WALCOTT - which position is best etc?

[franksav63]

Frank

We could debate his 'quality" for ages but I am baffled how you blame him for lack of effort versus Wigan?

He made the runs he was supposed to make for the position he played in.

He is not supposed to chase back to the half way line more than once or twice in a game, he is to use his energy for short bursts of high pace into space, which is what I saw him do.

When I played up front, on my own (many seasons ago now) and the ball wasn't appearing anywhere near me, I was always told to ''go looking for the ball'' Wally Walcott didn't do this, hence the reference to his lack of effort. It appreared, TO ME, that he couldn't be arsed, couple this with his obvious lack of quality and you have a rolled up, overrated wanker on one's hands, and the sooner he sod's off the better!

[Cockerill's chin]

It's unfair to imply that 7 years can be used as ammunition against Walcott at Arsenal northbank. He joined the club at 16 and his development has been hampered by too many injuries. We are now seeing him deliver on his potential and he is just 23. This is exactly the wrong time to let him go.

I don't know which way you envisage it at the Arsenal but Gazidis has been quoted often enough about re-signing existing players. Contract renegotiations are his remit. AW will advise which players he wants to keep and give an indication of worth (in my opinion). Negotiations should have started two years ago and the fact they have been allowed to be neglected is the fault of Gazidis and to a lesser degree Wenger in my book.

[northbank123]

It's unfair to imply that 7 years can be used as ammunition against Walcott at Arsenal northbank. He joined the club at 16 and his development has been hampered by too many injuries. We are now seeing him deliver on his potential and he is just 23. This is exactly the wrong time to let him go.

I don't know which way you envisage it at the Arsenal but Gazidis has been quoted often enough about re-signing existing players. Contract renegotiations are his remit. AW will advise which players he wants to keep and give an indication of worth (in my opinion). Negotiations should have started two years ago and the fact they have been allowed to be neglected is the fault of Gazidis and to a lesser degree Wenger in my book.

Mate, Wenger is responsible for the squad. Gazidis isn't responsible for the contracts: Wenger is the one responsible for deciding who he wants to offer a new contract to and when, and what he's willing to offer them, Dick Law is the one who carries out the formal negotiations. We're not a club where the board interfere in footballing decisions.

I actually reckon he's started showing a bit of end product last 12 months. And although nowhere near enough to justify his opinion of himself, he's not a player I'd want to let go. But the fact is that as an attacking player at AFC even over the last season and a half he hasn't been the decisive factor in anywhere near as many games as he should have consider the billing he gets from some quarters.

[k1tsun3]

All this Theo talk is really starting to tire me out.

[augie]

Question for those who want the club to agree to his demands........At what point would you say that his demands are too high ? I read comments saying that it would be lunacy to invest all that time and money into Wally only to let him go now but surely those comments have to include a BUT somewhere in there ? I have always been forthright in my opinion that the productivity > wage demands is unjustifiable but a lot disagree with me (for various reasons) so I would like to know where they would draw the line in these negotiations

[k1tsun3]

Question for those who want the club to agree to his demands........At what point would you say that his demands are too high ? I read comments saying that it would be lunacy to invest all that time and money into Wally only to let him go now but surely those comments have to include a BUT somewhere in there ? I have always been forthright in my opinion that the productivity > wage demands is unjustifiable but a lot disagree with me (for various reasons) so I would like to know where they would draw the line in these negotiations

I think a comp is in order. Arsenal are offer 80K/wk and Walcott wants 100k/wk, so why not try to offer 90k/wk and comp. I'm getting annoyed with both sides. I think right now rotating Walcott and Giroud upfront is good, but if Arsenal bring in Adrian Lopez, Walcott may not get as much time up front as he wants, which is something I think he needs to get over and just focus on being the best in any front line position he's put in. Even when started on the wing, he's allowed to drift into the CF role throughout the match.

[donaldo]

Question for those who want the club to agree to his demands........At what point would you say that his demands are too high ? I read comments saying that it would be lunacy to invest all that time and money into Wally only to let him go now but surely those comments have to include a BUT somewhere in there ? I have always been forthright in my opinion that the productivity > wage demands is unjustifiable but a lot disagree with me (for various reasons) so I would like to know where they would draw the line in these negotiations

A lot of fans of Feo want him to stay out of fear.Not that he is good enough for us now and no way worth £100k a week.But if he goes somewhere else he will improve.What kind of logic is that?But what if he stays and doesnt improve thats £26m down the pan.I have always said take away his pace what are you left with?

If Feo wasnt going to sign last summer we should have sold even for £10m because that was the most we were ever going to get him for.Not when he is free in July

[SteveO 35]

Question for those who want the club to agree to his demands........At what point would you say that his demands are too high ? I read comments saying that it would be lunacy to invest all that time and money into Wally only to let him go now but surely those comments have to include a BUT somewhere in there ? I have always been forthright in my opinion that the productivity > wage demands is unjustifiable but a lot disagree with me (for various reasons) so I would like to know where they would draw the line in these negotiations

100k is acceptable. If he starts demanding RvP type wages then the club should laugh in his face. 100k is no big deal in the modern game - yep, I'm aware how daft that sounds but every top club has players on that wage level. If City want to blow 170k per week or something daft on the fella then good luck to him

I would have no problem with Wilshere, Cazorla, Arteta, the great Abou and Walcott on 100k per week, possibly Podolski, but that's it.

[SteveO 35]

Interesting to hear the Twitcher yesterday blast the QPR players for earning too much money for their level of ability. Apparently he fined someone last week that was on higher wages than anyone was earning at Spurs. I know he's a tax dodging, scumbag *word censored* of the highest order but thought for once he spoke some sense on this particular point

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20828024

[donaldo]

Question for those who want the club to agree to his demands........At what point would you say that his demands are too high ? I read comments saying that it would be lunacy to invest all that time and money into Wally only to let him go now but surely those comments have to include a BUT somewhere in there ? I have always been forthright in my opinion that the productivity > wage demands is unjustifiable but a lot disagree with me (for various reasons) so I would like to know where they would draw the line in these negotiations

100k is acceptable. If he starts demanding RvP type wages then the club should laugh in his face. 100k is no big deal in the modern game - yep, I'm aware how daft that sounds but every top club has players on that wage level. If City want to blow 170k per week or something daft on the fella then good luck to him

I would have no problem with Wilshere, Cazorla, Arteta, the great Abou and Walcott on 100k per week, possibly Podolski, but that's it.

SteveO

I dont agree.Players on £100k a week for achieving 4th.They have to earn their huge wages first.There are winners at Utd on less than our players.What incentive is there to win if you are on £5m a year to get 4th place

Arsenal is just one big gravy train.Fill your boots

[SteveO 35]

Question for those who want the club to agree to his demands........At what point would you say that his demands are too high ? I read comments saying that it would be lunacy to invest all that time and money into Wally only to let him go now but surely those comments have to include a BUT somewhere in there ? I have always been forthright in my opinion that the productivity > wage demands is unjustifiable but a lot disagree with me (for various reasons) so I would like to know where they would draw the line in these negotiations

100k is acceptable. If he starts demanding RvP type wages then the club should laugh in his face. 100k is no big deal in the modern game - yep, I'm aware how daft that sounds but every top club has players on that wage level. If City want to blow 170k per week or something daft on the fella then good luck to him

I would have no problem with Wilshere, Cazorla, Arteta, the great Abou and Walcott on 100k per week, possibly Podolski, but that's it.

SteveO

I dont agree.Players on £100k a week for achieving 4th.They have to earn their huge wages first.There are winners at Utd on less than our players.What incentive is there to win if you are on £5m a year to get 4th place

Arsenal is just one big gravy train.Fill your boots

There are also players at United earning substantially more than 100k per week and we should know because we provided them with one. Fergie was only too willing to go running to Rooney with a 150k per week contract when that greedy *word censored* agent of his was trying to engineer a move to City and that mercenary *word censored* duckface Ferdinand has been quick to get himself on the gravy train too.

Its a fine balance I accept. People will look at those two and say they deserved the money because they won things but United were paying big wages to players when they had 2-3 year spells without winning the title which at the time was a gamble.

I'm confused as to what people want to be honest. Do they want us to keep our best players? How else do we keep them from joining the bigger clubs?

I think the argument about not paying top wages is circular? Surely you'd agree that we need 4 or 5 top players on that kind of money or do you still believe in the Wenger dream of winning the quadruple with nobody earning more than 70k per week. His model is outdated just like Graham's was at the end of his reign. Top young players have expectations of 100k per week and other teams will pay it. In a couple of years Wilshere will not have won anything still because he is at Arsenal and when City come calling with a big offer would you still take the view that 100k is too much money for a player that has only finished 4th and agree we should sell him?

[nut flush gooner]

Breaking news on SSN , daniel sturridge is having a medical at liverpool. If this is true I cannot see them buying Walcott.

He wouldnt get into the manure or city sides, so perhaps he will stay after all.

[k1tsun3]

Breaking news on SSN , daniel sturridge is having a medical at liverpool. If this is true I cannot see them buying Walcott.

He wouldnt get into the manure or city sides, so perhaps he will stay after all.

Yeah, saw that. I think his options are limited. Liverpool was really his only option if he wanted playing time in the CF position.

Time to sign da ting, Theo!

[donaldo]

Question for those who want the club to agree to his demands........At what point would you say that his demands are too high ? I read comments saying that it would be lunacy to invest all that time and money into Wally only to let him go now but surely those comments have to include a BUT somewhere in there ? I have always been forthright in my opinion that the productivity > wage demands is unjustifiable but a lot disagree with me (for various reasons) so I would like to know where they would draw the line in these negotiations

100k is acceptable. If he starts demanding RvP type wages then the club should laugh in his face. 100k is no big deal in the modern game - yep, I'm aware how daft that sounds but every top club has players on that wage level. If City want to blow 170k per week or something daft on the fella then good luck to him

I would have no problem with Wilshere, Cazorla, Arteta, the great Abou and Walcott on 100k per week, possibly Podolski, but that's it.

SteveO

I dont agree.Players on £100k a week for achieving 4th.They have to earn their huge wages first.There are winners at Utd on less than our players.What incentive is there to win if you are on £5m a year to get 4th place

Arsenal is just one big gravy train.Fill your boots

There are also players at United earning substantially more than 100k per week and we should know because we provided them with one. Fergie was only too willing to go running to Rooney with a 150k per week contract when that greedy *word censored* agent of his was trying to engineer a move to City and that mercenary *word censored* duckface Ferdinand has been quick to get himself on the gravy train too.

Its a fine balance I accept. People will look at those two and say they deserved the money because they won things but United were paying big wages to players when they had 2-3 year spells without winning the title which at the time was a gamble.

I'm confused as to what people want to be honest. Do they want us to keep our best players? How else do we keep them from joining the bigger clubs?

I think the argument about not paying top wages is circular? Surely you'd agree that we need 4 or 5 top players on that kind of money or do you still believe in the Wenger dream of winning the quadruple with nobody earning more than 70k per week. His model is outdated just like Graham's was at the end of his reign. Top young players have expectations of 100k per week and other teams will pay it. In a couple of years Wilshere will not have won anything still because he is at Arsenal and when City come calling with a big offer would you still take the view that 100k is too much money for a player that has only finished 4th and agree we should sell him?

United pay their top players players big money but the likes of Rafael Evans Carrick Welbeck and Hernandez are not getting mega money and they are all title winners.Compare that to our players who are losers.Wilshire like RVP will get a mega wage rise when he leaves.But you telling me we will get rid of Gervinho Ramsey Diaby and Rosicky all on mega money?.They will be like Chamakh Squillaci Denilson Arshavin and Bendtner still on the payroll because no fucker will be dumb enough to take them off our hands

On your point of how do we keep our best players you get in a manager who looks on 4th as failure

[SteveO 35]

On your point of how do we keep our best players you get in a manager who looks on 4th as failure

We all want that, but we also know that day isn't coming any time soon. In the meantime I would prefer us to keep hold of the best players we've got rather than participate in Wenger's self harm rush of completing other team's squads