Theo Walcott's been under the spotlight of late. By 'of late', I really mean since August.

Ever since his much-publicised contract dispute came out into the open, along with his wage demands of 100k a week, he's been under constant scrutiny by the media and Arsenal fans as to whether he deserved to be the highest-paid player at Arsenal.

Generally these opinions varied between games. After a frustrating game spent running fruitlessly and stumbling on the ball against Swansea in the FA cup, many fans could be seen to say '100k a week', full of derision for what was surely a ridiculous demand for this inconsistent player who never lived up to the hype.

But what about his hat-trick against Newcastle, one of two this season? That day the Emirates chanted 'Arsene, Arsene, sign him up'. Thierry Henry incarnate, allowed to run his contract down.

Time to focus

Much as Arsenal's concerns now lie away from securing Walcott's future, with his three-and-a-half year extension signed, that of the fans and media should be away from his pay packet.

He's paid what is sadly the market value for England internationals, and that includes people like James Milner.

Before the Chelsea game there was a lot of talk about whether Walcott would continue his goalscoring form this season, and he silenced those accusations with his 15th of the season.

His every move shouldn't be judged, he should be treated like a regular member of the squad. He isn't above criticism, but his wages don't need to be a part of that.

Walcott in previous years has been a scapegoat, and now he's got to prove himself as an international striker. The weight of expectation doesn't need to be on him.

Neither should the club be blamed. The most common thing seen when Walcott's contract was confirmed was 'Too late, money should have been given to RVP', or 'This proves the club can be held to ransom by anybody, pathetic'.

Van Persie's departure was about so many reasons other than money, and an offer of 100k a week is barely an increase on what he was paid at Arsenal.

As for being held to ransom, it was either pay Walcott the money his representatives asked for (Walcott was famously evasive regarding his contract matters), or another summer of high-profile departures.

It's a reasonable trade-off, and now Walcott should give his best years to Arsenal, which is surely better than somewhere else.

You might not like Theo Walcott. I'm not his biggest fan. But he's better here than scoring against Arsenal for another club, and it's better to keep one of your more notable players than let them leave yet again.

Latest: