This is a homer opinion. Silva isn't treated any differently from Mata. Both get due attention for being fantastic footballers on the ball. It is closer than most would like to believe. Last season Silva was better. This season Mata has been better. So it is not that clear who is better. You can match Silva's vision and class with Mata's movement and scoring. They are both fantastic, and are quite close talent wise. If you had either, you wouldn't want to swap him for the other. That is how close it is.Caveman said:Our David; quite easily.thenabster said:These are probably the best two Spaniard in the league right now (Honorable mention to Carzorla and Michu)
Both play similar positions and are key players for their teams. Silva has amazing footwork while Mata is a better goal scorer.
So trying to be as unbiased as possible, who would you rather have in your lineup ?
Mata is given nowhere near the attention David is during games (three men marking him, sometimes four) and isn't even any better than David for it. That tells me straight away that Mata is an inferior player. Imagine what David would produce in this league if he was treated by the opposition as Mata is.
As much as I agree that silva is a better player than mata, I hate it when city fans say this. When silva first came to the club and wasn't starting for spain following on from the world cup and we were all branding del bosque an idiot for not playing him. And don't tell me if for whatever reason del bosque chose to play mata over silva that you would have to say that mata was the better player?alky313 said:Del Bosque sees them both and goes with Silva. Ill take the World Champion coaches opinion.