Read the BBC article, no quotes from Theo at all. I just can't believe these things unless there is a direct quote from the player.
You know what, call his bluff, the only team Walcott will walk into is Liverpool, and Everton, I don't think he can even walk into the Newcastle team, if he thinks any bigger club than Arsenal will start him week in week out then he's living in dream land. And he sure as hell ain't going to be starting as no CF in any of the big 4.
Do you guys think there's a chance Chelsea would offer him a sizeable increase to be their 2nd/3rd choice striker? And if so, could you see him agreeing to move? Funnily enough, he'd get even fewer opportunities to play there and would probably still be playing wide right...
I actually think we should start him as a central striker. Giroud is proving only a little better than Chamakh as a striker so far but adds more to the team, Gervinho is a good player but lacks the final ball, but Theo has shown he can be a clinical finisher. Hes not the big striker who will get headed goals as well as with his feet like Drogba was, but hes already our top scorer this season with only limited appearances. The only other player we have I would see as warranting a start ahead of Theo at the moment is Podolski. So I say give him a go in the middle and get him to sign the new contract. Gnarby can take Theos place on the wing (as Theo has only been a bit part player this season so I think he can handle that) and Sorry, but Giroud has to drop down the pecking order (or challenge Gnabry for the winger position or as an off the cuff thought Ramsey for his position)
The report seems like speculation to me. There is no quote to support the headline or any interview. The quote also seems inprecise as if Arsenal say, "Here is your 100 grand a week" I don't suppose Walcott would be reluctant at all. He has also ben injured twice already this season, so his place in the first team was not really taken away because of the dispute. All in all it is a little misleading. As for him playing striker, I haven't been a fan of the idea, but I can't say that I think he would be much worse than Gervinho, who although he does have a bit more strength, loses out to Walcott in other parts of his game.
Most fans on our board don't want him, but his effort in the cup game the other night along with the goals is something we need, I'm not sure and don't think you lot will let him go.
That's what I'm getting at, he works hard and scores and we need that so I'm starting to hope this will happen but don't think you lot will let him go.
I think we would be making a massive mistake to let Walcott go. I don't care much for the haters. His record speaks for itself, not only does he score goals, but he has got a good assist rate too. He is one of those players who is always dangerous and can change the game in an instant. I sincerely hope that we can find a solution to this and get Walcott to sign da ting
why are you attacking him based on a speculative article? Where has he said he is refusing to sign? He has almost two years left anyway, why the interest from the media that he hasn't signed yet? Just looks like yet another attempt to destabilise our club to me.
Regardless of if he's being attacked or not, Wenger doesn't seem to play him enough in any position and is that the reason that he will want to leave?
He was playing regularly last season, but his contract situation has affected his selection this season. I think Arsenal are a bit ****ed off with players calling the shots, especially after the RVP situation. I want Walcott to stay simply for Football reasons, I think we'd be weaker without him.
That's the point, if they sign him, that's exactly what will happen, fact is, he isn't going to be playing as CF in any other major club, at least not regularly, and will most likely be playing out wide again, and not on a regular basis either like at Arsenal.
