Many newspapers reported on Wednesday that we have offered Theo Walcott a bumper five-year deal worth £25 million, ending the ongoing saga between Walcott and Arsenal F.C.

However, BBC journalist David Ornstein recently dismissed those reports, saying that Arsenal have yet to improve the first contract we offered Walcott way back in August.

‘Despite suggestions to the contrary, there have been no formal talks between Arsenal and Walcott’s representatives since August, where he rejected a fresh five year contract worth £75,000-a-week.’

If so, Arsenal has remained grounded on a £75,000-a-week deal and if we have held out this long, doubts could be rose that we are willing to budge on our offer.

But, not all is lost for Walcott fans at Arsenal. David Ornstein went on to acknowledge that Walcott wants to stay at the club and if a higher contract offer is raised there is a good chance Walcott will pledge his future to the club.

‘However, his stance has softened since being given a run of starts as Arsenal’s central striker and, crucially, he does not want to leave the club he joined in 2006. Arsenal are increasingly confident he will extend his stay at the Emirates Stadium.’

So, what position does this leave Arsene Wenger in? Should he give in to Walcott and offer him the extra £15,000 he so desires, as after all it is only £15,000 which is not that extensive in the current wage market, especially for a player of Walcott’s calibre.

Or should Arsene Wenger stick to his principles and not surrender? No player should be bigger than the club and if Wenger were to succumb to Walcott’s demands, does it not show a lack of order in the club?

And what about Walcott? Is he doing this as he believes Arsenal are disrespecting him by offering him £15,000 less than his demands?  Does he want to stay but just feels his basic pay is unfair. Or maybe he just wants more money?

Overall, I think that first of all Arsenal should’ve never let the situation come to this. The fact that one of our star players is rebelling against the club shows a real sign of weakness. And the fact we haven’t struck a deal yet can also be perceived as a lack of ambition.

This would never of happened at Manchester United. Fergie would’ve sat the player down, put him in his place and it would’ve been sorted by September.

But I think that as Arsenal are a club losing players, Walcott feels he has the power to demand a little bit extra to show that he is one of the most important figures at the club.

However, this does not mean I wouldn’t offer him his required contract. At the end of the day, no matter what his reasons are, if one of your star players wants a little bit extra, we should offer it. Losing another big player would be a real hard hitter, especially if it were to be on a free.

It would damage the squad’s morale, strengthen another opponent, especially if he were to go to another Barclay’s Premier League side, show signs of weakness and a lack of ambition, we wouldn’t even get a transfer fee which we could use to reinvest and we would lose a vital player.

In conclusion, if we were a side winning I would stick to the August offer. However, in the situation we are in, if I were Mr. Wenger, I would have had his contract on his desk in November with a ribbon and a box of chocolates.

Latest: