Quote Originally Posted by Niall_Quinn View Post
Do you think it would be a good idea to play Theo up top and construct the team around him? And then watch him walk out the door? Why is it Wenger that has frozen Walcott out? Why not look at it as Walcott having frozen himself out with his demands? When he could be playing instead of Gervinho. Walcott is either the thickest footballer alive today or has the thickest advisor alive today. He can go and take what he wants, right now. Sign a contract, wait a couple of weeks for Gervinho to completely fuck it up, move into his slot (just as Wenger says will happen), make himself invaluable and get his fucking money. That's what a smart guy would do. And a smart manager would say you;re either with us or somewhere else and until that's determined sit your arse on the bench because the long term future of the team takes precedence over the wishes of a single wantaway.
Wenger hasn't played Walcott up front at all over the last few years so why would he sign a new deal and then take Wenger's word for it? That would be thick. He's already lost his England International spot to Ox and people keep assuming he's a winger and in a few years time, he could end up like Arshavin or Chamkah. A bench player. If Wenger had any intention of playing Theo up front, he wouldn't have bought Giroud and he's been quick to give Gervinho his chance. Walcott could wait for Gervinho to fuck up but Giroud would be next in line and then Podolski, then Chamakh. Walcott is way down the pecking order to play that role.

He has no faith him and Wenger doesn't sound in a hurry to play him up top. A smart guy would run his contract down and find a club willing to play him up top and develop him as a striker.