they are playing. Both have played wide. One can play in that position and the other clearly can't, no points for guessing which is which. Is it a leap to suggest the same would hold true if they were transferred to the centre, or at least what's the more likely outcome given what we've seen so far? Right now I see Theo not as a future striker but as a potential impediment to Ox's progress given Wenger's tendencies to persist with limited players. I hope Theo goes in the summer. It would be good for him and good for us. I think he'll flop spectacularly wherever he goes though because he won't be as coddled as he is under Wenger and certainly won't be given as many opportunities if he initially fails to deliver.

I don't disagree with you on making the best of what we have, which is why I think Arshavin is potentially better suited to the role you are talking about. He has more intelligence than Theo and a great deal more skill. Of course he has other problems but if he was prepared to commit himself the I think he could play that role whereas I don't see Theo being capable regardless of his levels of commitment or desire. I think we are handicapping ourselves when we start him. Maybe an impact sub would suit him better, but Wenger has spoiled him now by making him think he's an important figure in the team. It would be better for somebody to sit him down and say, you're shit son! Then give him a last chance to prove people wrong.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

This is getting silly. Why are you comparing the goal stats? Your missing the entire point.

If Houllier had played Owen on the right wing it would have been a waste of talent.

Same applies to players like Defoe, Hernandez, Welbeck....

It's not a comparison of the talent. I'm talking about the type of player he is and the reason why it would make little sense to play small players with no dribbling skills out on the flanks. Owen wasn't playing on the wings when he started at Liverpool and was playing as a striker straight away. This is mismanagement. Just as we've seen when Wenger has played Bendy on the right. I don't care how shit Bendy is, it makes zero sense playing a 6 foot tall slow striker out on the right wing.

---

We've seen Bendtner when he plays in the centre. Better to have him out of the way on the wing where he can do less damage to his own team. Nick reminds me a lot of Theo. Both have much to say, both deliver very little. They are the opposite of players like Owen and Defoe in their prime. The latter pair delivered where it matters, on the pitch. True enough they would have been much less effective if stuck on the wing, but they wouldn't have become bad footballers as a result. Walcott just lacks too much to be much good anywhere I think. By all means, if we're going to give him a go in the middle then make it this season when there's nothing to lose. But it's not hard to predict the outcome.

The mismanagement lies in the fact we have had players like Nick and Theo on the pitch at all.

If you think Owen and Defoe would have still become good players as wingers then we can leave the conversation there. :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

If you think Owen and Defoe would have still become good players as wingers then we can leave the conversation there. :lol:

---

I think they were good players full stop. But sure, if you have nothing else to say.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn

I think they were good players full stop. But sure, if you have nothing else to say.

---

And Dennis Bergkamp would have made an excellent defensive midfielder! Wright should have been great on the right! :lol:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

And Dennis Bergkamp would have made an excellent defensive midfielder! Wright should have been great on the right! :lol:

---

Being silly now, aren't you? The trouble with Ox is he blows all of Theo's excuses out of the water. There's a big difference between a gifted footballer and Theo Walcott. And frankly, a club as big as Arsenal shouldn't be pissing around with a player that had some potential but failed to deliver on it. Happens sometimes and when it does you move on to the next prospect. In this case that's Ox. A kid who may well play in the middle one day but right now seems to be doing just fine on the wing. That's because he has ability, regardless of where he's playing. That ability will carry him through to great things we hope. Theo's lack of general footballing ability has carried him as far as he's going to go, unless there's some sudden improvement that's so far failed to materialise in the many chances he's had to show he's worthy of greater responsibility.