Ashley Young or Walcott?

Is it only me who thinks Theo is miles better?

No you are not, Walcott has been amazing this season, I think once he stays away from Injury he will be a top player.

yes

young is far more versatile

theo might be better as a traditional winger though

Most RVP goals have been from Walcott.

I'll take Walcott all day. I don't know why but Ashley Young is one of the most underwhelming players I have ever seen. He will flash skills from time to time but his finishing is terrible and at Villa he was a terribly selfish player.

He just isn't as good as people want you to believe he is and I was surprised United were so keen on buying him, I have never really understood the hype around him.

Walcott on the other hand is hot and cold but when he's hot he is unplayable with his speed.

Ashley started off strong and is back to his usual mehish ways.

Walcott's been on fire since last season. He's also finally in shape so those annoying little injuries he had seem to have disappeared.

His crossing is better, his finishing great and overall movement isn't as pointless at times as before.

I remember last season when English Jewel called him "Walnut" lol

Theo has come a long long way now from the player he was a couple of seasons ago. His growth started slowing down all too fast when he was ~18-19, and that's when the hype died down. Now, he has become integral to our side, and is usually left to fashion something out of nothing, which he does to good effect now as well.
The player that everyone thinks of is the one who had nothing but pace to his game, but now Walcott has a lot more to offer than just pace.

I'd take him over Young, if that wasn't obvious already. I was never a fan of Young if I'll be honest. If there was one man that I wanted from Aston Villa, it was Bent.

Walcott > Young

I'm still am a fan of Ashley Young, and would've happily taken him at Arsenal. He's someone with all the skills needed to be an effective attacker, but doesn't have the intelligence to back it up all the time.

Walcott is obviously a different type of winger to Young. While Young would be classed as an actual winger/attacking midfielder, Walcott would be a wide forward. Both would work well together in a team.

In saying that, I don't consider Walcott to be miles better. Rather, I think Young is approaching his peak and won't grow more as a footballer, while Walcott is still relatively young and is becoming more consistent which is the thing that'll ultimately seperate the two.

And since they're both inconsistent, we could quite easily be saying that Young is the better player and Walcott wasn't all that good later on in the season.

Well before this season i wouldve taken young anyday but walcotts forms this season has changed my mind.

In saying tht young is a very good player