Kyle Walker’s former club Sheffield United have a sell-on clause that will see them rake in a percentage of the fee Tottenham receive for the Manchester City-bound defender, according to BBC Sport.

Manchester City and Spurs have entered talks over the potential transfer of Walker, with the BBC claiming: “Negotiations for the England international are at an early stage, and no fee has been agreed.”

Kieran Trippier, who has just signed a new long-term deal, emerged as Pochettino’s preferred right-sided defender towards the end of last season following a reported row between the Tottenham boss and Walker.

Pochettino is believed to have concerns about the 27-year-old’s fitness and ability to play more than one game a week, something Walker strongly disagrees with.

As a result, Trippier started to be picked ahead of Walker for big matches, and Walker has been linked with a move to Manchester City ever since.

The transfer could drag on until the end of the transfer window with Spurs seemingly unwilling to budge on their £40 million valuation of Walker.

One of the reasons Tottenham won’t accept a lesser offer is that, according to BBC Sport, “Sheffield United have a sell-on clause of 10% of any fee above the estimated £3m they sold Walker for eight years ago.”

Daniel Levy clearly wants to earn as much profit as possible on Walker, which might be why Spurs are refusing to lower their valuation.




  1. How many times does this need to be said? SPURS HAVE NOT PUT A £40 MILLION VALUATION ON KYLE BLOODY WALKER FFS!

    And this is a Spurs website as well!

    £40 million is the price City had their friends in the media put about as the amount they were “prepared to pay” as part of the now familiar traditional Iberian tapping-up process, as pioneered by Real Madrid. It is that simple. Spurs had no part in it and are not bound by it.

    Walker is widely considered to be the best right-back in England – which is why City went to such lengths to tap him up.
    Walker is coming into his peak years.
    He is on a long contract.
    He is English and qualifies for home grown status.
    Spurs do not need to sell.
    Spurs do not want to sell Walker.
    City have publicly and blatantly tapped-up Walker.
    The transfer market is inflated, City helped make it so.
    City paid £50 million for John Stones – think about that for a moment.
    Sheffield United will receive a percentage of the fee.

    Why on earth do you imagine Daniel Levy would allow himself to be constrained by a tight arsed price City had their friends in the media put out as part of the tapping-up process.

    I think Levy would be more likely to demand £60 million, and bloody right too!

    • Can you please give some clarity regarding the tapping up? And exactly who do you consider to be City’s friends in the media?

      • Quite easily Chris. For almost two (2) months, the the gutter press Daily Star, Sun And Mirror have isolated Walker as a replacement for the outgoing Pablo Zabaleta (I hope I’ve spelt his name correctly), particularly as Guardiola made comment about the effectiveness of the Spurs back four, the number of players Spurs have in the England squad and their age and ability. Walker wasn’t the only player identified. Rose was also touted as a combined target for City. May I remind you at this point that Spurs hold all the cards here and not City, their friends in the press or fans. If the Manchester club really want Kyle Walker, they are going to have to pay through the nose for him end of. The player won’t cause a problem like Berbatov, Modric or Bale because City isn’t Real Madrid or a real powerhouse other than the fact that they are backed by wealthy Arabs who are attempting to emulate Chelsea who were also in the wilderness until the shady Russian pulled their sorry arses out of the fire. I repeat, if City really want Walker, after all he’s become a very competent player under Pochettino, they are going to have to shell out big time as all and sundry love to point out, Daniel Levy isn’t an easy man to deal with. Good luck.

    • Stones is young and has potential, Walker is a bang average f/b but useful going forward. Perhaps Spurs should report City if the nonsense you spout is true, and by the way, we don’t have many friends in the media, most favour the rags, Liverpool, Chelsea and you lot.

    • I would have thought that Levy might be interested in selling Walker to City because he’s got a younger and even potentially better player in Kieran Trippier ready to start next season. Fee to be negotiated, and have no worry, Levy is the toughest s.o.b. on this planet when it comes to transfer negotiations. He even makes those hard men running FC Porto seem like so many marshmallows!

      Luka Modric still has Daniel Levy nightmares every night…

  2. Who knows the real story! The player is worth what a club is willing to pay. If City are sensible they will also have a plan B if the sum is too high. Alves might be part of that plan. Spurs having had to sell good players in the past are gradually becoming a top club. That is good for the PL and viewers. I look forward to seeing Spurs v Cify – exciting top class football and better entertainment than boring Man U and Chelsea.

    • City fan here – City and Spurs are the future of the PL, not old war horses ManU, Arse and Chelski. Maybe Klopp can rescuscitate Pool and join the party. Spurs and City are great to view, Pool also. Forget about the rest!

  3. Comment:

    walker is worth 50 million -60 million.

    if van djik have 70 million price.

    if stones have 50 million price now.

    then why can’t Tottenham sell walker for 60 million.

    • Probably because nobody will pay it.if Spurs don’t want to sell andCity won’t pay their asking price (whatever that is) then Walker stays – seemples.

    • Comment:Age is taken into consideration in player valuation I hope ya all know that, stones has up to a decade more to but walker has less than 5yrs to play so u see u can’t Compare these two players.

      • A players value relates to the length of their contract, if 2 players have signed a 5 year contract then their age should have minimal impact on the fee. The reason why young english players have a premium is due to their “home grown” status in the teams squad.

  4. walker is worth 50 million -60 million.

    if van djik have 70 million price.

    if stones have 50 million price now.

    then why can’t Tottenham sell walker for 60 million.

  5. Why would Spurs sell him for only 40 million? He’s the best right back in the PL and he’s on a long contract. If City want him, minimum should be 50 million (John Stones price) but I’d want more if I were in Mr Levy’s shoes.

    • What Daniel wants and what you and I want means sweet FA. Do Spurs want to keep a player who is no longer first choice and who wants to leave because of this, or is it cash in time. At the end of the negotiations a price is agreed or it is not. No point in getting angry ether at Walker or at City, it’ssimply business on the one hand and a guy’s career on the other. Spurs no longer value Walker, a player who on the one hand is said to be at the peak of his career, but on the other hand fans want £50/60millions because he’s the best in the land? Stones is young and highly talented (£46m) and with 10 years of his career to run, same goes for Sane (40m) and deBruyne (53m) when they bought those players. Walker is not in that league.

    • I’d rather have Semedo, who at least has some concept of what defending at right back might look like! Kyle is brilliant going forward, no question, but he is a terrible defender. Then again, Dani Alves is even worse as a defender…Pep should reconsider his choices for RB next season.

    • A large part of the reason for that is because we’ve had to sell our best players. It’s good that Daniel Levy is making that harder to do, with extended contracts and high valuations (allegedley)

  6. What would city and Chelsea have won if not for their billionaires. These are money bought success teams.spurs are showing how a true team is truly built @PC

  7. Last season the papers were all talking about a disagreement between Walker and Pochettino about playing time. Remember he was dropped for the FA Cup semi-final. It then became inevitable Walker would leave. Walker is on a contract that is way below what most England players earn including Kane. It’s hard to see how Spurs can demand over £35m for a player who wants to leave. If you want to keep him, then do so, but you will need to buy a new right back, because once there has been a public falling out it wont be the same again.

  8. Love how folk commenting here are falling into the same trap as the media – peddling gossip as fact.

    Fact – there has been no PUBLIC falling out, both Poch and Walker have said nothing

    Fact – they is NO price, which is why we’ve seen £35m, £40m, £50m and even £56m quoted (ps Citeh would pay £40m in a heartbeat)

    Fact – they is no evidence Walker would throw his toys out the pram if “forced” to stay – I would argue most people/players are constantly tempted by money, playing in new cities or playing in new countries. If it doesn’t happen, then surely most get on with it

    The only facts that are out there is that Walker would get more money at Citeh and Sheffield United have a sell-on clause.

    I have no idea what will happen like everyone else except Levy. Even Poch, Walker, Pep currently don’t know. I’d guess most of the press have heard the odd titbits, but are stretching the story to keep us surfing the net for updates. For all we know, this may have become a non-story weeks ago.

    If he stays, good as a Spurs fan. If he goes, so what, he’ll be replaced hopefully by someone equal or better. And good luck to him if he moves to Citeh as he’s been a good servant.

    And to Citeh fans with their “what have they won comments” please stop. Aren’t other clubs allowed to compete? Think about it, if only the teams that “won” deserved the best players, then all but Chelsea, Real Madrid, Bayern, Monaco, Juve and your rivals Man U would be buying the top players this transfer window! I.e. You wouldn’t be linked to Walker, United would be! Total nonsense of a statement “they’ve not won anything”, it’s much more complicated than that my friend.

    And some more facts

    Spurs have finished above City in the last two years

    Spurs haven’t lost to City for nearly three years

    City are less settled as a team – they have let players leave on frees and have many defensive slots to fill, they don’t have enough Home Based talent to meet the quota and they’ll have to blend in lots of new players and find a system that works.

    So, again don’t fall into the trap of assuming this proposed move is about progression, statistics say it isn’t……..

    • City fan here – if it happens, it is a “lateral move” from the 2nd place club to the 3rd place one. I believe that Spurs and City will be the top two clubs in the PL this season, and maybe for the next few (though not necessarily in that order!).

      Let’s enjoy a friendly rivalry, and join together to poke fun at those blowhards from United, Arsenal, Chelsea and Pool who have spent seeming eternities deriding our clubs for supposed “lack of history” and other such prattle.

  9. I’m non-PC. Refers to the idiot on here calling himself PC, who clearly hasn’t heard of the FA Cup or the League Cup. He probably supports a team who have only prospered because a multi-billionaire took pity on them and bought them for a pound and invested half of his fortune to make them anything near a proper football team: or else he supports a team who play in red (take your pick). Now that’s what I call truly pathetic!

  10. I think this walker business has gone to far. We need to secure our targets and sell who we do not need. I can not think who we should sell. Do not sell Wimmer as he should be converted to a left side defensive holding player just like dire. Sisosko should stay and Jansen send out on loan in order to bring in another striker.

  11. I think it will be a case of take it or leave it with levy whatever the amount is to trigger his release clause whatever happens think its bad for us because if walker stays he looks like a player who will cause problems if he goes for less than 40 mil I think we will struggle to get a player as good as him bellerin can’t Tuch him if we could replace him I think alves or carvajal and don’t think could get one of them anyway


This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.