David Silva

[Walking on the blue moon]

Injured again. SMH.

I thought he's expected to be out. Many on here prefer him to be rested against Chelsea.

 

[Ric]

Don't think Silva was ever likely to feature in this game to be honest. We've just got to manage his ankle problems as best we can until the end of the season. Nasri is more than capable of filling in for him, and tends to do well against Chelsea.

 

[George Hannah]

While it hasn't been Dave's best season by any stretch - for a number of reasons - I am fed up with the "Silva is shit/finished" argument that seems to have become a fashionable opinion on here recently.

It's all part of the rich tapestry that is BM, or to be more specific in this case, the frayed and unravelling edges.

 

[meltonblue]

Even Silva's biggest fans happily acknowledge that he has very little pace, isn't an aerial threat, is one footed, has poor finishing ability and doesnt have the highest work rate in terms of his defensive contribution. I readily accept these faults and aren't "blind" to them. Before this season, David wasn't being referred to as a fans favourite but a genuinely world class player and a vital part of the squad.

A few months later and people are already questioning whether he was ever that. I can't speak for you and what you previously made of him but many of the posts on this thread appear fickle in their revisionism.

No, mine was more saying that those issues have always existed, so it was more talking about those being revisionist, or having never faced into them. I personally think they are slightly greater than your list though.

This season, I think has been down to the way he has been used in the 4411, which has highlighted some of his poorer attributes, coupled with playing through injury. I put equal blame on Pellegrini to be honest.

 

[George Hannah]

Injured again. SMH.

Sydney Morning Herald?

 

[Neville Kneville]

Imo we need to see the vintage DS back before the Real Madrid game or he doesn't start the game. Can't afford sentimentality at this stage.

 

[Dax777]

Silva has been troubled with his ankle for a long time. At the beginning of the season after a quiet summer not playing he came back with no pain & played for the first 5 games possibly his best football since he arrived at the club. He was man of the match nearly every match.
He then got a recurrence of his injury which affected his performances & due to other players being injured he's played on through the season with pain instead of being rested.
I think some on here need to get off his back!
I'm sure if he moved on & played for another Premier League Club you'd be gutted.

If by Man of the match "in nearly every match" first 5 games, you mean Just Wes Brom. I totally see your point.

Or perhaps you meant he was 'nearly man of the Match in every match' which changes the context. Even then I'll say that's true of WBA and Chelsea. Not so much so Everton or Watford. And Crystal Palace he actually didn't play in. So I guess you also meant first 4 games.

And for what it is worth, no one is on Silva's back. Some would just rather others play when he is not performing, while others argue he should play regardless because of what he has achieved before. It is about that issue, not Silva persee. We all love him and what he has done. But that is not the issue.

This is the player equivalent of teams and commentators who always bring up 'the money spent' claim when City plays any team. It is not a real issue. Neither is how great Silva was. We were all here for it, so you are not telling us something new.

The question of what's best for City is future looking. We are asking what's best for the club? We wonder if he can still regain the old magic, some have no doubt, others do. And that's fine. And there are legitimate arguments for both positions.

 

[bluetev]

Glad in a way, he deserves a rest as he was clearly carrying an injury, and nasri will be a good replacement.

 

[Tugay One Cup]

Not so much so Everton

I thought he was brilliant against Everton.

And for what it is worth, no one is on Silva's back.

That's just simply not true.

The rest I agree with. I really don't see a need to play him with De Bruyne and Nasri back as well as Kelechi and Navas being in the squad. Much rather get him anywhere near full fitness before making any judgement.

 

[Phil1]

If by Man of the match "in nearly every match" first 5 games, you mean Just Wes Brom. I totally see your point.

Or perhaps you meant he was 'nearly man of the Match in every match' which changes the context. Even then I'll say that's true of WBA and Chelsea. Not so much so Everton or Watford. And Crystal Palace he actually didn't play in. So I guess you also meant first 4 games.

And for what it is worth, no one is on Silva's back. Some would just rather others play when he is not performing, while others argue he should play regardless because of what he has achieved before. It is about that issue, not Silva persee. We all love him and what he has done. But that is not the issue.

This is the player equivalent of teams and commentators who always bring up 'the money spent' claim when City plays any team. It is not a real issue. Neither is how great Silva was. We were all here for it, so you are not telling us something new.

The question of what's best for City is future looking. We are asking what's best for the club? We wonder if he can still regain the old magic, some have no doubt, others do. And that's fine. And there are legitimate arguments for both positions.

Who thinks he should play just because of what he's done in the past?
I'd rather he was dropped/rested weeks ago but I suppose complete lack of options has meant he's been put in as the only real playmaker we've got.