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

On the eve of England’s first warm-up match for the World Cup another member of the England set-up has expressed his disappointment at Paul Scholes’s decision to not make himself available for selection – England captain, Rio Ferdinand.

Scholes who has been capped 66 times for England has previously appeared in two World Cups – 1998 and 2002, scoring one goal in the finals in 1998 against Tunisia. He has been retired from international football since August 2004, and talk of his return to the scene frequently pops up around competition times.

Fabio Capello admitted that he approached Paul Scholes and asked him to become part of his 30 man provisional World Cup squad. Scholes turned down the offer citing family as his main reason. Scholes has enjoyed a fantastic return to form this season just ended, in particular he seemed to have a real impact upon Manchester United in the last few months of the season, culminating in a goal-scoring masterclass away at rivals, Manchester City.

Rio Ferdinand is upset Scholes will not be in South Africa believing he would have added to England’s chances of success; even go so far as to say, “I would have paid him to come. That’s no detriment to any of the other players who are here, but I think he would have added to the squad that we’ve got”. Ferdinand did go on to say that while it is a shame, there is no point contemplating Scholes’s decision any longer and that the squad must focus on their upcoming game against Mexico tonight.

Feel free to follow me on Twitter by clicking this link

Today Germany won the under 17 european tournament against their rivals the Netherlands on extra time 2:1.This is the first titel for a German national youth team since 1992 and a big sucess for the new formed DFB youth advancement.

In the first half the German defense was under high pressure and just after 9 minutes Luc Castaignos scored for the Dutch team. 24000 fans in Magdeburg saw a confused German team who needed almost half an hour till Lennart Thy could equalise the game with a header.

In the second half then Germany was the dominant team and haid several chances to decide the game but their tries were to imprecise. So decision was made shortly before the end of overtime when Florian Trinks scored with an phenomenal freekick just right into the left corner of the Dutch goal.

Manchester United and Barcelona will meet in the 2009 Champions League Final held in Rome this May – as both sides overcame London opposition to reach the 54th final. Manchester United are competing in their fourth final having won the trophy in all three final played previously whilst Barcelona will be competing in their sixth final – however only winning the competition twice in their history.

Cristiano Ronaldo proved all the doubters wrong, regarding his mentality to perform on the biggest stage, with a superb performance against Arsenal – in which the Portuguese forward scored twice. United ran away 3-1 winners on Tuesday night, winning the tie 4-1 on aggregate after a 1-0 victory at Old Trafford in the first leg. The only sour note on a memorable night for the current European Champions, was the dismissal of Darren Fletcher after a tackle on Arsenal captain Cesc Fabregas. Replays showed that Fletcher clearly got hold of the ball rather than Fabregas. United have lodged an appeal to UEFA regarding the decision.

There was controversy in equal measure at Stamford Bridge on Wednesday, when midfield playmaker Andres Iniesta scored a 92nd minute equalizer – putting Barcelona through on the away goal rule having drawn in Catalonia a week ago. Tom Henning Ovrebo was at the centre of the controversy having failed to give Chelsea four penalties claims – one being a clear handball by centre half Gerard Pique. Ovrebo was criticism by both Guus Hiddink and Didier Drogba who referred the performance of the ref as a “f*cking disgrace” – he has since apologised for his outburst. UEFA are currently looking into the incidents at Stamford Bridge.

Manchester United and Barcelona last met in a European Cup final in 1991 when the teams played in the Cup Winners Cup. United beat Barcelona 2-1 in Rotterdam, with Mark Hughes scoring both goals.

Michel Platini, star of the 1982 and 1986 World Cup finals, will not be too pleased with the potential of another all English final, as Arsenal, Chelsea and current European Champions Manchester United all progress to the semi-finals of the Champions League.

Platini, who has voiced concerns over the domination of English sides and the accumulating debts of some clubs, has criticised English clubs in the past and would have preferred to see a more balanced semi-final – considering 75% of the teams involved are from the Premier League. Barcelona make up the other semi-final slot – and they will be taking on Chelsea.

Champions League Fixtures

Tuesday 28th April 2009

Barcelona v Chelsea


Wednesday, 29 April 2009

Man Utd v Arsenal


Tuesday, 5 May 2009

Arsenal v Man Utd


Wednesday, 6 May 2009

Chelsea v Barcelona

UEFA has announced that it is unlikely to move the final from Rome after an Arsenal fan was stabbed in the leg before the last 16 tie between the London club and Roma on Wednesday. UEFA also amazingly claimed that moving the final away from the chosen ground would make fans ‘less safe’

UEFA spokesperson, William Gaillard, released the following statement today:

“Moving to another place would probably put these arrangements in danger so it wouldn’t be safer, it would be less safe,” he said. “We will review arrangements with the Italian police. We will have a larger number of police present, as we did in Moscow [for the final] last year, and more stewards for visiting fans. It will be a different situation in which it will be a neutral venue.

“We take it seriously because a fan was injured and there is no way we would take it for granted that everyone will be fine. We will be in a completely different context for the final. There will be no Rome team involved. A much more neutral context, together with the special measures we are putting in place with the Rome police, should ensure we have a good venue for the fans.”

The incident occurred after a bus that Arsenal fans were traveling on was ambushed by a number of Roma’s “Ultra’s”. The injured man managed to make his way to the hospital to get treatment for his bleeding leg. Roma were also in the news for attacking rival fans in 2007 when Manchester United traveled for a quarter final tie in the Italian capital.