NinjaFletch
Full Member
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2009
- Messages
- 19,818
But who was so good in those games that it makes sense to play them ahead of him? Nobody is trying to say he’s perfect for every game. Just that he’s comfortably the best we have for that position and it doesn’t make much sense not to play him.
Which is true enough, but your claim – and the claim of many others – is that Mata should play because he makes the side play better football. You can't hand wave away a significant number of games where Mata singularly fails to do that with 'ah, well, he wasn't the worst player on the pitch' because that undermines your claim that Mata is the difference between us playing good and bad football.
It suggests, rather, that Mata is simply a player that can act as a conduit in an otherwise well functioning unit.
Which is a fair enough argument. I do think Mata is a good player, and I do think that in another set up that suits him better he would be better. I just also think there's a bit of a gulf in class between Mata and the other, more exceptional players that play in his position for our rivals, and that he's probably not quite a good enough player to ever be a starter in teams with title aspirations.