Jack Wilshere Returns to Arsenal Training After 14 Months
An excellent week for Arsenal fans shows no signs of letting up.
Jack Wilshere has finally returned to training after spending 14 months out with injury (via ESPN).
He has spent time regaining fitness with the first team and is finally on track to making his long-awaited comeback.
Arsene Wenger is understandably pleased to have his midfielder back. The Gunners manager is amongst Wilshere's biggest admirers and spoke about the difficult year sustained by the 20-year-old (via The Independent):
We are so pleased that Jack is back in full training.
It has been 14 months and that is a long time for someone at his age. It is an eternity, but it is great news.
We have to give him a few training sessions to see how he copes and responds to it, that is the delicate, sensitive stage - to choose when to bring him in and out.
We will have to handle that day-by-day.
Wilshere is unlikely to be rushed back into first-team action. When he finally returns, he'll be forced to fight for a place in the starting lineup.
It's difficult to see who Wenger would drop in favour of the Englishman.
Arsenal remain unbeaten in all competitions this season. The impact of Santi Cazorla and Lukas Podolski has been instant. Both have been given attacking roles in which they can work creatively and with purpose.
Abou Diaby has also reasserted himself as a key since returning from injury. Arsenal fans will be excitedly awaiting Wilshere's arrival and imminent partnership with the Frenchman. The mix of pace, power and passing ability will be integral to any success at the Emirates this season.
It's good to see the young Englishman in training once more. Wilshere has been desperately unlucky across the past year and deserves his chance to force his way into Wenger's plans.
If Arsenal remain unbeaten once he steps onto the pitch, expect the Londoners to pose a real threat to Manchester City's Premier League crown this season.
What is the duplicate article?
Why is this article offensive?
Where is this article plagiarized from?
Why is this article poorly edited?