Theo Walcott


You guys are a bit much; because his dude being where he was we got to more goals.

To be honest most strikers like agurero is offside quite a lot so what’s the problem.


What’s a bit much is acting like he deserves credit for his pass coming off a defender and fortuitously landing at Kola’s feet and him missing a chance which rebounded in the direction of Bellerin.


The defender did his job preventing a cross to other arsenal players in the box; ignore the fact he made the run to collect the pass in the first place, so credit is deserved.


He deserves credit for 1 thing he did right and criticism for 3 other things which he failed at. And that’s what he gets. That ratio also sums him up quite nicely. He is 25% footballer and 75% failure.


He deserves some credit for the two goals. However if we think about it a deflection/failed cross and thankfully Kolasinac was clinical with his finish. The last goal it was a clever touch by Wilshere and Walcott still failed to strike the ball clearly and right at the keeper. Once again you have another player in the form of Bellerin who followed up.

We will not get that many opportunities against the likes of Chelsea. How many times can Walcott f*** up before he make something positive?


Maybe he needs to be told that it is contract renewal time for him :henry2:


Kola being there would mean nothing if the ball wasnt collected, deflected cross wouldn’t happen period.

Wiltshires pass would have back to the touch line to bellerin and would have been crossed in; let’s be honest her had to shoot first time, the ball was hit true but the keeper made a good save; the power of shot meant he couldn’t hold the shot hence bellerin had the chance.

Say what you like the two goals were from being there.



It’s obvious why there is. Because he’s a player that’s ugly to the eye and the reasons you said, and because people like a scapegoat to release their frustrations on. He’s one of those players who for someone who knows very little it’s easy to go ‘ha-ha’ at. That’s why I said it should be as inactive as the Elneny thread.

In reality he’s probably worth his salary in a functional team. In a functional team he’s pretty much Müller with a bit less ball retention and a bit more pace, limited players who have good movement and are specialists reliant on their team functioning and taking advantage of their movement and the opportunities it creates.

There are other people who understand Theo here and who don’t talk shit about him like me, and not a4tt, if anything my yankee roots shine through in the fact that I’m stubborn and naive enough to continue opening this thread and failing for the same bait over and over. In that vein I’ll try not to fall too hard for the bait of this post.

What’s a bit much is not giving him credit for a move that doesn’t happen without, and originated with, his movement…For chances to happen you have to be there in the first place. The second one is more meh but still, this is the stuff of haters.


Jack’s movement for the third goal was a prime example of what intelligent movement can do in regard to creating options for teammates and drawing defenders away. Theo running around like a headless chicken, constantly offside and missing chances he should score is night and day from what Jack done.


Lol thinking that Jack has intelligent movement and Theo not is really ignorance shining through. There was nothing headless chicken about his run in the move for the first goal.


Yet you seem to be denying that had Walcott not been there the ball would have been played to bellerin, rather than a chance on goal; or that the goal keeper read the play really well and made a good save.


If he was left footed he could have shot first time from that position.


Walcott does indeed have good movement which is a key reason as to why he scored as much as he has.

It’s the other areas of the game such as transition and facilitation that he’s woefully inept at which is why unless he’s scoring he’s essentially invisible.


This kids, will later go down into the history books as the infamous Theo Walcott argument. 100s of years from now, scientists will still ponder how something as straightforward and indubious as the fact that TW14 is a shit footballer could be debated over.


Ah fuck all this. You do exactly the same thing with Giroud. You scapegoat him and make shit jokes at his expense when he is just like Theo in terms of being a limited player who isn’t always easy on the eye, but effective when utilised correctly in his specific role.

You are so holier than thou sometimes when you are guilty of doing the exact same thing with players you don’t like, you’re only here because you’ve always like Walcott not because you’re so even handed and reasonable in your analysis of players.


I just react toward what I read. People talk a lot of shit about Giroud; the brilliant link-up play nonsense (when, as the weon eloquently put it last night, his passing is about as good as Ospina’s), the periodic statistics posted comparing him with Drogba, the talk making him out to be irreplaceable as a plan B, etc. etc. Theo most of the shit being talked–with the exception of a4tt–is in the other direction.

The idea that I really like Theo is nonsense, btw. He’s not my type of player at all, lol, and before he showed his worth in 12-13 I was always telling my Premier league following friends (the only ones I talked to about Arsenal before signing up for this forum) that I wanted him gone bad. If you think I like a Theo it’s just a measure of how much shit people talk about him.


I think overall there is a spectrum on Theo, centering on “not really good enough for a club of our stature but useful in patches and under certain circumstances”

Some also don’t particularly care for him (including me) for other intangibles (bias, sure), but give me a break people… the vigorous ness of defense of his on one dimension or another seems out of balance with the basic consensus on him, including aw (who has at times played Ollie, welbeck iwobi over him, none of which are world-beaters.


SAF won united the title in the RVP year mainly with a bunch of Theo-esque players who would get the ball down the wing and send those kind of dangerous crosses across the face of goal. Just like Theo did yesterday. When you get into those dangerous positions like Theo has a penchant to do, mayhem occurs and goals are scored.


So I’m getting that Theo is a specialist at ‘being there’; occupying space, making runs and distracting defenders. Anything that doesn’t involve too much of the ball. Definitely better than having nobody in his position at all.

Actually, ‘being here’ sums up his Arsenal career quite nicely.

He frustrates me like no other player ever has.


What gets on my nerves is that he always tries to dribble. Fuck me! He can barely control the ball!