Who got the better deal out of the Kyle Walker transfer?

After months of speculation, last week Manchester City completed the £50million deal for Tottenham and England right back Kyle Walker. From the reactions across Social Media, it seems like fans on both sides are delighted with the transfer, however, who actually benefited from the transfer more?

                Evident from last season, one of the reasons City could not achieve instant success with the Pep Guardiola philosophy was because of their shortage of top quality full backs. The reason the full backs play a massive part in Pep’s philosophy is because he loves them to push high up the pitch as much as they possibly can, almost as wingers so that they are completely dominating play. Last season at right back, however, Pep had to work with Bacary Sagna and long serving veteran Pablo Zabaleta. None of whom are known for their blistering pace, nor their ability to attack the flank, unlike Kyle Walker. So as you can tell, Sagna and Zabaleta didn’t exactly have a season to remember last year, the same which cannot be said for Kyle Walker. Completing 80% of his passes, creating 39 chances, assisting 5 and then finishing off with a spot in the PFA Team of the Year, these stats for last season show all of his attacking qualities. Of course, one of the concerns for Walker is that some say he’s quite poor defensively, the people who say this though are only judging the 22 year old, young and immature version but as the years have gone by, the more Kyle Walker has matured, including his defensive game. Last season he made 53 tackles, 36 interceptions, 100 clearances and didn’t make a single error leading to a goal in the Premier League with not a single one of these stats being inferior of the stats occupied by Zabaleta or Sagna. Some may say the 27 year old is now 'the complete right back'. So obviously this is the perfect transfer for City and will certainly be one of the best they have made in recent years but the issue is with Tottenham, is this a respectable deal for them or have they just made a huge mistake?  

                After 8 years of great service, Spurs have finally decided to cash in on the Yorkshire born defender. It is reported, Kyle Walker was actually on the list of the people who Mauricio Pochettino was willing to let leave the club, which could show the faith he has in 26 year old Manchester born Kieran Tripper. Yesterday, the signing of a 5 year contract renewal only emphasises the faith Pochettino holds in him. Although he contributed to as many assists despite playing a lot less minutes, it is Trippier who is the one with the weaknesses defensively and not Walker; inferior to Kyle Walker for clearances or interceptions on average per game last season. So the question is, with the absence of Walker can Trippier step up and maintain the starting position? Judging from the end of last season many say he could as in the games Trippier was playing, Spurs really did not miss Walker but there are times when Trippier may get caught out and these are at situations when you would expect Walker to not do the same. There is a saying amongst Spurs fans which is. ‘Walker is better against the big teams, Tripper is better against the smaller ones’, and this can be down to the fact that Walker is better defensively and is a lot quicker so can run in behind a high line you would expect from a big team but because of Trippier’s outstanding ability to cross, he is better against teams that sit deep. By the look of things, Pochettino fully believes in Trippier just like many Spurs fans do already.

                Of course, financially it is great for Tottenham because £45million plus add ons is going straight into the bank. As what will be expected, the money from this transfer will go into new players, but, personally I believe a new right back should be the last thing Spurs buy because of Kyle Walker-Peters. The 20 year old, academy prodigy who helped England win the U20’s World Cup should be given his chance to see if he can compete with Trippier in the first team. The manager has already came out and said he will give first team action to the young lad, so as a result of this transfer, Spurs now have funds to buy new players and it also gives a golden opportunity to Kyle Walker-Peters to show what he has in his locker. So from these reasons, you could argue that Spurs have done well with this transfer both on the pitch and off it, however, the fact they have sold him to a title rival makes it worse than if he were to go to a club abroad, such as Bayern Munich. Spurs are now effectively strengthening a rival and weakening themselves, maybe giving them less of a chance of finally winning the Premier League which is why there is the debate that this may actually be an abysmal piece of business on Spurs’ behalf. So yes, Trippier has every ability to step up, this transfer is giving a home-grown, academy talent his golden opportunity and is providing funds for new players, however, he was sold to a title rival which is why there is some confusion as to why Spurs agreed the deal. 

                So in summary, who is better off from the transfer? Easy, Manchester City. They have bought the best right back in the league with nothing but Premier League experience and Sheikh Mansour will not even notice £50million has left his bank account. So fair play to the team in blue.