Fernandinho had a mare at LB, continually too far forward and made it easy to get behind us, Sagna when he moved over cut off that route to goal. He wasn't too much better as a RB either.
Saying Dihno had a mere is a matter of opinion. And the narrative that he didn't play well is often supported by the fact he was subbed.
However, saying he was "continually too far forward and made it easy it get behind us" is factually untrue. By and large the full back who got leaked behind was Sagna, not Dihno. Most of their attacks down the flank came from Lemar and and the LB.
True Silva often drifted inside but whoever drifted outside, often Sidibe, got no play on the right. One bad play in which Dihno actually made the tackle but the ball bounced back of his shin to spring Sidibe down the right, was the only attack of note due to Dihnos positioning.
His runs off Silva to put in crosses and his interplay on the invert, and his passing out of pressure were all 2ice as good as Sagna's on the right. Who kept going back to the keeper.
More breakdown and crosses came from the left flank (I.e our RB), more chances were created from their left flank and Sagna and Zab got beat more often in the box on their side than Dihno did on his.
Dihno had more tackles, more clearances more through balls, more passes in the offensive half, more long balls, and completed, fewer attacks down his side and fewer crosses from his side
I have done this rundown before but the narrative that he had "a mere" persists.
Did he have a good game? No. Did he have a mere? Compared to Sagna, Stones or Otamendi? Answer has to be no.
And the only reason he was pulled was because he was the fullback with a Yellow.
So yes, given the choices, Fernandihno on fact and not narrative, is the correct choice.
