At one level, that is true. Wenger
does want to keep Walcott and, following the departures over the past 15
months of Cesc Fabregas, Samir Nasri, Gael Clichy, Robin van Persie and Alex
Song, Arsenal
face being without six of the 10 outfield players who generally started during
the 2010-11 season.
Yet, as Wenger has consistently argued, each circumstance is different and
should be considered in isolation. And it is clear that the current Walcott
situation has far more in common with the losses of Clichy and Song than Van
Persie, Nasri and Fabregas. Of the latter trio, Wenger was convinced by
their world-class status and genuinely distraught at being forced into a
situation where he must sell.
With Walcott – as was the case with Clichy and Song – the position is rather
more nuanced. Yes, in an ideal world, he would like him to stay. Wenger
believes that Walcott has improved, especially in his team play over the
past 18 months, and he would probably start the majority of Arsenal games
this season.
The problem, though, is that he does not regard Walcott as remotely
indispensible and is certainly not willing to pay beyond his own valuation
in order to keep him. Wenger considers an offer of £75,000-a-week to be
generous for a player who, while still developing, has never quite fulfilled
the expectation that was perhaps unfairly placed on him when he arrived from
Southampton in 2006.
That deal, which was potentially worth £12million, made Walcott the most
expensive 16-year-old in world football. Arsenal, though, only actually paid
£9.1million and would not regard his sale now for around £12million as
such a bad piece of business.
Source: telegraph