I was panicked when we lost Walcott. It filled me with dread looking at our fixture list for games he was missing, and I know I wasn't the only one who felt like that.
Last night however, without Theo, we looked absolutely scintillating. It was approaching the tika-taka style that Arsene has been searching for for years now. It is the kind of style that is best for breaking down those packed defences, something desperately required against the majority of teams who play with 10 men behind the ball.
Last season and the start of this season, Theo looked to be the first name on our teamsheet, but even now when he's back to full fitness I'm not so sure he will be. I'm starting to think he should only be starting against teams who allow us to play on the counter (Man City maybe) and then conversely he can come on off the bench once we've already scored against the likes of Villa, WBA and Sunderland to exploit the gaps they leave when they go looking for a goal.
Admittedly this article is premature, it should really wait until we've played Dortmund and Man U, but Liverpool are a strong team and I never thought we would play so well without someone who used to be such a key player.
Walcott - Starter or super-sub?
posted on 3/11/13
If Walcott starts consistently, Ozil's assist stats are going to become scary.
posted on 3/11/13
Walks
into the team for me (even
though we will concede
possession more regularly with
him in the side)
-------
not necessarily. If you have pacy outlets on the flanks, you can spread the play and decongest the middle. It's easier for teams like Dortmund or even the battling West Brom to squeeze our midfield when there is no out-ball.
posted on 3/11/13
Whether against a team parking the bus or a team having a go at us, Walcott has to start EVERYTIME. He makes by far the best runs off the ball among our players. The others like to play it infront of the opposition. Walcott likes to get behind the opposition and this also creates space and options for those on the ball. I genuinely believe we wouldn't have drawn with West Brom or lost to Dortmund with Theo on the pitch. In the latter case, Sagna wouldn't have overcommited himself upfield for the 2nd goal if Theo was there.
It's not all about technique. Pace and the willingness to run the channels is important too. We've had 2 good games against Napoli and Liverpool without Theo but you can't tell if we would have been even better with him.
posted on 3/11/13
Theo is carp. You lot are better off without him. He is the welbeck of arsenal. teams play well when they are off injured
posted on 3/11/13
And all these neglects the fact that we won't see the best of Ozil until we have willing runners behind the opposition defence. Pod and Ox would thrive on the vision of Ozil but none more than Walcott.
posted on 3/11/13
Very well-argued point there sheriff. I love that we have options in this team and that even with a few, 'key' players out, we have a team that can compete with the best
posted on 3/11/13
"There was a moment yesterday, when Ramsey got the ball in an advanced position and it was 2 v 2, he had a clean run at the liverpool centre backs. However, no one really managed to catch up with him. Ozil, Cazorla, Rosicky were way too slow in joining Ramsey. Only Giroud was up there with him and he's not the ideal striker when it comes to a counter-attack.
This is why we need Theo. Like people have pointed out, a lot of our attacks die out because it's too much tika-taka and no one to release the ball to."
This
"not necessarily. If you have pacy outlets on the flanks, you can spread the play and decongest the middle. It's easier for teams like Dortmund or even the battling West Brom to squeeze our midfield when there is no out-ball."
And this
As well as we played yesterday, it's easy to forget that it wasn't all plain sailing. For the first 15 minutes in particular, I thought Liverpool pressed us well and we found it difficult to get our of our own half.
It's testament to the technical ability of our players that despite a lack of pace, they were able to retain possession under pressure and gradually work their way up the pitch and get into the final third.
But with a pacey runner in behind, a la Walcott, the transition from defence to attack could have been a lot more straightforward.
For me, assuming he doesn't look completely out of sorts, Walcott has to start when fit.
posted on 3/11/13
Theo is carp. You lot are better
off without him. He is the
welbeck of arsenal.
------
Except Welbeck got like 2 or 3 goals last season while Theo had over 20. And more assists too. Not that good a comparison, is it?
posted on 3/11/13
comment by Sheriff John Brown - bring back David Dein (U7482)
posted 42 seconds ago
And all these neglects the fact that we won't see the best of Ozil until we have willing runners behind the opposition defence. Pod and Ox would thrive on the vision of Ozil but none more than Walcott.
-------------------------
I wouldn't want to see 2 out of those 3 players on the pitch at the same time though, except if one of them is Ox (in a few years time) who I believe is the the only one of those 3 with the potential to up his creativity to Cazorla/Rosicky levels
posted on 3/11/13
When Walcott returns, we will have options. Something people have complained about in the past.
There will be games where Walcott's pace will be more effective, and other games where we will want to have more creativity or a more defensive minded player instead.
The important thing is that we'll be able to make changes without necessarily weakening the team.