I always think of myself as a fairly balanced sort of fellow. Hazard is quite rightly being lauded this season for his performances. I am surprised no one has been talking about Walcott Theo Walcott Arsenal 159 minutes per goal 793 minutes played 5 Goals scored 2 Assists Shots Total 61% Accuracy 17 shots on Target 28 Shots total Eden Hazard Chelsea 168 minutes per goal 838 minutes played 5 Goals scored 1 Assists Shots Total 58% Accuracy 14 Shots on Target 24 Shot total Played less minutes, scored more goals, got one more assist than Hazard, better shot accuracy too. Just thought I would bring it up because it seems odd that no one has been singing Walcott's praises in the media or on MOTD. Why do you think this is? Because he is English? Or because he is overshadowed at Arsenal by Sanchez, Ozil and the like? I think Eden is a better player when on point, easily, but early form puts Theo a nose in front, and just thought it odd no one has been giving him the praise he deserves.
Hazard overall has the full package. He was amazing at Lille, had up and down seasons with Chelsea. Was of course outstanding during the 14/15 season and he's showing that form again. Walcott for me has always flattered to deceive. Be it because of injuries or being overhyped since he was 16, he has never reached his potential. I'm hoping this season he proves me wrong because his contemporaries and Wenger clearly still think he hasn't yet reached his full potential. Hazard has already shown us that. Walcott having a more stable role now and not meandering between being a striker and a winger should help (I hope).
I think people are scared to talk about Walcott from previous seasons. He is clearly one of the most on form and best performing players this season. But his injury records will always make us feel wary for over praising him. We know he can be destructive when on song but injuries and inconsistencies have been major issues and cost us. If he can stay relatively injury free, he could have a great season and push Arsenal to title winners.
Theo is pretty much the story of Arsenal. Lots of potential, should perform better but overall blighted by injury and weak mentality. So far this season we've seen an injury free Theo fighting for his place and it's a revelation. If this can last then ....it won't though will it.
I listened to an interview with Walcott on Radio 5 live a few weeks ago where he said that he was playing with aggression with a 'difficult' chat with a 'very senior person' at Arsenal (presumably Wenger). I took this to mean that Wenger had given Walcott a rocket up his arse and it seems to have worked. I've also noticed that Walcott now looks like a man, after years of always looking like a lightweight, he seems to have bulked up a bit and just generally looks stronger. His talent has never been in doubt, but his confidence, injuries and inconsistency have meant that he's never really fulfilled his potential, but now at 27 it looks like he's coming good just at the right time in his career. Let's hope it lasts
I like theo in certain situations. He's always had good stats but i've never seen him as a championship winning side player. Here's the things decent about wally: - Fast - Makes good intelligent runs - will always get a few chances because of the way he plays What i don't like - His finishing is very hit and miss. Will bang a few great ones and miss some absolute sitters. Sort of makes up for it because he always seems to get quite a few chances - Lightweight - Technically not too strong, all round play hit and miss Some people might disagree because he's scored a few worldies (i remember the one where he dribbled past half the team, was it barca? and banged it in) but those are pretty much 1 offs. If theres no space behind he isn't dribbling past anyone He's always had great stats in terms of goals per game and he's been injury prone. I think in the current system where sanchez is a false 9, wally comes into his element. As a winger, he's good but not great in that he can't beat a man with skill and his crossing is hit and miss. So with Giroud in the side, he's not that useful hence he could barely make the team last season. With sanchez as a false 9, the work really well. Prior to wally playing sanchez was wasted as a false 9 as hes not great at holding it up or making runs past the last defender and you never really had anyone in the box with play being congested. With wally in the side though, they compliment each other in that sanchez is able to drop deep because the wingers, especially wally are now making the runs inside past the defenders, stretching the play and also making space for sanchez to drop in. This with Ozil and Cazorla with their vision and passing abilities really help what you guys are doing imo. As for comparing him to hazard, no chance. Hazard has the all round ability and is pretty much better at everything. The only thing i would give wally better marks at is his pace and making runs. Hazard is lazy and doesn't make many runs unless he's dribbling or playing a give and go and his finishing is pretty hit and miss like wallys.
Walcott was appallingly managed by England as a 16 yr old. Taking him to the 2006 world cup was a very unfunny joke. He then got all that grief when England failed to do anything decent in that world cup as pundits and the media decried the fact that a mere boy was taken for a jaunt when another striker was actually needed. He was then hindered by not going out on loan (imo) but I think that was a 50-50 gamble that didn't pay off so I wouldn't criticise Wenger for that. The next problem was he was hyped beyond belief and then slaughtered every time he didn't deliver. That, mixed in with his injuries (which looked liked they were mishandled at times as he sometimes seemed to be rushed back) seemed to destroy his confidence. Personally think he is a decent player...no where near world class but then again, very few are...who, while he may not get in everyone's first team would make most of the top teams squads in the prem.
Oh I would definitely agree with this. I wasn't suggesting that they are equals in terms of overall ability, just that Hazard is being lauded for his good form this season, where as Walcott, despite being on a par, form wise, gets very little kudos. Just found it strange.
This is always the test for me who the better footballer is. Take away a players pace, how do they fare? For me, Walcott does not have sufficient football intelligence. He can do things rapidly but he lacks vision or ingenuity. Hazard has all these.
Hazard is a better player than Walcott. A fairer comparison would be Sanchez vs Hazard. (Sanchez wins)
Yeah. Hazard v Walcott is not even fair. It is why I rate players like Kanu, Ozil, Ronaldinho, Messi, etc. I think these guys can make things happen on one leg just based off intelligence and vision.
Not at all,look at the stats that Zidane and Iniesta have in comparision to Del Piero and Fabregas for example,ot doesnt tell the whole story at all,Cesc has twice or thrice the assists as andres iniesta,if it wasnt for ronaldo and messi,he would have teams built around him and been the zizou of his era along with xavi.. Hazard is a very special player,a game changer,a big game player...he is so so influential.Walcott is nowhere near him but if he keeps up his form and maybe improve,he would be worldclass and a vital,indispensible club cog for us that any team in europe wouldnt mind unless they have someone like Bale or Messi there.
Sorry but Walcott isn't and will never be world class in any sphere of existence. A very good premier league player when on form, who has outstanding speed and decent movement and finishing. But he is a very limited footballer. Hazard is light years away, multifaceted in his game and an ideal Wenger signing comparable to Sanchez. We haven't seen the best of him yet.
I already agreed this comparison is quite stupid and hazard is on a different level,i f you check back on theos highlights from 07/08 and 11 to 13 you will understand why he wont merely end up as a stats strong player who is good enough but i do agree in the current years he looked more and more unlikely,this season will set his max for the rest of his career.
Theo couldn't understand how Monreal could have the vision and ability to put in a controlled well-measured cross for him to head in.
As an all round footballer Hazard is far better than Theo. Passing,Vision and creativity. However Theo does get WAY too much critiscm particularly when you look at his injury record. The reality is probably around 30% of the games he has played for Arsenal were straight off the back of an injury - therefore he wasnt 100%. Theo is ridiculously quick and is a very good finisher. Whenever he has had a decent spell without Injury he scores a good number of goals. This Season for example 9 goals in 15 apps from a wide position just shows what he is capable off.
