Alex Oxlade-Chamberlain v Theo Walcott

[Özim]

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.

So he does some defensive work, so what....isn't he suppose to be an attacking player?

If he can't deliver going forward which form the evidence of 6 years he can't, why should we put up with it, if we're ever going to improve we need better players than him, it's players like him and a number of others that explains why we are where we are, overpaid players who add very little to the team.