Lennon is hardly a clogger, and he's not injury prone - Walcott is. He spends more time on a treatment table than on a pitch. The most skilful player in the world is of no use if he can't play.
I take you Spuds do now concede that when they are both fit and playing, Walcott is better than Lennon ?
Avoiding the question tells me you agree Walcott is better than Lennon And whilst Walcott has had his injuries, he's back now and just scored 2 in his first 2 starts.
Back, but for how long??.....probably just long enough to stick in another of his outrageous wage demands.
Meh ... That's a **** comeback. Walcott is vastly superior to Lennon and that's the point you're desperately trying to avoid
I wouldn't say "vastly," but it is clear that, over the past couple of seasons, Walnut has been better than Lennon. Hence, the reason why we've loaned him to Everton. At Spurs, we're only interested in the Harry Kanes and the Eriksens, now.
Both are a bit average. Lets just agree on that. Walcott is better though, when fit. which is 3 days in every 200 years The issue is, when the pace dries up. Both have literally nothing else to offer. Pace is their game and without it.... whats the point of Arron walcott and Theo Lennon?
Walcott only ever plays well when there is something to play for such as a new contract or a international tournament in the summer, this inevitably happens between January or May as a result too. Still a better player than Lennon though.
Lennon, on his day, could run rings around Walnut. When Spurs beat Chavs in the 2008 League Cup Final, it was mainly down to Lennon, who treated the Chav's left-back like a little boy, and had him in his back-pocket all game. Walnut, whilst a decent player, has never dominated a game like that, and never will.
As others have said, also, and what you're trying to avoid, is that Walcott is rarely ever fit. Subsequently, no matter how good you think he is, he ain't much use lying on a treatment table cooking up his latest obscene wage demands. I should think his pay per minute actually spent on a pitch must make him the best paid player in work football!
If Lennon is as good as you are saying why have you got rid of him then ? as I said in an earlier post imo I think Townsend is a better all round player than Lennon. I think Walcott is also better than Lennon. so the comparison is between Townsend and Walcott, with Theo just edging it as he can play upfront on his own as well as on the wing, and he has a better scoring rate than Andros. both are good players imo but not great
I think quite a few Spurs fans are wondering why too. For whatever reason, M.P. obviously doesn't rate him, or doesn't like his attitude, etc. Townsend, blows hot and cold. It would help if he tried engaging brain before feet sometimes. I quite like Walcott. But, the fact remains that he's very injury prone. Strikes me as though he could be a bit of a disruptive influence, too. He certainly has a very high opinion of himself. Whether that view is shared by Wenger, I'm not so sure.
Both players are guilty of not engaging brain before feet sometimes and both are guilty of not always looking up to see better options. I thought when Townsend got into England team he was good but haven't seen much of that quality since. as to this weekends NLD I think it could be close and a draw is likely. You have quality up front and Eriksen playing very well in midfield but defence can let you down, and that is similar to state of Arsenal - we have quality upfront and Cazorla playing very well in midfield yet our defence had let us down before. So we seem to cancel each other out and u expect a score draw 2 - 2
