Am I the only person left who thinks referring to positions using a number that was perhaps relevant 40 years ago when everyone played a 442 but doesn't really reflect any position in modern football is a bit silly, tiresome and ultimately displays a complete lack of knowledge about football?
Hmm, tbf it's not wrong.
It's just the idea of a 10 from 2008-2012/14 (i.e when that Spain team dominated up until Germany's WC win) is completely different to what a '10' is now.
The best teams in the world mostly play a 4-3-3. They have front lines with pace and midfielders with tenacity who can all do a bit of everything, usually with one who sits deep as an anchor. It's all based around counter-attacking play and - in City's case - possession and high press, but not like Pep's Barca.
I think people still see a No.10 like they did 8 years ago. They automatically think of a player like David Silva or Juan Mata - a diminutive playmaker who tied it all together.
Fact is, those players are hardly used in that central role 'in the pocket' anymore.
Bernard would get swamped in the middle. He's not physical enough. He's nimble and quick-footed and yes, at times could play there, but he doesn't offer a goal threat and is at his best being able to drift in.
We don't play with a 10 anyway because our most reliable goalscoring midfielder has to play (at least in Silva's mind), and he's pushed up as a split striker so we can press high.
@Tubey touched on it but Gana's sale has left a hole to fill in this regard too. With Gana there, Gomes was given free reign to push on and plug the gap. But also, even when Gomes wasn't fit, Gana had the energy and pace to push on into that gap and link up, but also get back into position within seconds. We don't have that at the moment, although I feel Delph can at least offer that energy when he comes back. Davies has the energy, but whether he has the nous is in question.
