your the biggest wum on here , anyway.......... we'll have to wait and see how both players perform tonight.
He's not that bad, Hopefully Cleverley carries on his good form, also i think Welbeck is not getting enough credit on this thread in my opinion.
Who's not that bad? Neither of ours are bad, although they're not as good as you blindly claim, but Wilshere would be ****ing dynamite in our midfield. Alongside cleverly would be good but if I had to choose either it'd be Wilshere. Walcott is better than Wellbeck.
No, he's not. By me saying I would prefer Walcott isn't saying I think Wellbeck is no good. He's certainly not ****.
with both tipped to start today, we will have a better idea today who is better on the pitch facing the same opposition with the same quality of players around them walcott will not have a better chance to shine than today match facing an attacking team like Brazil with too many slow defenders who will leave enough space for him to explore using his pace ..
Walcott's a better player but Welbeck's a more natural striker, which is where Walcott wants to play. Walcott would be best served playing deeper to get a run on defenders, when he picks up a bit of pace running at the defence he's very hard to stop but if he's put under pressure before he really gets going he's much easier to stop.
walcott need space in front of him too, this is why facing compact teams he often struggle as can't rely on his pace
yepp because he can rely on his sublime passing and amazing technical ability, isn't? even SuperJackWilshere10 said he is not as effective facing sides that sit back and leave no space..
No just his raw pace. Yes of course he's more effective when sides are daft enough to push up with a high line & give him acres of grass to run into, as in a sprint he's probably the quickest player in the league. But he's also good enough to just burst past defenders, even when they're sat in.
