Sign or be sold: Arsenal get tough as Theo Walcott stalls over new deal
England winger rejects latest contract terms and could join exodus from the Emirates by Friday's deadline
Theo Walcott will not allow his future over the next three days to be dictated by Arsenal, despite threats by the club to sell him after the England international rejected the second offer of a contract made to him over the weekend.
Walcott, 23, and his representatives had been preparing to continue negotiations beyond Friday's 11pm transfer deadline on a new deal for the player, having rejected the club's first two offers. However, despite interest from Manchester City and Liverpool they feel under no pressure to agree to a move away from the club by Friday with so many factors in their favour.
The feeling from Arsenal's side is that they cannot allow the player to leave for a relatively small compensation next July when his contract expires and he would be entitled to a lucrative Bosman free transfer. That has been the long-held fear at the club and yesterday's threats to sell him for £11m appears to be a last-ditch move to apply pressure to the player to sign.
Having sold Robin van Persie and Alex Song this summer, as well as Cesc Fabregas, Samir Nasri and Gaël Clichy the previous year, Arsenal clearly recognise that selling Walcott as well would be far from ideal. Nevertheless, they would rather do that than allow him to enter the final year of his contract, which manager Arsène Wenger does not like to do with any player.
Regardless of the merits of the player one way or another, the responsibility for allowing Walcott to drift into the final year of his contract without issuing an ultimatum earlier belongs to Arsenal.
Walcott has rejected a £75,000-a-week offer although given that was only the club's second deal on the table it is not altogether surprising. The player and his representatives have only begun talking to the club since the end of Euro 2012. Discussions were due to begin in January but when Walcott asked the club for them to be delayed so he could concentrate on playing.
He spoke to Wenger in broad terms about his future during the tour of Asia last month and said that he wanted to stay at the club. While he is aware that Arsenal are not among the highest payers, Walcott recognises that, for the time being, there are benefits to him continuing his development there.
Arsenal would like to keep the player but at the moment the two sides are far apart in their valuation of Walcott's worth to the club, with the player seeking a £100,000-a-week deal. Arsenal regard that level as too much relative to what he has achieved so far at the club.
Latest in Sport
Paul Scholes: Manchester United vs Liverpool - I don't understand why Brendan Rodgers was not more attacking against Basel
Jesus Christ plays for Chelsea - that's what one in five children thinks
Transfer Talk: Nemanja Vidic to return to Manchester United; Hazard to leave Chelsea; Sunderland want Radamel Falcao
Frank Warren column: Don't bet on Amir Khan landing pay day against Floyd Mayweather
Manchester United transfer news: Kevin Strootman move edges closer
- 2 Harry Potter fans can apply to the Hogwarts-inspired College of Wizardry
- 3 Jessica Chambers: 19-year-old woman 'doused with lighter fluid and burned alive' in the US
- 4 Russell Brand calls Nigel Farage 'poundshop Enoch Powell' in BBC Question Time debate
- 5 Orange Wednesdays are no more
Disgruntled RBS worker writes hilarious open letter to Russell Brand after anti-capitalist publicity stunt leaves him hungry
Nigel Farage defends Kerry Smith 'ch***y' comment: 'If you are going for a Chinese, what do you say you’re going for?'
Nigel Farage's approval rating hits 'record low' as popularity suffers in wake of Ukip sex scandal
Pakistan school attack live: Taliban kill at least 132 children in 'horrifying' massacre
Sony hack: Angelina Jolie branded 'seriously out of her mind' in further embarrassing leaked email saga
Panic Saturday: 13 million Britons spend £1.2bn – while 13 million others across the country live in poverty unable to afford food