As an avowed Theo Walcott fangirl, it breaks my heart to be writing this column.
Intro
Don’t get me wrong, I recognise he has his flaws.
No need to ask TJ what his superpower would be, given he’s already capable of shrouding himself in invisibility for large stretches of games, after all.
But he’s also got a certain ‘je ne sais quoi’ which means he can turn a game on its head.
As frustrating as he can be at times, at others he is just as equally devastating.
He feels like a player who has become a little lost – he doesn’t know his role in the team, he doesn’t know his best position, and he was probably the biggest victim of the manager’s tinkering throughout last season.
As Arsene desperately tried to turn his collection of quality but seemingly incompatible ingredients into bubble and squeak, Theo was left out in the mix.
I’ve written repeatedly about how we have underused Walcott; indeed, you might say it has become something of a personal hobby horse.
It’s not just about how much we use him, but also how effectively…
Underused, undervalued, underperforming
Walcott is lightning quick, with great timing to his runs, and despite his clear discomfort playing in the build up phases of Wengerball, he has one of the most impressive first touches of anyone in world football when travelling at high speed. And yet, our midfield have been reluctant to play anything approaching a ball in behind for him to capitalise on.
In Mesut Ozil, we have a creator with a wand of a left foot.
In Granit Xhaka, we have one of, if not the best long passer in Premier League football. Yet neither have spent consistent minutes on the same pitch as Theo Walcott or attempted the obvious pass even when they have.
We are so often undone ourselves by a simple ball in behind. Make all the jokes you like about the quality of our defence, but having variety to our play and the ability to cause defenders headaches with blistering pace has earned Arsenal dividends in season gone by.
Yet we don’t use Theo properly.
The mind boggles.
But the landscape has changed somewhat.
Where we used to field four at the back, with wingers not wing backs offering width, that team desperately needed some direct running to push defences back and get support up alongside the lone striker.
In the new system, it is the wide defenders who smear their boots with chalk instead of genuine wingers, and you have to ask if there’s a place for Theo in the squad let alone the first team under the new regime.
After all, if we’re not going to play him, he’s still young enough (and English) that he should command a ridiculous transfer fee in today’s market.
But are we there yet?
Does he have a future at Arsenal Football Club or is there still space for Walcott?
Plan A: The Starter
It seems pretty clear that 2017-18 will see up reprise our new tactic of playing three at the back, given the success if brought for the last quarter of the season just gone even (or perhaps especially) taking into account the changing personnel during that period.
Clearly, Theo cannot play as one of the goalkeeper, three centre backs or two central midfielders in that system, which really only leaves five positions for which to even contemplate his suitability.
Realistically, while he can do a job as an attacking left sided player, he’s never going to cope as a left wing back.
Indeed, even right wing back would be a push, because while Theo can do a passable job of tracking a full back and blocking passing avenues, his tackling ability is limited and the idea of him facing an opposing left back and left winger concurrently fills me with dread.
We’re getting better at providing some cover for our wing backs, but not enough to contemplate playing Walcott there other than against the very weakest of opposition.
So where does that leave us?
The three positions left are the three forward positions, and given that the two more withdrawn of those are currently occupied by our two best players (by most people’s measures at least) that seems fairly limiting.
Barring a departure this summer, you would have to think Theo has no chance of replacing either Alexis or Ozil as one of the support forwards.
So we are back to the old conundrum – can we (and should we) play Theo at centre forward?
Part of 3-4-2-1 is to allow fast counter attacks, which in theory suits a speedy forward.
However, it means playing a lone striker against two or even three centre backs, and we’ve seen Theo bullied in such circumstances back when we played 4-2-3-1.
There are also plenty of occasions when we’re not counter-attacking (goal kicks, games against overly negative opposition) and with Alexis strong on effort but weak on height, and Ozil stronger on height but weaker on effort, we don’t have much aerial ability to negate Theo’s similar lack of skillset.
There’s no other genuine aerial presence in the front half of our team, and with a small forward we’re left with the unavoidable tactic of playing out from the back every time or else just giving the ball straight back to the opposition.
We’ve seen Tottenham, Liverpool and Man City take that approach to extremes at times last season to good, bad and indifferent effect. Playing out is good, doing so too often is predictable, and ultimately more dangerous.
Playing Theo as a lone striker is not an absolute no-no, and could suit certain games quite well, but it’s still not a tactic I would expect to see us employ on a regular basis.
Giroud is about as diametrically opposed to Walcott as it’s possible to be – his height and bulk make him the ideal foil for our other aerially challenged forwards. When Danny Welbeck is fit, what he gives up to Theo in finishing ability, he makes up with power to match his pace, offering an alternative Olivier Giroud’s interlink play without giving up too much in height.
Throw in the potential arrival of Lacazette and the waters are further muddied.
So if Theo is not to be a regular starter, is there a place for him on the substitutes’ bench instead?
Plan B: Super Sub Squaddie
So if Theo is not to be a regular starter, is there a place for him on the substitutes’ bench instead?
It depends.
If you’re expecting him to come on to score the winner against West Brom while they have eleven men camped behind the ball, defending inside their own 18 yard box, you’re likely to be disappointed.
No, to my mind there are two key situations where Walcott really adds some potential value.
He can be rotated in to start a game or come on partway through to change the approach of the opposition where they employ a high press.
Earlier, I espoused the virtues of occasionally playing ‘route one’ to allow Theo to chase down on goal, and against a team who gambles on throwing men forward to defend from the front, à la Tottenham and Liverpool, we can foil them with a well-placed ball over the top or into the channels.
The other real time to make good use of Theo is when we are a goal or two to the good, we’re defending a lead and playing classic counter attacking football.
The longer the game goes on, the more adventurous the opposition want, and need, to be.
Playing Theo leaves gives a conundrum: they can either push up and leave spaces in behind which could see the game put to bed, or they can curtail their attacking agenda at the cost of reducing their own attacking potency.
Either way, it’s good for an Arsenal result.
But, if we’re using him in such a fashion, we should never bring him back to defend set pieces! Leave him up, and let them have an additional problem to worry about!
A question of desire
Ultimately, I can increasingly only see a place for Theo as an alternative option rather than a regular starter. A player of his calibre can offer great options from the bench or as an opposition-specific selection.
However, there are two key considerations.
The first is whether Theo can perform without week in, week out, game time. Throughout his career he’s tended to be a streaky player who thrives on confidence. His best runs have come when he has played – and scored – consistently.
I do wonder if the Dr Theo Jekyll we know and love can thrive in a squad capacity, or whether we would only ever see Mr Hyde, or Mr Hide if you prefer.
The second consideration is, of course, whether Theo himself is content with a bit-part role.
This is a man who has grown up considerably since he moved to the club over a decade ago, and has missed plenty of international tournaments through a combination of injury and being taken along for the ride.
He has been out of favour in the England squad, no doubt in part because he is not a regular in the Arsenal team, and at 28 his time is running out at the top level.
Will he be content to warm the bench, when it inhibits his opportunities not just for club but for country as well?
What does Theo want?
For me, there’s a place for him in our squad, and he could yet prove us all wrong if he can carve a niche for himself in the team.
If either Alexis or Ozil leaves then it also changes the complexion of the picture somewhat.
However, at the moment I can no longer make a case for Theo Walcott to be in the starting XI of a regular Arsenal line-up.
And that makes me sad.