Nice to see some common sense on this thread today.
The problem that often arises on forums is that views get polarised; even when people do not necessarily have extreme views. I try to take the approach of focussing on the positive aspects of individuals rather than the negative, which doesn't mean I never criticise, but one of the reasons I spend more time "defending" Yaya and Pellegrini is that there more than enough people queuing up to criticise. In the case of Yaya, I confess that I find it odd that there has been a seemingly constant need since he arrived for some to focus on the weaknesses of a player who is one of the most complete that I have personally watched and who I am sure, in the Opta sense, has been City's most influential since he joined the club.
I love my stats, I can't help it (my job is all about numbers FFS), but my eyes told me on Saturday that there was a Yaya sized hole in our midfield in terms of controlling the ball and it is usually the case in his absence. It didn't matter on Saturday against Villa but it will against more adept opposition. I also felt on Saturday that despite all the running about City's midfield did, they didn't do a particularly good job of regaining possession and Villa actually did a better job of that. We didn't need Yaya on Saturday and he did need resting but if he had been in front of two of the guys who did play in midfield, I reckon we would have had greater control of the game. That's hypothetical but was is not is the need to be able to play consistently and convincingly without Yaya starting and we simply do not yet have enough evidence to show that we can. Maybe Dinho or Silva or Nasri can yet step to the plate to be the hub of the side; maybe a new approach will have to be the way forward.