Theo Walcott For England

its because of the way england play. they hit it to the striker and then he can't do anything with it. he needs the ball played behind the defence. now go find his assists stats for england

Wayne Rooney and Emile Heskey played up front in that game. Rooney was dropping deep, and Heskey did actually keep the CBs occupied. This allowed Theo to get more involved, and run behind the CBs more often.

At the end of the day, Theo needs Rooney, Gerrard or Wilshere to control a game like Rooney did that night.

He is also used as a wide midfielder for England, not as an inside forward (like he is at Arsenal) and so picks the ball up deeper, and therefore finds it harder to really make an impact.

Also, especially with Wilshere out, England don't have a playmaker capable of playing the kind of passes Walcott thrives on (i.e. into space behind the defence), with Rooney the only other player technically gifted enough to really allow Theo to be utilised fully for England.

He is decent for England, but I believe Capello should start Adam Johnson ahead of Theo if he persists with his current tactics - Walcott can be brought on when defenders are tiring and so the quality of service he gets will be more or less irrelevant (to a point); he will be far too quick for the defenders.

His closest rival for the place, Aaron Lennon, has yet to score a single goal for England despite a similar number of caps, so 3 ain't bad!

Adam Johnson would offer competition, but he has to play for City to justify a place in the team, imo.

Quite a bit of competition on that right side for England now - A. Johnson, Sturridge, Lennon, Walcott...I think we can rule out Downing. Hope they all go to the Euro's.

If Capello plays a 4-3-3 then Sturridge has a chance (maybe even Welbeck). Hopefully that will be the system used, think it suits Parker, Wilshere, Walcott and Rooney (if he gets to play). I think it will also suit the team without Rooney, with Gerrard probably playing instead of Rooney.

Not sure who is best option for the striker role, though.

Seems silly that A. Johnson would have to justify his place since he must have one of the best goals/assists ratios in the league for the minutes he's played. At every other club he'd be a regular starter.

Sturridge has to have some part in the team with his great form. I'd have him and Bent in attack.

Gerrard has to start playing and playing well before he gets a place back, and even then I'm not sold on the idea.

IMO Johnson deserves to be a starter at City, he's a fantastic player, tricky and unpredictable, and he can get a goal out of nothing.

Much better than Nasri (well, more effective anyway!)

Bestie I agree with you. It must be the most any player is doing without actually getting a start. Unlike most English players he actually has a good touch and technique, and he doesn't half score some decent goals.

Walcott cannot create anything himself - he needs to be put in. England are not dominant in as many games as Arsenal and his understanding with the other creative english players is much worse - so often he basically just disappears,