Slavia Prague VS Arsenal FC | Wed, Nov7th, 7.45pm | ERS

[Alfonso]

Well done for getting that one in.
Denilson looked like a park player last night, does that mean he is useless and still has a long way to go? Gilberto Silva was a pale immitation of his usual self does that mean he is not good enough? Eduardo has scored more times than Brad Pitt in recent times but was anonymous last night, is he not up to it then?

Denilson played poor, but I think its fair to say that Denilson has peformed more consistantly than Theo at his time at Arsenal, so one poor peformance is not the end of the world, wheras with Theo these kind of peformances are more of the norm than exception, so he gets less benefit of doubt.

Im not going to even argue with you about Gilberto, and Eduardo the jury is still out on him anyway. Ive always said Eduardo looks a bit lightweight and off the pace for my liking, but he has only been here 2 months and scored 4 goals in 11 appearances, so despite last nights efforts its not a bad start so far, but like I said, the jury is still out.

Walcott played poorly, but so did everyone. The weather was horrible, the pitch was s**t, the crowd were volatile, the opponents were frothing at the mouth after their humilliation at the Emirates.

But Walcott has played like that even when the rest of the team have played well. Walcott has had more average/****e peformances for Arsenal in the last 12 months than good ones.

Just because it is Walcott you cannot suddenly say he is not good enough, he has shown already that HE is good enough. He was awesome against Slavia at home (thats the Champs. League aint it?) and we all know about his performances in the Premiership.

He is good enough? Good enough for what? To start Premiership games?

He has played ok in patches but nothing compared to the image or aura of him you are trying to portray. You said by one or two good peformances this season that he had "silenced the critics" and that he is like a "cross between Ronaldo, Owen and Henry". Which I felt is a bit OTT and not justifed at all yet. I mean since last Decemember, apart from scoring in the Carling Cup, and his peformance against Prague at home, what has he done when he has started a game? Its all good coming on for the last 10 mins and making an impact against defenders with tired legs but its a different thing playing well from the begining of the game to the end.

If a person never heard about Walcott and saw him for the first time this season on the basis of the games he has played, what would you think their impression of him would be? Would they say he is a potential worldbeater or an distinctly average footballer? One could argue that he's not got a lot of tricks, he doesn't have great vision or awareness, cant cross to save his life, cant take corners to save his life and his touch varies between superb and absolutely rubbishl and he does at times play like a headless chicken.

Therefore, if one said Theo has been massively overrated so far then they would not look silly. He has amazing pace but the rest of his game needs a lot of work on. To be perfectly honest, Im not yet convinced that's the level of potential we bought in Walcott.

BTW Bolton and Sunderland are every bit as good, if not better than Slavia Prague. Slavia wish they had Anelka up front, Jaaskerlainen or Gordon in goal.

Playing Slavia Prague away in the CL is tougher than Bolton(of this season) and Sunderland at home.

I apperciate some supporters liking Theo because he is English, but if he was one of our players from accademy and without the hype that surrouned him, most people would be on his back a lot quicker.

 

[Anzac]

IMO Walcott & Diaby are 2 players with enormous potential to be very good international players, however neither have any consistency in performance and neither are playing in their preferred roles.

At most other clubs they'd probably have had more game time and in their preferred positions. I'd dare say that even if they'd done so here they'd have been more consistant in their performance & had more impact. However LeBoss is trying to develop certain aspects of their game to make them more complete players & less one dimensional - just look at the flexibility in the squad.

LeBoss has hinted that he expects to see the best players putting their hands up by the time they reach their early 20s. Granted that these two aren't playing in their preferred positions, but they need to show consistant application & progress by the end of the season. There have been plenty of other hot prospects let go & we have several more finishing EU qualification for next season - some of which will be contesting the same positions in the attack.

 

[banduan]

Walcott was awful this game, really dire. I so wanted him to do well.

OTOH, it was a Carling Cup line-up with an experimental formation.

The Carling Cup! In Europe!

 

[Rahul]

Why isnt there a Reading match thread?

 

[Nutsy]

Soon rahul. Working on it ops:

 

[Rahul]

I was just asking mate.

I can understand how much time and effort you must be putting into it.

 

[stiiphunn]

Well done for getting that one in.
Denilson looked like a park player last night, does that mean he is useless and still has a long way to go? Gilberto Silva was a pale immitation of his usual self does that mean he is not good enough? Eduardo has scored more times than Brad Pitt in recent times but was anonymous last night, is he not up to it then?

Denilson played poor, but I think its fair to say that Denilson has peformed more consistantly than Theo at his time at Arsenal, so one poor peformance is not the end of the world, wheras with Theo these kind of peformances are more of the norm than exception, so he gets less benefit of doubt.

Im not going to even argue with you about Gilberto, and Eduardo the jury is still out on him anyway. Ive always said Eduardo looks a bit lightweight and off the pace for my liking, but he has only been here 2 months and scored 4 goals in 11 appearances, so despite last nights efforts its not a bad start so far, but like I said, the jury is still out.

Walcott played poorly, but so did everyone. The weather was horrible, the pitch was s**t, the crowd were volatile, the opponents were frothing at the mouth after their humilliation at the Emirates.

But Walcott has played like that even when the rest of the team have played well. Walcott has had more average/s***e peformances for Arsenal in the last 12 months than good ones.

Just because it is Walcott you cannot suddenly say he is not good enough, he has shown already that HE is good enough. He was awesome against Slavia at home (thats the Champs. League aint it?) and we all know about his performances in the Premiership.

He is good enough? Good enough for what? To start Premiership games?

He has played ok in patches but nothing compared to the image or aura of him you are trying to portray. You said by one or two good peformances this season that he had "silenced the critics" and that he is like a "cross between Ronaldo, Owen and Henry". Which I felt is a bit OTT and not justifed at all yet. I mean since last Decemember, apart from scoring in the Carling Cup, and his peformance against Prague at home, what has he done when he has started a game? Its all good coming on for the last 10 mins and making an impact against defenders with tired legs but its a different thing playing well from the begining of the game to the end.

If a person never heard about Walcott and saw him for the first time this season on the basis of the games he has played, what would you think their impression of him would be? Would they say he is a potential worldbeater or an distinctly average footballer? One could argue that he's not got a lot of tricks, he doesn't have great vision or awareness, cant cross to save his life, cant take corners to save his life and his touch varies between superb and absolutely rubbishl and he does at times play like a headless chicken.

Therefore, if one said Theo has been massively overrated so far then they would not look silly. He has amazing pace but the rest of his game needs a lot of work on. To be perfectly honest, Im not yet convinced that's the level of potential we bought in Walcott.

BTW Bolton and Sunderland are every bit as good, if not better than Slavia Prague. Slavia wish they had Anelka up front, Jaaskerlainen or Gordon in goal.

Playing Slavia Prague away in the CL is tougher than Bolton(of this season) and Sunderland at home.

I apperciate some supporters liking Theo because he is English, but if he was one of our players from accademy and without the hype that surrouned him, most people would be on his back a lot quicker.

Exactly. Well said Alfonso.

Ricky, I really appreciate your posts but I think you're overrating Walcott performances. You said people should eat some humble pie right after the game against Prague. Wasn't it a little too soon?

Most of the times he's been useless- absolutly useless. He's put in two very good performances this season, but that's about it (one as a substitute). I'm not even talking about last season because it's even worse.

However in those games you could see he had some very interesting qualities.

So the question should be: even though Theo's highly inconsistant do you think a few good performances can reflect what will be the norm in the years to come?

If I'm honest, I'd say probably. At the start of the season I criticised Walcott because I thought he wasn't ready to be an Arsenal player- one that could step in when Hleb/Rosicky are injured. I still think it's valid. Nevertheless, in 3 years he'll probably up there.

 

[tam1886]

And the point made earlier - about not caring whether we finish 1st or 2nd - stands. We want to win the CL, and it doesn't matter who we play aginst in the 2nd round - we have to beat the best teams anyway. Wenger did good yesterday. Next stop - 3 points against Reading.

Obviously we'd need to beat good teams, but some are better than others, and by finishing first in the group, we do ourselves a favour by missing out some of the hardest opponents first. The longer we can go without facing a big team, the easier it will be for us. All the teams are good, but some will be more dangerous to us than others.

Do you really think it doesn't matter if we get Barcelona or Shakhtar Donetsk first? Or Real Madrid compared to Rosenborg.


Walcott frustrates me in the same way Adebayor does. In one game he can show flashes of brilliance, then in the next few he can look like a really poor player. Both have shown time and time again they have what it takes technically, and both have talent by the bucketload, but neither have found that consistency which is so important. There is a bit of a difference between them in age, and bopfully by the time Walcott is Ade's age he will have ironed out his problems, but the most annoying thing is knowing that they can do it, but for cant for some reason.

 

[ricky1985]

Well done for getting that one in.
Denilson looked like a park player last night, does that mean he is useless and still has a long way to go? Gilberto Silva was a pale immitation of his usual self does that mean he is not good enough? Eduardo has scored more times than Brad Pitt in recent times but was anonymous last night, is he not up to it then?

Denilson played poor, but I think its fair to say that Denilson has peformed more consistantly than Theo at his time at Arsenal, so one poor peformance is not the end of the world, wheras with Theo these kind of peformances are more of the norm than exception, so he gets less benefit of doubt.

Im not going to even argue with you about Gilberto, and Eduardo the jury is still out on him anyway. Ive always said Eduardo looks a bit lightweight and off the pace for my liking, but he has only been here 2 months and scored 4 goals in 11 appearances, so despite last nights efforts its not a bad start so far, but like I said, the jury is still out.

Walcott played poorly, but so did everyone. The weather was horrible, the pitch was s**t, the crowd were volatile, the opponents were frothing at the mouth after their humilliation at the Emirates.

But Walcott has played like that even when the rest of the team have played well. Walcott has had more average/s***e peformances for Arsenal in the last 12 months than good ones.

Just because it is Walcott you cannot suddenly say he is not good enough, he has shown already that HE is good enough. He was awesome against Slavia at home (thats the Champs. League aint it?) and we all know about his performances in the Premiership.

He is good enough? Good enough for what? To start Premiership games?

He has played ok in patches but nothing compared to the image or aura of him you are trying to portray. You said by one or two good peformances this season that he had "silenced the critics" and that he is like a "cross between Ronaldo, Owen and Henry". Which I felt is a bit OTT and not justifed at all yet. I mean since last Decemember, apart from scoring in the Carling Cup, and his peformance against Prague at home, what has he done when he has started a game? Its all good coming on for the last 10 mins and making an impact against defenders with tired legs but its a different thing playing well from the begining of the game to the end.

If a person never heard about Walcott and saw him for the first time this season on the basis of the games he has played, what would you think their impression of him would be? Would they say he is a potential worldbeater or an distinctly average footballer? One could argue that he's not got a lot of tricks, he doesn't have great vision or awareness, cant cross to save his life, cant take corners to save his life and his touch varies between superb and absolutely rubbishl and he does at times play like a headless chicken.

Therefore, if one said Theo has been massively overrated so far then they would not look silly. He has amazing pace but the rest of his game needs a lot of work on. To be perfectly honest, Im not yet convinced that's the level of potential we bought in Walcott.

BTW Bolton and Sunderland are every bit as good, if not better than Slavia Prague. Slavia wish they had Anelka up front, Jaaskerlainen or Gordon in goal.

Playing Slavia Prague away in the CL is tougher than Bolton(of this season) and Sunderland at home.

I apperciate some supporters liking Theo because he is English, but if he was one of our players from accademy and without the hype that surrouned him, most people would be on his back a lot quicker.

Exactly. Well said Alfonso.

Ricky, I really appreciate your posts but I think you're overrating Walcott performances. You said people should eat some humble pie right after the game against Prague. Wasn't it a little too soon?

Most of the times he's been useless- absolutly useless. He's put in two very good performances this season, but that's about it (one as a substitute). I'm not even talking about last season because it's even worse.

However in those games you could see he had some very interesting qualities.

So the question should be: even though Theo's highly inconsistant do you think a few good performances can reflect what will be the norm in the years to come?

If I'm honest, I'd say probably. At the start of the season I criticised Walcott because I thought he wasn't ready to be an Arsenal player- one that could step in when Hleb/Rosicky are injured. I still think it's valid. Nevertheless, in 3 years he'll probably up there.

Ok. Maybe you are right. I just see something very special with Walcott.
Yes he was **** the other night, absoluely useless, and to be frank he has played like this more times than he has played well.
I am beginning to believe it is simply because playing on the right doesnt come natrually to him, which is a shame because he really should be better in that position, he has good attributes to play there.
When he plays on the right he looks like he is lost and doesnt know what to with the ball when he gets it.
I am beginning to think that Walcott considers playing wide almost as purgatory, a sentence he has to serve before he can move to his rightful position and rip the world a new one.

Playing out wide is bloody difficult, and you need special skills to be top drawer there.
You see Henry had quick feet, but not as quick as C.Ronaldo or Quaresma, Henry could cross a ball but not as consistantly as David Beckham or Luis Figo, Henry could time a run from out-to-in but not as well as Freddie Ljungberg. What I am saying is Henry was/is an unbelievable striker but put him out wide for any length of time and his percieved strengths as striker become mediocre by the standards of a top drawer wide man.

I think it is the same with Theo, up front his crossing would be a strength, similar to Henry, his feet are quick and would give tall centrebacks big problems, his movement is excellent up front but at best decent out wide. Basically what I am saying is Walcott up front is a different beast.
I think even you Alfonso would have to admit that Theo Walcott up front is pretty exciting and potentially devastating.
The area I worry about Theo is competitve attitude, he needs to show more aggression and will to win. Wenger has also expressed a desire for Walcott to show more in this department.

I have to diasgree with you on this point Alfonso, if we had an academy graduate who came on as a sub at 17 and literally burnt through twelve players at about the same speed as cheetah, an academy graduate who had already scored in a major cup final at 17, or showed such zen-like composure in front of goal in the Champions League at such a young age then we would be salivating with excitement, and would have very high hopes for him.

Listen maybe I am going on a hunch a little and havent realised it and have been a little blinkered, and maybe that makes my opinion a little biased, for that I apologise.
But I stand by my view point that Theo has immense, immense talent and I believe he will reach similar levels to Thierry Henry. But I have to admit that quite often Walcott looks useless, and I am hoping that is because he is out on the right, out of his comfort zone, learning his trade in the spotlight at one of the biggest clubs in the world. He gets the ball loses it, or does the wrong thing, and then he has to trot over and take a corner, is he likely to take a brilliant corner when he has spent 65 minutes having his confidence dented on the right hand side?

I think when you look at what he has you see a top drawer striker. I said he reminded me of Ronaldo and Henry, I am not saying he is automatically as good, just I could see comparisons with the way he did things and the attributes he posessed. Let me try to justify that big claim;

I believe he has very similar technical ability to Thierry Henry.
He can generate lots and lots of power with the instep of his foot (the hallmark of a good finisher), this technique extends to crossing and passing as well. He can dribble past players at amazing speed, but doesnt really beat them with his skill.
He reminds me of Ronaldo in the way he runs witht he ball, and the way he controls it. He also finishes in a similar way to Ronaldo in my opinion, very natrually and can always find a way to get the ball where he wants it to go (so I guess I could have said Robbie Fowler for the finishing LOL). His speed is also comparable to both.
I understand that he is yet to really prove what I am saying, but these are just observations that I made, becasue they are what I think. Maybe I'll be completely wrong, and maybe I'll be spot on, who knows.

So Stiiphun, Alfonso you are right and I was wrong the jury is still out and I shouldnt have said otherwise, but give Theo Walcott a run of games up front and I'll stake my forum rep. (I wish I had a forum rep.) that he will become a world class striker, and be a fixture in our team.

 

[stiiphunn]

Oh yeah definitly.

I'm sure Theo's going to be a great striker. He definitly has something, I completly agree with you.

And it's normal for a young player to be inconsistant. Very few are playing well week in week out.
That's why I still feel Theo would struggle up front.
I know we all want him to do well, but he's not quite ready yet wether it's upfront or on the wing.

Even if he'd probably do better upfront, because as you said it's not easy on the wing.

 

[Alfonso]

Listen maybe I am going on a hunch a little and havent realised it and have been a little blinkered, and maybe that makes my opinion a little biased, for that I apologise.

Fair play for being honest.

You are right, he is only 18 and under Wenger he has one of the best coaches to improve him. I also think he is better up front, so perhaps its not entirely fair to judge him soley based on how he does on the wing. I guess the same could be said of Diaby.