http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/20732920 Here we go again. Haven't we learnt that dragging things on like this will only hurt the club? The problem with this is if Wenger has someone in mind to replace Walcott, he might not go through with it in the vain hope of getting Walcott to sign. But if he doesn't, then we miss out on a signing. We need to be fortifying after this difficult period, we can't afford to weaken the club any further. The news of Walcott's departure will only have a negative effect on the dressing room.
This is seriously boring now. I am also utterly confused by this. I still can't believe that the board have allowed him to get this stage without selling him, so someone at the club (Wenger?) must be trying their best to try and sort this out and get Walcott to stay.
not a good idea to allow him to communicate to other clubs I will never be surprised Liverpool will come and offer him something like 140k to take him in summer .. they paid some stupid wages like 135k to Jovanović or 110k to Cole, beside Walcott is a liverpool fan and they need a striker ..
Yeah but you cant blame any of this on Arsene , He is just an innocent in the ways of such things surely . Im sure he has absolutely no power to do a single thing in these situations . Just a bystander with his hands tied. Poor man , who would want to be a coach for so long and have such little influence eh ?
Well, this is what everybody said Arsenal should do, not sell their best players. I assume that the board are thinking that the moron fans will be less upset if he leaves for free than if we sell him.
Not really. I think Arsene does want to keep Walcott but is not stupid enough to give into Walcott's demands. He is simply not worth the money he wants. It's just a boring game between Walcott's people and the club.
We shall see, but i am guessing that the fans are going to get screwed over again by someone . Either by The board , Wenger , or Walcott. Take your pick .
this has a ring of sol campbell about it....Arsenal could get well and truly screwed over ... losing Toure, cliche,(excuse spellings) Song, Nasri, Adebayor, Fabregas and RVP may have felt bad but arsenal made a mint on each deal.... Losing a player who's worth money for sod all is horrible. Especially if he goes on to win things; and implies it ain't a money thing etc. I ain't taking the piss either
Maybe you can blame some of this on Arsene. The most intriguing part of the BBC article was this little snippet: "But it is understood the main reason negotiations have not recommenced is the player's anger at being relegated to the substitutes' bench after he turned down the improved contract." I did think it strange that Oxo was being played ahead of Walcott, even when it was clear Oxo wasn't playing well.
I remember that. Walcott has been one of our best players this season. I'm with swj10 I think there is some posturing going on, which could be sorted out with a little leeway.
Whatever happens, Wenger & the club must NOT let Walcott dictate the team's formation or their wage structure. He plays on the clubs terms or he can jog on. Simplez!
For me, I'd take the pragmatic approach. Walcott - despite what people have said about him - is an important player for Arsenal, scores goals and provides others with goals. To me that is an extremely valuable asset to have and could be the difference between CL football and not. If that's worth Forty million to the club, then Walcott is worth paying for. Gazidis has recently said that we can now compete on a salary level with the clubs around us and as much as I baulk at seeing anybody 'earn' 1OOk per week, this is the reality of the situation we face if we want to keep him.
Giving Walcott an extra 40k a week would see our wage bill rise by 2 million. Champions League football is worth 30 million? Right now we're on the cusp of missing out on that 30 million. With a board ranting about how much money they've got, WTF is the problem here? If money is the issue, our board can feck off. Otherwise: 1. Walcott just wants to leave and is trying to lay the blame on the club so he can make an amicable exit (like RVP tried to do). 2. There really is a positional issue, and Walcott wants to be a striker. 3. Walcott is pissed at being left on the bench earlier in the season.
Theo wants 100k a week. Does he really deserve it? The max I'd give him is 85/90k a week because frankly, Theo does not deserve 100k a week
I think the figures are all speculative, but I believe that Walcott was on 6Ok, has been offered 75k and is holding out for 85k. Which is still considerably less than he would get at Chelsea, City or Utd
If it's only 85K, why are we saying no? It's within our structure, and it's not that much money for a club of our stature.
Although I don't think anybody deserves to 'earn' 85k per week. In the context we're talking about, I think Walcott is worth that.
