Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain v Theo Walcott

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn

Play me in goal then, I'd be shit no matter where I played but I'd be least shit in goal. Or just get a better player than me and save yourself a lot of grief. If you're suggesting we have a hidden Defoe or Wright just waiting to be unleashed then I get where you are coming from. I used to (sort of) think the same. But a couple of seasons on, forget it. Capello couldn't get anything out of Walcott either and now he's talking about bringing Ox in. If that happens then Walcott's England career is over before it really started. And that's a shame but the guy had his chance and couldn't take it. You say give him another chance, change the whole team around for Theo. Why? Because he has pace? Ox has pace too, let's just move on with him because it very much appears there's plenty to be gained from that route. Whereas with Theo, not as much.



That's right, it does.

---

Theo has never had a real chance of playing up front. The last game I remember was against Birmingham when Eduardo broke his leg, I think. He scored two goals in that game but it was forgotten, obviously.

I've got issues with the 4-3-3 we play in general. Playing a different system would benefit a few our players not just Theo. We have a three man midfield that can't dominate possession against a weak 2 man midfield Man U team and struggled badly against Fulham and Swansea. Song has more assists than Ramsey and Arteta. One of those players should be making way if they're not doing what the formation is meant for.

No point in mentioning Capello. He adds no weight to the conversation after his tatical shambles at the World Cup. But if I was Theo, I'd leave this club and not sign a new contract. If we're saying he hasn't developed in 6 years, that's not his fault because it has nothing to do with effort. Most playere would have outright refused to play out of position for so long and sulked after the amount of criticism.

I trust Wright's assessment in him. He should be playing up front as a striker but Wenger has never been good at coaching out and out strikers and is obsessed with adding more to Theo's game and he hasn't got it. Who has Wenger successfully developed recently by playing them out of position?

Theo should walk away or he's going to mess his career up.

Quote:

---

If we're saying he hasn't developed in 6 years, that's not his fault because it has nothing to do with effort. Most playere would have outright refused to play out of position for so long and sulked after the amount of criticism.

---

That's a pretty outrageous point of view. It certainly is Theo's fault if he hasn't improved in 6 years. To try and blame Wenger for that is giving the player a free pass. Why won't you consider footballing ability in your analysis? Theo's a prospect who hasn't come good, that's it really. He's had his career laid out on a plate for him so far. If he can't take advantage of what has been handed to him then why is it anyone's fault except his? So what if he can't dribble or beat a man (still a problem for a player his size even if he plays in the middle), why can't he pick a pass after 6 years? Why can't he cross a ball even when unchallenged after 6 years? Why can't he make intelligent runs after 6 years? But more importantly why should we carry him for another period of time so he can adjust to a new role, which chances are he'll be just as infective at? I agree, Theo should go. Not because he has been somehow sleighed or short-changed but because he's failed. You can say forget about Cappello, but notice the pattern here. It's everyone's fault except Theo's. Don't buy that.

Anyway, fuck it, I enjoy arguing with you but we're not going to agree about Theo are we? And Wenger's not going to play him through the middle or he'd have done it by now.

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.

---

I see exactly what you are saying. We can talk about the relative merits of the players but need to appreciate how they are being used. Wenger is not having players play to their strengths and is making them play in roles that are unsuitable for them. Consequently we take it out on the players, who may be shit in whatever role they play, but at the very least, they should be given the opportunity to play to their strengths before being damned.

That said, I still think Theo is crap, but many here have suggested that he would have developed into a better player somewhere else. And that is probably true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn

That's a pretty outrageous point of view. It certainly is Theo's fault if he hasn't improved in 6 years. To try and blame Wenger for that is giving the player a free pass. Why won't you consider footballing ability in your analysis? Theo's a prospect who hasn't come good, that's it really. He's had his career laid out on a plate for him so far. If he can't take advantage of what has been handed to him then why is it anyone's fault except his? So what if he can't dribble or beat a man (still a problem for a player his size even if he plays in the middle), why can't he pick a pass after 6 years? Why can't he cross a ball even when unchallenged after 6 years? Why can't he make intelligent runs after 6 years? But more importantly why should we carry him for another period of time so he can adjust to a new role, which chances are he'll be just as infective at? I agree, Theo should go. Not because he has been somehow sleighed or short-changed but because he's failed. You can say forget about Cappello, but notice the pattern here. It's everyone's fault except Theo's. Don't buy that.

---

When you take a kid on at that age it's the managers duty to school him properly. He's been sitting under Wenger for a long time and if your saying he can't do the basics...that's a bad teacher. It's not as if Theo isn't willing to learn or skipping class. Also, when you look at Wenger's success rate with young players....it's not pretty. We've been going at it with this youth project for years now and we haven't produced much. We have a whole generation of youth players that were touted as hot prospects and never made it under Wenger. Walcott is actually one of the better ones.

A load of playere go out on loan and never come back. This youth project has been a failure. If Wenger gets the credit for producing good players, he also gets the blame for the bad ones. We're not talking about some Pennant type of player either. This kid is happy and willing to learn. And I hate to say it, under Harry, he might have been a better player. He looked dangerous at Southampton.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Power_n_Glory

When you take a kid on at that age it's the managers duty to school him properly. He's been sitting under Wenger for a long time and if your saying he can't do the basics...that's a bad teacher. It's not as if Theo isn't willing to learn or skipping class. Also, when you look at Wenger's success rate with young players....it's not pretty. We've been going at it with this youth project for years now and we haven't produced much. We have a whole generation of youth players that were touted as hot prospects and never made it under Wenger. Walcott is actually one of the better ones.

A load of playere go out on loan and never come back. This youth project has been a failure. If Wenger gets the credit for producing good players, he also gets the blame for the bad ones. We're not talking about some Pennant type of player either. This kid is happy and willing to learn. And I hate to say it, under Harry, he might have been a better player. He looked dangerous at Southampton.

---

Well the thread is comparing Ox to Theo. I guess if Ox steadily goes backwards and turns out to be a waste of space in 6 years we can test your theory. Meanwhile, for whatever reasons, Theo has taken 6 years to be half as good as Ox already is. So Theo vs Ox. No contest really. Sell the former, play the latter, problems solved.

I'm amazed people still defend Walcott, he's had so long to prove himself the problem isn't just where he's been played it's his lack of talent...basically as I've been saying for years he's just a guy with pace and nothing else, a sprinter.

His finishing is very hit and miss as has been highlighted many times, he's like Forest Gump once he sets off he keeps going but there's absolutely no intelligence in anything he does.

If we sold him he wouldn't amount to anything because frankly he's not good enough, the excuse about playing him out of position doesn't cut it because you need more than pace up front to play there, you have to time your runs and have the ability to finish....he just outpaces players. Signing him was a massive mistake by Wenger, sticking with him even more so, he's not really a striker whatever might be said about him because he offers very little other than pace....and we could do a lot better than having such a one dimensional player. It's high time we stopped putting up with Wenger's flop signings, no other manager would get this much leeway with such poor quality signings.

Conclusion: A flop of the highest order, cut your losses and get rid

Hey Zim, I'm not defending Walcott at all. But am acknowledging what PnG is saying in respect of where Wenger deploys him. If Wenger played him in a way which made use of his relative strengths, we'd perhaps get more out of him - it certainly couldn't be any worse.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by GB.

Hey Zim, I'm not defending Walcott at all. But am acknowledging what PnG is saying in respect of where Wenger deploys him. If Wenger played him in a way which made use of his relative strengths, we'd perhaps get more out of him - it certainly couldn't be any worse.

---

I don't disagree, but the underlying problem is his lack of ability, it's disappointing that we're not at a level where players like Walcott are all we have to hope for.

Denilson vs Diaby, Vela v/s Walcot, and now Walcot v/s Ox. Walcot the tradition continues. Ox is an exciting player who has shown talent and ability. He has not played nearly as regularly as Walcot and not expected to and consequently don't have the same pressure to perform. Walcot is a first team regular and contributes better defensively. I'am happy to have both in the team. Walcot is not nearly as bad as people say he is and is better with a regular fullback playing alongside him.