Man City have £50m Kyle Walker bid accepted by Tottenham

[Classof17]

The league can be as close as 1 point .

Surely Walker is worth at least 1 point more than Tripier ?

Sad to see Kyle from Sheffield go .

Wish him well .

Unsure, trippier will create more goals, Walker would stop more....

 

[UbeAstard]

davidmatzdorf do you have any thoughts then on why Trippier was being preferred at the end of last season?

 

[davidmatzdorf]

davidmatzdorf do you have any thoughts then on why Trippier was being preferred at the end of last season?

Some ideas, which vary in the degree of evidence that supports them.

1. Walker said or did something that alienated Pochettino, who resolved back then that Walker would leave and therefore devoted much of the rest of the season to bedding Trippier into the first eleven.

2. Early last season, Walker went through a phase where it looked as if he had really started to develop his attacking play. He'd get himself to the byeline and put in crosses or he'd fly up the touchline and take a man (or two) with him. He got a few assists as a direct result. Then he just ... stopped. He went back to doing the same thing every time he'd advance with the ball, which was to make ground quickly until he reached the final third, then slow down to look for options, then cut inside at about a 40º-60º angle, continuing to slow down as he went, ending with a half-hearted attempted through ball that bounced off a defender, or an inaccurate deep cross, or a blast of a shot off target. I think Pochettino saw this regression and realised that, especially when we play with 3 centre-backs, Trippier's attacking style and crossing ability are more productive than Walker's vigour and pace.

3. Trippier's defending improved to the point where the manager could rely on him. He still has a way to go before he is as solid as Walker, but he's a lot cannier than he was when he arrived at the club.

4. There is reason to think that Pochettino thought that Walker was tired, either physically or mentally or both. One rumour was that their disagreement was about Walker insisting that he was able to play every game, twice a week. It's been obvious for two seasons that Pochettino prefers to rotate fullbacks more than any other position, presumably because of the sustained sprinting they have to do.

I decided to check the accuracy of the perception that "Trippier was being preferred at the end of last season". According to the match report "stat centres" on the OS, of our last 12 league matches (which covers March to May), Walker started 6 (Everton, Southampton, Swansea, Bournemouth, Palace and West Ham), Trippier started 5 (Burnley, Watford, Arsenal, Man Utd and Hull) and Sissoko started as right wing back once (Leicester). If you include Trippier's start in the FA Cup defeat against Chelsea, it was strict rotation for the last 12 matches of the season, except for Sissoko replacing Walker in the penultimate match.

It's also interesting to compare the results during that phase.

• Of the 12 league matches, we won 5 and lost 1 of Walker's starts (13 goals scored, 5 conceded).
• We won all 5 of Trippier's starts (17 goals scored, 2 conceded). If you include the FA Cup loss, Trippier's record is 5 wins, 1 loss (19 goals scored, 6 conceded).
• Sissoko's lone start ended in a 6-1 win.

It's a small sample, but it does suggest that we score more goals with Trippier in the side, without suffering defensively.

 

[UbeAstard]

Some ideas, which vary in the degree of evidence that supports them.
***********************************
It's a small sample, but it does suggest that we score more goals with Trippier in the side, without suffering defensively.

The reason I asked the question was because you disagreed with my comment that Walkers head was turned. It just seemed to me as you have referred to that something had changed in Walkers relationship with the club or manager, so i assumed it could be his head was already turned.

 

[davidmatzdorf]

The reason I asked the question was because you disagreed with my comment that Walkers head was turned. It just seemed to me as you have referred to that something had changed in Walkers relationship with the club or manager, so i assumed it could be his head was already turned.

Yes, I understood that your query was in response to a "disagree" rating. The ratings system has its uses, but answering a sensible question isn't among them.

I don't find the phrase "his head was turned" helpful. It's a football transfer window cliché that never has much bearing on the complex reality. I'm sure Kyle Walker knew at least two seasons ago that he could earn a lot more money at a different club. It's not as if he suddenly went "Ooh, Man City want me! My head has been turned."

Like the rest of the squad, I'm sure he had a warm and supportive relationship with the manager and the sense of team going places - he said so, multiple times. Then some unspecified disagreement emerged between Walker and Pochettino's management of his career - my favoured version is the one where he wanted to play twice a week and Pochettino didn't think he could maintain his form without rotation.

We already know how decisive and ruthless our manager is when he decides that a player has character issues or isn't fitting in with the squad. Even after the isolation and sale of Kaboul, Adebayor and Lennon, there was a similar moment when Bentaleb's career became dead-man-walking, probably associated with the dickheads he had hanging around him when he was trying to renegotiate his contract - and we all saw when the same happened to Andros Townsend, because he did it in public.

Doubling your salary is always attractive. But being part of a positive team environment, with a trusted and loved manager, support from the fans and ever-increasing on-pitch success can make money seem a lot less important. Take away the manager's support after a disagreement or a disciplinary issue and suddenly all that money looks a lot more important. That's nothing like "having your head turned".

I stayed in a part-time, but long-term housing association job for 16 years, making a modest salary, because I was part of supportive, productive and tight team (11 years later, we still meet 2-3 times a year for dinner and drinks). Then our director took early retirement and his replacement was a sexist bully, with limited relevant experience, whose probity we doubted severely. By the end of three months, the whole team had left, in my case to take up self-employed consultancy and double my income. I already knew I could make more as a freelance - I was already doing that kind of work on a limited basis - but I stayed on, costing myself money, as long as it was a positive and supportive work environment.