It is not simplistic minded to suggest that when you are playing one of the best teams in the world, on form, away, with a makeshift centre back pairing, in a two legged game, that you might want to be maximise your midfield protection and stop say, Kroos, from having too much time on the ball.
Let's face it, the 50 minutes we played with Thiago, it was 1-1.
I know we have hindsight but my in my choice of midfielders I would have had Henderson first (not possible), then Thiago before Keita or possibly even Jones.
It may well be that Thiago was the better option to start with (though the manger has more than just the one hindsight-fuelled factor to think about when he makes his selections, and we don't know all the things he had to think about and all he was hoping to achieve by that selection); indeed, if it were up to me I would have started with Thiago as well.
But that still doesn't make the Keita selection the cause of all our woes. It was one factor, but there's no particular reason to think the whole team would have played at the required level if just that one selection had been different.
The simplistic-minded, however,
will now claim that had Thiago started all would have been different, because they know they can say it with impunity as we can't go back and re-run the game to prove otherwise, and reallly all they want is a simple black and white 'soundbite' solution to hold onto, rather than the complexity that actually pertains. That the said soundbite can also be used as an accusation to level at the manager is all the better.
