Just to clarify, I don't have any issue with Walsh per se, Tate, Lucas, Skinner et al have all proven any naysayers wrong, and I could see him playing a Duggan like character and I think that'd be great. I'd just rather he was her second year's companion rather than an initial one.
Doesn't mean I'm not looking forward to the new series, and I'm intrigued as to what the Tardis dynamic will be and I'll choose to trust that Chibnall knows what he's doing until there's evidence to the contrary.
Yeah, I figured that's what you meant. I just don't see it as a problem, at least as an American.
Still no one has answered this. Has any incoming Doctor had an initial companion older and/or better known than them other than when said companion had originally been with the previous Doctor (so you could fit Billie, Lis etc. in here) And whatever people say about how well known Jodie/Bradley are if you'd stopped 1000 people in a UK high street before Jodie's announcement (maybe even since her announcement) more people would know who Bradley Walsh is than her.
Again speaking from the American perspective, but wasn't Billie Piper well known as a pop artist before Rose? How did her fame compared to Christopher Eccleston's? He's a well-known character actor but he doesn't strike me as a big star, or at least at that time. Could be wrong, of course.
Otherwise, with the exception of Jon Pertwee, all of the classic Doctors inherited his predecessors' companions, so it's hard to compare. And I'm guessing Caroline Johns wasn't more known than Pertwee.
Likewise, all of the companions tended to be considerably younger women to the older male Doctor, although Janet Fielding is only two years younger than Peter Davison, Daphne Ashbrook is three years younger than Paul McGann, and Karen Gillan is five years younger than Matt Smith.
Obviously that'll change. I'm just flagging the impression it potentially gives when you hire the first female Doctor then decide to give her an older male companion, and I know I'm not the only person to have raised this as a concern.
I understand your concerns, and maybe I'm being naive, but I honestly don't think it's going to be a problem, at least within the realms of fandom. There have obviously been outliers against Whittaker's casting (and their voices are louder than their numbers, if that makes any sense), but most of fandom has been very welcoming and I don't see that changing due to Walsh's casting, nor his presence overshadowing her in their eyes. That might be different with the general public, but frankly, I don't give a tosh what they think (to borrow a Britishism).