• Dear Guest, Please note that adult content is not permitted on this forum. We have had our Google ads disabled at times due to some posts that were found from some time ago. Please do not post adult content and if you see any already on the forum, please report the post so that we can deal with it. Adult content is allowed in the glory hole - you will have to request permission to access it. Thanks, scara

"Champions of 3rd place, we know what we are"

What exactly do you think Dynamic means? Because, honestly, its not a word Id use to describe Walker.

Much like Sissoko, Walker is more an athlete than footballer, IMO. Though he is of course a far superior footballer than Sissoko.

When you watch Walker, in an offensive capacity, he really is quite disappointing. And at City - again like Sissoko - he is completely out of his depth compared to his team mates when it comes to basic skill, technique and intelligence.

I rate him as a very good defender, particularly in 1 on 1 situations. And his athleticism means he has remarkable recovery powers when he is (quite frequently) caught out of position.

Attacking? Trippier makes him look silly. And people here barely rate Tripps.
Pity my subscription to the OED has expired. The lesser Cambridge dictionary has this to say:

dynamic adjective Full of energy.

Other than that, the word generally refers to motion. If that isn't applicable to Walker, then what is?

I agree that Trippier is more dangerous in attack -- like Davies, his attacking game is about reading the play and delivering the cross. I also agree that Walker is the better defender, esp. 1-on-1. After a few years of Poch's special fullback sauce, anyway.

The point someone else made about Walker being dangerous just because of his threat is a good one too. There's nothing like sheer pace to disrupt the opposition -- like the rare rugby player who can break the line. So I don't see it as anything like a clear choice between Walker and Trippier -- I know the latter will give me more dangerous balls into the box, but the former is going to cause more problems for the opposition defence that the likes of Eriksen, Alli and Son can then exploit.
 
Like any attribute pace is pointless without producing results, I've seen countless players with pace to burn but no end product, its all about getting the balance right, its a team game and often the less obvious player is a better fit to the general team system than the standout player. Walker has left us and we should just let it go.
 
Pity my subscription to the OED has expired. The lesser Cambridge dictionary has this to say:

dynamic adjective Full of energy.

Other than that, the word generally refers to motion. If that isn't applicable to Walker, then what is?

I agree that Trippier is more dangerous in attack -- like Davies, his attacking game is about reading the play and delivering the cross. I also agree that Walker is the better defender, esp. 1-on-1. After a few years of Poch's special fullback sauce, anyway.

The point someone else made about Walker being dangerous just because of his threat is a good one too. There's nothing like sheer pace to disrupt the opposition -- like the rare rugby player who can break the line. So I don't see it as anything like a clear choice between Walker and Trippier -- I know the latter will give me more dangerous balls into the box, but the former is going to cause more problems for the opposition defence that the likes of Eriksen, Alli and Son can then exploit.

Thats fair enough, I think many people miss use 'dynamic' with some personal twist or inference.

I have to disagree with you final assessment, very much in the vein of @K.D.D.D.D.Soc following response.

Thats not to say pace isnt an asset, or that pulling teams around/creating space isnt valuable, its more a question of how much weight you give it.

For me, without any real output/end product it is of very limited use - where as Trippier's intelligent and skillful use of the ball is of far greater value.
 
Thats fair enough, I think many people miss use 'dynamic' with some personal twist or inference.

I have to disagree with you final assessment, very much in the vein of @K.D.D.D.D.Soc following response.

Thats not to say pace isnt an asset, or that pulling teams around/creating space isnt valuable, its more a question of how much weight you give it.

For me, without any real output/end product it is of very limited use - where as Trippier's intelligent and skillful use of the ball is of far greater value.
Fair enough. Don't get me wrong though -- I definitely appreciate Trippier's skillset, just think that Walker was useful in a different way. Just look at who I've chosen for my avatar!

But anyway, we are taking the thread off-topic and Walker isn't going to come back in a hurry (well, not more than a couple of times a year).

4th. I'm torn between hoping that Chelsea get knocked out of the CL by Barca...and hoping that they manage to win at the Camp Nou so that they aren't able to give the league their full attention. Also, I'd rather play Chelsea over two legs than Barca. Similarly, while I'd like to see Emirates Marketing Project go off the rails a little, I would much rather they tonk some of our rivals.

If I was going to put money on our finishing position, I'd go for 4th. I just have the feeling that we'll be too good to finish behind ManU, Liverpool AND Chelsea. I just have no idea which one will miss out.
 
Fair enough. Don't get me wrong though -- I definitely appreciate Trippier's skillset, just think that Walker was useful in a different way. Just look at who I've chosen for my avatar!

But anyway, we are taking the thread off-topic and Walker isn't going to come back in a hurry (well, not more than a couple of times a year).

4th. I'm torn between hoping that Chelsea get knocked out of the CL by Barca...and hoping that they manage to win at the Camp Nou so that they aren't able to give the league their full attention. Also, I'd rather play Chelsea over two legs than Barca. Similarly, while I'd like to see Emirates Marketing Project go off the rails a little, I would much rather they tonk some of our rivals.

If I was going to put money on our finishing position, I'd go for 4th. I just have the feeling that we'll be too good to finish behind ManU, Liverpool AND Chelsea. I just have no idea which one will miss out.

I think we have to accept City running away with it, and so just hope they take points in the games they have with Arsenal, Chelsea and Utd.

Id also be in favour of Chelsea getting past Barca. Anything that keeps their league form faltering is welcome!

I can see us finishing as high as 3rd, though as I understand it 4th this year is automatic group stage qualification, so the difference practically between 3rd and 4th is no more - no more play off.

Both Liverpool and Chelsea are unconvincing for me, and neither are far ahead on either points or GD (which I often feel is a good indication of a team) so why not look to chase them down?
 
If Chelsea can knockout Barcelona then the CL itself is wide open afaic - supposedly Barca struggled last night? Didn't see it myself but they are many peoples favourites so it's there to be won imo
 
If Chelsea can knockout Barcelona then the CL itself is wide open afaic - supposedly Barca struggled last night? Didn't see it myself but they are many peoples favourites so it's there to be won imo

It was apparently the first away goal by a Barca player since November 2016 or something (Sporting scored an own goal in the group stage). They'll do Chelsea at home. At least they would have until this post was made.
 
If Chelsea can knockout Barcelona then the CL itself is wide open afaic - supposedly Barca struggled last night? Didn't see it myself but they are many peoples favourites so it's there to be won imo

They won't beat Barca, but they certainly stiffled them. Gave Barca very little space, apart from out wide, and constrained them well. I actually think Barca are beatable in a one-off game if you employee the right tactics; they're still the favourites but they dont have the cutting edge which they had when Neymar was there
 
I think 2nd is very achievable.

While I certainly believe we can over take Chelsea, or Liverpool, or even Utd, I dont see us over taking ALL of them, so for me 3rd is likely our best shot.

And even then, Arsenal are 7 points back with plenty of games left - we still need to keep a gap on them.


They won't beat Barca, but they certainly stiffled them. Gave Barca very little space, apart from out wide, and constrained them well. I actually think Barca are beatable in a one-off game if you employee the right tactics; they're still the favourites but they dont have the cutting edge which they had when Neymar was there

Jose and Inter spring to mind...
 
An optimistic 3rd place. Love for us to fight for 2nd, and I’m sure we’ll get close but i’ll take 3rd place and a third consecutive champions league season. Establishing ourselves as regular CL qualifiers will be great for us going forward.

3rd or even 4th place playing at Wembley all season....that would be outstanding, also bearing in mind how our first 3 'Wembley home' matches started
 
JgYrpsMNRuiXJQdYqY5c_tumblr_msemw1WItw1s5wcx0o1_500.gif
 
They won't beat Barca, but they certainly stiffled them. Gave Barca very little space, apart from out wide, and constrained them well. I actually think Barca are beatable in a one-off game if you employee the right tactics; they're still the favourites but they dont have the cutting edge which they had when Neymar was there

Barca are predictable as they only have the one way to play

Chelsea for me yesterday were the better side despite having inferior players

Barca pounced on an error and Courtois wasn’t massively tested.

Maybe i expected more because of Barca’s run but maybe the English sides this season are a genuine cut above everyone
 
Back