View From The Sphere

Who really is the better player – Walcott or Bale?

|

theowalcottgarethbalehug20121117_576x324In the lead-up to the derby with Spurs, a lot of talk has focused, naturally, on Gareth Bale’s form. He is, quite simply, in rare form, having scored two goals (including the winner) against West Ham, and has 15 goals in the Premier League to this point, good for 3rd behind Robin van Persie and Luis Suarez. The fact that he and Theo Walcott played together a Southampton and have such similar skill-sets has prompted further discussion.

I’ve previously compared Walcott to Van Persie as we seek ways to replace all of those goals from last year (which we’ve done quite well, thank you). Now, as the hype ramps up, it’s worth comparing Walcott to Bale, if only to find out if the latter is as good as that hype has suggested and if the gap between them is as wide as it seems.

Across all competitions, Bale has 19 goals in 33 games, including 15 in 24 Premier League games, while Walcott has 18 in 22, including 11 in 16 Premier League games. At the risk of revealing my bias, it sounds like Mr. Walcott emerges ahead of Mr. Bale. The only real distinction that can be offered is that Bale has been on an incredible tear lately. In Spurs’ last five matches, the Welshman has scored seven goals, all of which have been crucial to Spurs’ success. Also remarkable has been the timing of so many of these goals – the winner against West Ham came in the 90th minute, and his goals against Lyon came in extra-time of the first-half, and in extra-time again in the second-half.

In my comparison of Walcott and Van Persie, I emphasized how vital Van Persie’s goals have been for United and how ‘superfluous’ Walcott’s have been. At this point, though, I’m essentially done extolling Bale’s virtues. Yes, he has been on fire, but he’s absolutely had to be. Spurs rely on him to a much-further extent than Arsenal relies on Walcott.

Whereas Bale leads his team in goals and is followed closely by Jermain Defoe with 10 Premier League goals, no other Spurs player has more than five (Clint Dempsey – USA! USA! Okay, I’m done).

Looking at Arsenal shows that we have a more-diverse attack, with Santi Cazorla and Walcott scoring 11 each, Olivier Giroud with nine and Lukas Podolski with eight. My point here is that Spurs need Bale to score in a way that inflates (not unfairly) his stats, and this pressure does not similarly drive Walcott’s stats. Therefore, a direct comparison is not necessarily all that revealing. If it was a one-on-one match-up, maybe these stats would get us somewhere. However, it isn’t so they don’t.

Among the chatter, Sir Clive Woodward has spoken glowingly of both Walcott and Bale, saying ‘you can see potential greatness even when they are just kids’ and ‘their quality was evident even then as 16-year-olds.’

However, former Southampton manager George Burley is less even in his comparison, saying that he ‘always thought Gareth was the better prospect’ and was ‘more the [complete?] package’ compared to Walcott.

I might be inclined to agree, but I would say in Walcott’s defence that his development arguably suffered while playing in the shadows of other forwards for whom inspiring and mentoring are not strong-suits. On the other hand, Bale has played for a team that needs him to develop and has given him room to do so, if only by necessity. Bale has played with the likes of Emmanuel Adebayor, Defoe, and Rafael van der Vaart, none of whom seem to command as much deference as Van Persie did. With Van Persie gone, Walcott seems well on his way to closing the gap, perceived or real, between him and Bale.

As the game approaches, the talk grows. Some are suggesting that Bale is talking of ‘revenge’, but I haven’t seen him use the word. They’re sure to be up for this game, including Adebayor, whose red-card triggered our 5-2 win earlier in the season. Huh. It took me a while to find a link to that game, as it appears we’ve beaten Spurs 5-2 more than once. I was looking for November 2012 but stumbled across February 2012 instead. What a world. Let that be the only actual trash-talk I engage in.

As both sides know, this is a huge game on a number of levels. Neither team can afford to drop points, although I’d personally settle for a draw. Perhaps. Nah. Let’s take it to ’em and knock some fillings loose!

Like what you read? Then follow me on Twitterhttp://twitter.com/woolwich_1886

Visit and Join our Facebook page, click HERE to do so.

Gunnersphere is currently looking for new writers to join the squad. Contact via twitter or at Gunnersphere@snack-media.com for further details.

Share this article

10 comments

  • silentstan says:

    I am a gooner but its Bale hands down.we would be 2nd with him

  • rich g says:

    is this a joke?

  • Rob says:

    Bale is a better all round player. I am saying this as a football fan rather than a biased Spurs fan. I do agree that spurs would suffer more with Bale being out of the team, than Arsenal would if Walcott was out. But at Spurs we no Siggy can step up and score goals, we fans just aren’t sure why he isn’t starting ahead of Lennon.

    By the way, trying to decide who is the better player, by comparing stats is just silly. Who is the better player, Mert-the-sacker or Walcott?

    Ronaldo is better than Messi, but Messi gets player of the year because of stats. Everyone knows that Ronaldo can walk into any team and do the same amazing job, but Messi relies on good players around him to give him space or supply great passes.

  • Charlie says:

    You surely jest ?? You would definatly not raise that question in a pub or anyones company. Walcott is not even on the same planet.

  • ivorstephens says:

    Bale is more of an all rounder of course but from the summer we wont have to worry about him unless we draw real or barcs in europe.For a team that everyones always praising,spurs and their main man bale have won less and achieved less than arsenal and walcott

    • AlphaT says:

      LOL, why where do you think he’s going! Plus I can;t see either of those clubs in the Europa League that’s if you can make Europa League!?

  • Jon Shay says:

    Good points, all–I only mean to suggest that Bale’s growing reputation inflates the gap between he and Walcott. At this point, yes, Bale is better and more important to his team. However, the gap is not as wide as it seems. It’ll be interesting to see the terms this discussion is based on in 6 months, to say the least!

  • gunner4ever says:

    On current form,Bale is the better player. Sooner or later the Welshman will attract heavy marking. It’s a question of time. Outwardly Wenger says he has no plans for Bale.If that were the case and Bale becomes unplayable,the fm has to take the blame.
    Another report states Arsenal plan to cull some players. Wenger shd top the list if he has no plans to deal with Bale and Arsenal lose and can’t get the cl slot.

  • lopez says:

    Bale is the better player; stronger,taller,great with free kicks and also has a hammer for a foot when it comes to shooting from outside the box, he has proven his talent in every game for the last two seasons. Walcott has other attributes that Bale does not have like dribbling skills and speed, Bale is fast no question about that..but Walcott is faster and can also score many goals, all in all my conclusion is that they are both great footballers but Bale has the extra edge that British footballers lack so Bale will be one of the greatest players in the league for many years to come. Arsenal is still better than Spurs! lets shit on them today !!

  • ivorstephens says:

    Bale or no bale unimportant as again we beat ourselves just like every other large game weve been involved in this season

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *