Alfonso
Established Member
ricky1985 said: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.
ricky1985 said: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.
ricky1985 said: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.
ricky1985 said: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.