I am inherently biased. I should point out that I wouldn’t have selected Theo Walcott for the England provisional squad in the first place. However, he was selected, so I will try to provide an argument for and against his selection in the final squad.
Let me explain firstly why I wouldn’t have selected Theo. The World Cup squads must be built up of experienced players, core players, squad players and players in form. Youth is always a risk, however if a player has exceptional talent then there is an argument to select them on that basis. I don’t believe Walcott has exceptional talent. I don’t believe Walcott is in form. I don’t believe Walcott is an experienced player or a core player. At best, Walcott is a squad player.
Walcott joined Arsenal in January 2006. The transfer was high profile and received a lot of attention and media coverage. Never before had a 16 year old joined for such an amount of money – £5million up front, rising depending on clauses being met to between £11-14million, depending on whom you believe. Walcott’s status grew further when he was selected for the England World Cup provisional squad in 2006 despite not playing a single game for Arsenal. He played in one of the warm-up matches against Hungary and went on to be selected for the final 23 man squad. He didn’t feature at all in the competition and it was another two years before Walcott played for the England national side again.
In the meantime at Arsenal, Walcott was getting lots of chances in the first team, making over 30 appearances each season until the present day. He hit top form at the back end of the 2007/08 season and continued it into the new campaign, when under Fabio Capello he was brought back into the England set-up. Capello’s faith in the youngster was rewarded as Walcott scored a stunning hat-trick away at Croatia in September 2008.
Walcott’s progress has been stunted at various times by injuries. He is a confidence player; when things are going well for him he is blistering. However, he is easily lost in games when his tail is down. Walcott’s injury during the 2008/2009 season that kept him out from November to April was for me a big turning point in his fortunes. Prior to the injury he had noticeably bulked up, he was looking much more of a physical presence. However it seems that he has been unable to build up the muscle again in his upper body since this injury. As a result he seems to have little confidence taking players on and he is easily knocked off the ball.
He played on Monday evening for England. He lined up on the right of midfield up against Carlos Salcido. Walcott’s pace alone gave him in theory a real edge against the experienced Mexican. However, Walcott failed to deliver. Literally. In the 77 minutes Walcott was on the pitch I can only remember one good cross he put in, on the 51st minute. Walcott’s positional play is not too bad, he was found frequently in an area where he could take a man on or play an important pass. However, he was let down time and time again by his inability to make a decision. No moment was more frustrating than when after a good run he failed to release a ball to play Rooney in early enough, and instead played him in when he had made the run and was now in an offside position. This happened because he dallied about for too long on the ball trying to decide whether to take his man on and shoot or pass. Decision making comes with experience, but these small moments can make a huge difference in World Cup games.
The rest of Walcott’s performance was fairly forgetful. He won a few free kicks. He put in some poor crosses. He gave the ball away. He failed to link up well with Glen Johnson bar Johnson’s fantastic goal which Theo did very well for. Importantly, Walcott I felt, got bullied. If he beat his man he would then just be muscled off the ball by the next man. Mexico never allowed him to get too confident – the bullying tactic would be easily used by better teams than Mexico at the World Cup to counter Walcott.
One problem Walcott cannot address is Aaron Lennon. In his brief cameo appearance he seemed to have a real energy and purpose about his play. It’s true that he came on fresh against tired legs but he is a player with a real swagger about him at the moment after the season Tottenham have just had.
The other problem Walcott cannot address is the media and press. I understand why the media do not want to be too critical of Walcott – he is a young English player with the potential to be very good, the last thing the media want to do is destroy him at such a young age. However, it cannot be beneficial for the media to paint a story about Walcott that is not true. I couldn’t believe how many papers said he had a good game yesterday, or how he was a ‘positive’ from the friendly. In my opinion he was a pretty big ‘minus’ from the friendly – he failed to give Capello a reason to start him again.
To evaluate Theo then….
The positives first. I believe that Capello likes Walcott. He has been loyal to him by selecting him time again to start games when his form has not been good. Capello definitely has faith in Walcott and trusts him. I would imagine that Capello is a pretty decent judge of a footballer’s ability and therefore I accept that no doubt he sees something in Walcott that I don’t and for sure he knows better than most people on selection policy.
Walcott does have a bit of a knack of being a big game player. He has a habit of scoring in important games or having a positive impact. For country he did this away at Croatia and for club he’s done it a few times against Liverpool most memorably and once against Chelsea. It makes me wonder whether he could have a similar impact in the latter stages of the World Cup against better nations.
Walcott has the ability to be a fantastic impact player, off the substitute’s bench. He’s possibly the quickest footballer in the world, and against tired legs he would be a real threat. I believe that this is his best role in the squad. This would allow for the fact that he’s not in form and possibly doesn’t have the full set off attributes to be starting for England yet. He would also have a lot of joy against tiring defenders that would hopefully boost his confidence.
Walcott has already been to a World Cup. He didn’t feature, but he knows what the atmosphere is like. The other rivals for the right wing role are Shaun Wright-Phillips who seems not to be liked by Capello; Joe Cole who has hardly featured of late under Capello; and then both Gerrard and Milner can play wide but both look likely to be taken as central players. However, his main rival, Aaron Lennon, also has that experience from 2006 and unlike Walcott, he played in that tournament. Where Walcott has the edge over him is that when fit, Walcott has always been favoured over Lennon and is used to the style of football Capello has been trying to ingrain in the side due to his selection in more competitive matches of late.
Now for the negatives. I find it hard to justify selecting someone to start for their country when they aren’t even a guaranteed starter for their own football club. The season just finished, he came on as a substitute for Arsenal as much as he started for them. If a player is not good enough nor is his form considered good enough to start for his own club, then why should he start for his country?
Aaron Lennon is the form player. He has had an excellent year. He played 6 times fewer for Tottenham this year than Walcott did for Arsenal (due to injury) but still managed over five times the number of assists and only one fewer goal. He has finally become a threatening winger who is lightning quick, can dribble, can put a good cross in and generally makes good decisions. I believe he is more of a threat from the start of a match than Walcott is. However, he lacks international experience.
Whilst Lennon is a natural wide player, I don’t know if Walcott is. I don’t believe he is a winger in a 4-4-2 formation. The main reason for that is his decision making is poor, his positional play requires improvement and he can’t cross. He has a tendency to hold onto the ball for too long that allows a defender to put a challenge in. He is most effective as an inside forward type winger in a 4-3-3 or a 4-5-1. He was expected to mature into a centre forward (dubbed by some the next Thierry Henry), but he hasn’t had a chance to play there enough for Arsenal and he doesn’t seem to have the same hunger that a young Michael Owen (a player who had a similar build and attributes at a young age to Walcott now) had to be a centre forward.
Walcott is young. He is young enough that he could make the England squad at five World Cups. Whilst I know this tournament has the potential to be the making of him, I wouldn’t want it to ruin him at the same time. There is the potential for him to become a scapegoat should he be first choice and should England not do well. I think it’s wrong he is being exposed to international football at the moment when quite clearly his form is poor and he has no confidence. One can argue that he should not be going to the World Cup at all and that it’s more important he has a very good pre-season and comes back stronger for Arsenal, and then England can be considered if his form warrants it.
So what would I do? Well for starters I really don’t believe there has been much improvement in his game in the four years he has been at Arsenal. I think considering he was so hyped up and Arsenal paid a lot of money for him as a 16 year old I feel I’ve not watched the development of a special player yet. He’s had one good spell of form where he was unstoppable but he’s got nowhere near to that peak since he’s been injured. However, time is on his side, there is a lot of development to come still and he will go on to be an important England player. For me he would be a good squad player for England to take to the World Cup, but no more than that at the present. He could be a fantastic weapon off the bench and that should be a big reason for him to go. Should Lennon get injured he’d be an adequate replacement.
I want Walcott to succeed, I really do. For all the ranting and negative slurring of him coming from my end on Twitter it truly would be great if he went to the World Cup and did amazingly. However I think you have to be realistic and wonder what has he done to warrant England inclusion at the moment? Not a lot. He’s there on reputation and potential ability. Walcott will go to the World Cup. Taking everything into account now he is in the provisional squad, I would select him for my final squad as someone who can be a squad player. I hope this summer is the making of him.
Feel free to follow me on Twitter
Tags: Arsenal, Doron, England, SA2010, Theo Walcott, Walcott, WC2010, World Cup
It’s quite simple – the answer is NO.
Walcott has not developed properly into an international quality player. Other than the Croatia game where he bagged a superb hat-trick, he has very much failed to live up to the expectation that comes with playing for England. You could put that down to his lack of playing time at Arsenal.
In Lennon, Johnson, Joe Cole and James Milner, England have four quality wingers, all of which can score goals, in addition to their other midfield responsibilities.
If Walcott is to be a regular in the England squad in future years, I think it’s time he left Arsenal, like Wilshire did, to look for first team football. Only Walcott’s move would have to be permanent.
He’s in the England squad because he plays for one of the ‘big 4′. For all of Capello’s talk of only taking players in form, playing regularly, and who are injury free, he’s still made some pretty poor (but typical) England manager decisions.
Walcott, Carragher and Barry would not have been included in Capello’s squad based on his original rationale for picking players, and they shouldn’t be going to the World Cup. All three are candidates to miss the crucial penalty in the quarter-finals.
The answer is yes. Football is not only about winning. England need to get their fans behind them, and this includes women. Theo is cute and should go to the world cup to get the women behind us- even if he isnt very good.
In fairness you could say that he was one of the Arsenal players who gave Barcelona the most problems this year… plus while yes we do have loads of right wing options, such as miner, joe cole and Lennon, all are probably going to be picked for the squad as well because they are better than the options which we have in other positions. This shouldnt be a reason to leave him out – if lennon got injured they will still be there
There is no substitute for raw pace, which could be handy later on in games, especially in the heat and metres above sea level where the teams will be playing. While players should be picked on form and effectiveness which they will bring to the team from the start of a match, there is no point following this rule blindly if it stops us from using what could be an effective weapon to our advantage
Eddy – I agree that players should be selected upon form, but Theo is not an in form player. He is not an automatic starter at Arsenal. I have suggested he should go to the World Cup based upon the impact he can have as a substitute – his pace is a huge weapon against tiring defenders. If he does very well in that role and Lennon is not delivering then he may stake a claim to start.
Milner should go simply because of the wonderful season he has had – his form merits inclusion. Technically, Joe Cole is the best player in the England squad, his impact at Chelsea when he plays is clear for all to see.
[...] Monday I wrote about why I felt Walcott should go to the World Cup but only in an impact substitute role. Today the England team for the second and final World Cup warm-up match against Japan was [...]
thats what i said – i said that picking players due to form should only be followed to a certain point, and an exception should be made in his case because of the fact that his attributes suit a situation like this… I think we both kind of said similar things without thinking about it. Also on your second article, I wouldn´t see playing someone who is right footed playing on the left as such a negative thing – if you look at Robben, he does that kind of thing really well, and was Bayerns best player in the final of the Champions league … with the speed from those two, and a striker as complete as rooney, we could have a really good team – its at least worth a try, otherwise we will go back to 442 which has worked really well
it is a negative thing when you don’t play there!! Robben can play on the right, he does it for his club…Lennon doesn’t play there for Tottenham – I’m not ruling it out as an option but Lennon’s best position is on the right, he is better than Walcott on the right, and he therefore should be given the chance to start there and prove himself there
[...] have previously hinted that this is something I would have considered from the very beginning. I would have never selected Walcott in my initial squad. I then suggested that actually [...]