The Fury said:
kennyrester said:
The Fury said:
Act like an idiot? What do you mean? He's not Balotelli. He's consistant , more then other players and most importantly, he's good. Milner is slower and less skillful, he doesn't get ahead of the defense while Walcott blasts past them even at the start of the game. He can get into the position where he can provide our forward with the ball they need like he did all season with Van Persie, he wouldn't have got as many goals without him.
|
I mean run the ball into trouble or into touch again and again and again. He is not consistent. At all. I don't know how anyone could have watched him over the course of the season and come to that conclusion. Maybe from around November to January he was pretty good but for the rest of the season I honestly don't think he put in two good performances in a row. How many times did he get the ball in a good position and just aimlessly run either into a group of opposition players or out for a goal kick? Lots, that's how many. He can be good, sure but I would say it's less often than not. He was good with Van Persie for parts of the season, but frankly miserable for others and was relying on arguably the best striker in the world, and inarguably the best one in England, being on top form to convert the chances he created. His crossing isn't great and generally need a top class CF on the end of them to make anything of them. When RVP lost form towards the end of the season Walcott's assists dried up too. He needs about 5 gilt-edged chances to put one away.
All that said he can be a joy to watch and his inconsistency makes him more exciting, but god is he frustrating. I just don't think he fits into Hodgson's plans, which lets not forget worked pretty well against France. Like I said he might come on if things are going badly, but in a system based on solidity and not conceding he just won't work.
|
A few but any right winger does that. Silva for Man City was great last season, for msot of it yet there was this patch around March/April when he did nothing, no goals, no assists, yet no one moans at him. Walcott scored more goals than Silva.
My consistancy thing was based on style of play. There was this period for some reason arsenal fans were booing him, yet he was still putting in good balls and getting ahead of the defence against a keeper and defender with nothing to do with it other than shoot which is saved. He's not a natural striker so he looks for the Van Persies to pass to and finish in style. He shut the booing fans up by setting one goal up and scoring 2 in a game yet they still don't respect him. If he was at Saints or anywhere else he'd be the best on the team.
He's still better than Milner. We won't win the tournament by not playing our best players.
|
Although I agree that he's a better player than Milner I don't think he's good enough to overhaul the teams tactics around his inclusion. As someone else pointed out Milner is better at tracking back which is obviously very important to Hodgson. I think the idea that the "best" players need to be picked has been very damaging to England in the past and credit has to go to Hodgson for not trying to fit Gerrard and Lampard into the same team or any of that nonsense that other England managers have persisted in. I know it's a cliché but the manager needs to pick the best team, not the 11 best individuals.
And as for your other points the Arsenal fans booed Walcott because they're the worst fans in the world , and David Silva is a far, far superior player to Walcott.
