Again it's opinions. Silva at no point played better, in my opinion. The team looked better, and we got a goal, but we were playing a risky game with 5 attacking players and 1 CM. Especially as the CM was the aging Yaya.
He got the response he needed from throwing the kitchen sink. And it was time to go back to having 2 CMs. He then pulled the worst performing attacking player.
Just before Silva was subbed he made 2 terrible passes in the final Third and we lost the ball. I don't know where the Silva got better narrative comes from. Can you point to actual positive things he did? Or is this a generic he was getting better?
Toure was at fault in the build up to the first goal. Not just the one one one but earlier in the build up and that was a microcosm of his entire game. I can't understand why he is being played in games like this which are going to be high intensity games in the middle of the park. Players just ghost past him and he can't support our man in possession either unless the build up play is slow.I don't disagree with the notion of actually playing a midfield three but I would disagree that Yaya was ineffective today: he was our most involved player again. He made as many key passes as any other City player, he made tackles, interceptions, clearances, plenty of ball recoveries. His pass completion was lower than normal but I think that was down to the number of long passes he attempted.
He wasn't perfect and he got done on the opening goal but he was not alone in failing to prevent it.
He was more effective than Delph.
I too thought that was madness, but as I said above our attacking players don't do enough defending, not by a long way.Again it's opinions. Silva at no point played better, in my opinion. The team looked better, and we got a goal, but we were playing a risky game with 5 attacking players and 1 CM. Especially as the CM was the aging Yaya.
Again it's opinions. Silva at no point played better, in my opinion. The team looked better, and we got a goal, but we were playing a risky game with 5 attacking players and 1 CM. Especially as the CM was the aging Yaya.
He got the response he needed from throwing the kitchen sink. And it was time to go back to having 2 CMs. He then pulled the worst performing attacking player.
Just before Silva was subbed he made 2 terrible passes in the final Third and we lost the ball. I don't know where the Silva got better narrative comes from. Can you point to actual positive things he did? Or is this a generic he was getting better?
Agreed, he was nowhere near the worst City player.I don't disagree with the notion of actually playing a midfield three but I would disagree that Yaya was ineffective today: he was our most involved player again. He made as many key passes as any other City player, he made tackles, interceptions, clearances, plenty of ball recoveries. His pass completion was lower than normal but I think that was down to the number of long passes he attempted.
People just want to moan. I get he doesn't so everything everyone wants, but even when he makes the right choice, they moan. That anyone can question or begrudge subbing out an attacking player after getting the goal he wanted for taking the risk is mind boggling. In fairness, he should have just pulled Dave in the first place for Kelechi. But he probably figured, Dave had moments of magic in him, so Delph was sacrificed. Then he got his result for taking a big risk, and he reverted to balance.I have to confess I was calling for the introduction of one of the Ferns as soon as we equalised. West Ham had sat back defending their lead so going gung-ho pull back the game was fine as there was nothing to lose but there was no guarantee WHU would continue to sit back. It would have been criminal to sacrifice the point we had just regained. I didn't approve of the starting line up but I am happy to be in minority that thought that substution was sensible.
How would you suggest the midfield 3 line up? Flat? In a triangle with a single base or a 2 at the base with one in front. And where in the 3 do you see Yaya?
I think his non-existent work off the ball made him the worst player by far. And his game makes it very difficult for the other players in midfield to perform. It also exposes slow defenders like Demichelis to players running directly at him.Agreed, he was nowhere near the worst City player.
Yes but you moan about him every game, just like many others do.I think his non-existent work off the ball made him the worst player by far. And his game makes it very difficult for the other players in midfield to perform. It also exposes slow defenders like Demichelis to players running directly at him.