Is Wenger right about Walcott?

Whether Giroud is good or not, or cheap or not, or can win us a title or not - he can't be missing chances like he did on Sunday. We'd have been better off calling Heskey out of retirement, even he would have bagged at least one of those chances. And he's faster than Giroud. It was a terrible performance in a big match and that's a problem. Two or three more games like that and he'll kill us off.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Letters

Really?! :lol:

I don't think brain cells are a requirement in PL football. I think he's OK, he'll chip in here and there, but he's not THE ANSWER. We need better if we're going to push on.
I still think our squad as is has a chance - Giroud is not average but he's no Aguero. But with people like Ozil and Sanchez around we should be getting plenty of goals. Possibly Ramsey too if he can sort himself out. The concern is they're getting too stretched, particularly if we do drop into the Europa League. They're already looking tired, as the games pile up we could be too stretched.

---

I share your view on Welbeck - if (when) we don't buy, I'd back Campbell to become a better option than him in Walcott's absence. This main thing for me is that we don't need an Aguero in order to make this team tick - Walcott's no Aguero, yet playing centrally he has moved our team forward in terms of its effectiveness. Giroud is a decent striker, but he is not a player around whom our A game should be based - we have seen ample evidence of this. If he will stay, however, he is incredibly effective as a plan B - and IMHO gets far too much stick for his missed chances. Vardy and Aguero apert - which striker has a better than 1 in 5 or 6 conversion rate? Giroud's stats are decent. His versatility isn't.

Have we really seen enough of Walcott to make any solid judgements? He's played well in a few games, but that's all we've had from him because he's injured most of the time. Will we ever get a season out of him, or enough of a season to make a difference? He needs to have a RVC recovery and get a season under his belt. If he can't do that we need to be looking for a player who can. However good Theo is or isn't, makes no odds if he's not on the pitch.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fakeyank

I really have faith in Welbeck. I see this man having everything to become the perfect striker in the PL (except brain cells). May be his time away with injuries will lead him to develop some brain cells. I really see a big future for him as a striker IF he can add some intelligence to his game.

---

Why? What has he shown to warrant such faith?

Welbeck? Good team player. Solid, dependable, bags of energy. Will take on a man and cause opposition defences problems. But not a striker either. We are overloaded with these types of player. Now injury prone too. Welcome to Arsenal.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn

Have we really seen enough of Walcott to make any solid judgements? He's played well in a few games, but that's all we've had from him because he's injured most of the time. Will we ever get a season out of him, or enough of a season to make a difference? He needs to have a RVC recovery and get a season under his belt. If he can't do that we need to be looking for a player who can. However good Theo is or isn't, makes no odds if he's not on the pitch.

---

I think Theo has shown a glimmer of what’s possible. He’s still learning the role and growing in confidence. I think the Munich and Utd wins show his potential and that’s without him on the score sheet. The Munich game away and the Spurs game show how slow and laboured we can look without him. If he can’t stay fit then we need to look for another solution but we should be looking for someone with bags of pace. We need to value pace over someone that’s a team player. I’d say it’s easier to integrate that sort of player into our game over bulky target man type.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

Why? What has he shown to warrant such faith?

---

Physically he has every attribute to be a top striker- Quick, good header, strong and good dribbling skills. What he doesnt have is positional sense or the ability to make good runs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

You're missing the point Mastermind. Who is better is debatable but I will say I remember having a very similar discussion with you and others about Walcott and you've seen the difference his pace and runs have made to how we can approach games. He's not a Henry but at least has the pace which means we can get back to fast counter attacking football. It only took a few games for people to see how our game shifted tactically with him in the squad.

Now look at Giroud and how he shifts things tactically for us. It goes back to what I was saying about him a part of the tippy tappy set up where we pin our opponents back in their own half and keep the ball. Giroud is far from a Henry also so start asking yourself why we bought him and how we've shifted tactically. Yes, there weren't players similar to Henry on the market or if they were they were pricey. So a player like Giourd who has a totally different game to what we're used to was the next best option? Or a Chamakh? Think about it.

---

i didnt say Giroud should be our main guy, but IM also not gonna shit on him either. He has been very prolific for us.

The point I am making is I dont think Wenger decided to not buy fast strikers (well its not really fast strikers, but players with great movement). Those strikers cost a lot of money and the club could not afford them in the period prior to Giroud.

A player like Bony and Ba are not that pacy and play similar to Giroud. Remy just isnt that good.

The closest we got was Suarez, and we got him until Liverpool decided not to honor his contract.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mastermind84

i didnt say Giroud should be our main guy, but IM also not gonna shit on him either. He has been very prolific for us.

The point I am making is I dont think Wenger decided to not buy fast strikers (well its not really fast strikers, but players with great movement). Those strikers cost a lot of money and the club could not afford them in the period prior to Giroud.

A player like Bony and Ba are not that pacy and play similar to Giroud. Remy just isnt that good.

The closest we got was Suarez, and we got him until Liverpool decided not to honor his contract.

---

I don’t believe quick mobile players weren’t available in the market at the time. World Class players that were quick and mobile…yes I’d agree there weren’t many around for cheap but I think we’re really stretching things if you Giroud was the fastest player we could find at that price and quality. I already mentioned the Dortmund players and Suarez at Ajax.

It also goes back further to when we signed Chamakh. It’s partly born out of circumstance but I believe it’s tactical because Wenger was reluctant to play short strikers on their own up front. We bought Vela as a striker but Wenger wouldn’t play him through the middle on his own. Pushed him wide when we were playing 4-3-3. He did the same to Eduardo and we’ve had Walcott here for years and he’d never give him games through the middle. I believe Wenger wanted a striker that could complement our style and keep the pressure in our opponents half. A striker that can hold the ball in our opponents half.

You’ve made the argument yourself against Walcott saying he couldn’t hold the ball up to save his life. He may not be able to hold the ball up like Giroud but I believe that strategy slows us down, leaves us vulnerable to counters and we don’t have the players or movement up front to break down a compact defence. The eye of the needle pass stuff is boring and risky. I get we’d be just as vulnerable if we have a small striker that gets bullied off the ball constantly but I think we’ve seen a glimpse of how it should be done recently. As I said ages ago, a small striker doesn’t need to match a defender physically to keep the ball in our opponents half.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

I don’t believe quick mobile players weren’t available in the market at the time. World Class players that were quick and mobile…yes I’d agree there weren’t many around for cheap but I think we’re really stretching things if you Giroud was the fastest player we could find at that price and quality. I already mentioned the Dortmund players and Suarez at Ajax.

---

I never said the bolded

And Suarez cost 22 million. When Suarez signed, Arshavin was our most expensive purchase at 17 million. I dont think we had the money during that period.

Aubamayang flamed out at Milan and there wasnt that much evidence he was that good. He made the move to Dortmund in 2013. He is a very inconsisent finisher, but he seems to have found it this year.

Lewandowski is you hindsighting. You never heard of him but are mad that we didnt get him once he looked good. I do think our scouting sucks, but no one else in Europe went after him except Blackburn bizarrely.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

It also goes back further to when we signed Chamakh. It’s partly born out of circumstance but I believe it’s tactical because Wenger was reluctant to play short strikers on their own up front. We bought Vela as a striker but Wenger wouldn’t play him through the middle on his own. Pushed him wide when we were playing 4-3-3. He did the same to Eduardo and we’ve had Walcott here for years and he’d never give him games through the middle. I believe Wenger wanted a striker that could complement our style and keep the pressure in our opponents half. A striker that can hold the ball in our opponents half.

You’ve made the argument yourself against Walcott saying he couldn’t hold the ball up to save his life. He may not be able to hold the ball up like Giroud but I believe that strategy slows us down, leaves us vulnerable to counters and we don’t have the players or movement up front to break down a compact defence. The eye of the needle pass stuff is boring and risky. I get we’d be just as vulnerable if we have a small striker that gets bullied off the ball constantly but I think we’ve seen a glimpse of how it should be done recently. As I said ages ago, a small striker doesn’t need to match a defender physically to keep the ball in our opponents half.

---

Our midfielders get in on goal because our CF can hold the ball up. Its a big reason why the fall of Adebayor was probably the biggest blunder we've had the last 10 years. He was that plus he could get behind defenses. Adebayor is the player Wenger wants up there but Adebayor talent is rare. I do think Wenger wants bigger guys up front, but I disagree completely about him not wanting speed.